Skip to main content

Full text of "The new Schaff-Herzog encyclopedia of religious knowledge, embracing Biblical, historical, doctrinal, and practical theology and Biblical, theological, and ecclesiastical biography from the earliest times to the present day"

See other formats 


This  is  a  digital  copy  of  a  book  that  was  preserved  for  generations  on  library  shelves  before  it  was  carefully  scanned  by  Google  as  part  of  a  project 
to  make  the  world's  books  discoverable  online. 

It  has  survived  long  enough  for  the  copyright  to  expire  and  the  book  to  enter  the  public  domain.  A  public  domain  book  is  one  that  was  never  subject 
to  copyright  or  whose  legal  copyright  term  has  expired.  Whether  a  book  is  in  the  public  domain  may  vary  country  to  country.  Public  domain  books 
are  our  gateways  to  the  past,  representing  a  wealth  of  history,  culture  and  knowledge  that's  often  difficult  to  discover. 

Marks,  notations  and  other  marginalia  present  in  the  original  volume  will  appear  in  this  file  -  a  reminder  of  this  book's  long  journey  from  the 
publisher  to  a  library  and  finally  to  you. 

Usage  guidelines 

Google  is  proud  to  partner  with  libraries  to  digitize  public  domain  materials  and  make  them  widely  accessible.  Public  domain  books  belong  to  the 
public  and  we  are  merely  their  custodians.  Nevertheless,  this  work  is  expensive,  so  in  order  to  keep  providing  this  resource,  we  have  taken  steps  to 
prevent  abuse  by  commercial  parties,  including  placing  technical  restrictions  on  automated  querying. 

We  also  ask  that  you: 

+  Make  non-commercial  use  of  the  files  We  designed  Google  Book  Search  for  use  by  individuals,  and  we  request  that  you  use  these  files  for 
personal,  non-commercial  purposes. 

+  Refrain  from  automated  querying  Do  not  send  automated  queries  of  any  sort  to  Google's  system:  If  you  are  conducting  research  on  machine 
translation,  optical  character  recognition  or  other  areas  where  access  to  a  large  amount  of  text  is  helpful,  please  contact  us.  We  encourage  the 
use  of  public  domain  materials  for  these  purposes  and  may  be  able  to  help. 

+  Maintain  attribution  The  Google  "watermark"  you  see  on  each  file  is  essential  for  informing  people  about  this  project  and  helping  them  find 
additional  materials  through  Google  Book  Search.  Please  do  not  remove  it. 

+  Keep  it  legal  Whatever  your  use,  remember  that  you  are  responsible  for  ensuring  that  what  you  are  doing  is  legal.  Do  not  assume  that  just 
because  we  believe  a  book  is  in  the  public  domain  for  users  in  the  United  States,  that  the  work  is  also  in  the  public  domain  for  users  in  other 
countries.  Whether  a  book  is  still  in  copyright  varies  from  country  to  country,  and  we  can't  offer  guidance  on  whether  any  specific  use  of 
any  specific  book  is  allowed.  Please  do  not  assume  that  a  book's  appearance  in  Google  Book  Search  means  it  can  be  used  in  any  manner 
anywhere  in  the  world.  Copyright  infringement  liability  can  be  quite  severe. 

About  Google  Book  Search 

Google's  mission  is  to  organize  the  world's  information  and  to  make  it  universally  accessible  and  useful.  Google  Book  Search  helps  readers 
discover  the  world's  books  while  helping  authors  and  publishers  reach  new  audiences.  You  can  search  through  the  full  text  of  this  book  on  the  web 


at|http  :  //books  .  google  .  com/ 


*•     '     »    "* . 


:;"ii-/^v*^/ 


r*   #  y.- 


•    ;:fA; 


L^<;r^jr:«t^ 


■5*-, -"If    *-h«i1i 


■■  ■ 


"^^r      '"-* 

I 


:  i'  V  i.\"/.     ■   ^"i'\  _ 


^ 


SAN   FRANCISCO  CUSTOM  HOUSE  1846 


it 


THE 

DAVID  STARR  JORDAN 

MEMORIAL  FUND 

FOR  INTERNATIONAL  RELATIONS 
STANFORD  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES 


'  7   '        ^ 


:^'  6^^ 


't^'i 


•^.i^  I  ."  «  p  n 


:*?^»'V; 


^f  ^  ■■     ■  ■•''-'^ 


"^ '*?*•-: 


:i'.'.^v    ■ 


=  .^^v* 


if 


irVr'\V.\iv 


-^V? 


^i^i 


Y  liry  i  ^      r^v-' 


^^^?^;V-    •• 


^*^r#-v^% 


>  f 


iiifr/ ?r,-v 


^iN« 


':'-^L 


THE   NEW 

SCHAFF-HERZOG  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


OF 


RELIGIOUS  KNOWLEDGE 


CDITCD  BY 

SAMUEL  MACAULEY  JACKSON,  D,D.,  LL.D. 

(EdUor-in-Chief) 

WITH  THC  ASSISTANCC  OF 

CHARLES  COLEBROOK  SHERMAN 

[VOLUMES  I— VI] 

AND 

GEORGE  WILLIAM  GILMORE,  M.A. 

(Asaoeiate  EdUoni) 

AND  THE  FOLLOWINQ  DEPARTMENT  EDITORS 


CLARENCE  AUGUSTINE  BECKWITH,  BJ). 
(Depardntni  of  SyttemaHe  Thtology) 

HENRY  KING  CARROLL,  LL.D. 

{Department  of  Minor  Denominationi) 

JAMES  FRANCIS  BRISCOLL,  D.D. 

(Department  <if  LUurgic*  and  Bdigiout  Order*) 


JAHES  FREBERIC  HcCURBT,  PH.D.,  LLD. 
{Department  of  the  Ctd  Tetlament) 

HENRT  STLVEtTTER  NASH,  BJ). 
{Department  of  the  New  Tetlatnent) 

ALBERT  HENRT  NEWMAN,  B.B^  LL.B. 

(Dqaartment  of  Qtureh  Hietory) 


FRANK  HORACE  YIZETELLY,  F.S.A. 

{Department  of  PromundaiUm  and  Typography) 


VOLUME    VI 
INNOCENTS  -  UUDGER 


FUNK  AND  WAGNALLS  COMPANY 

NEW  YORK  AND  LONDON 


OOFTBIGHT,   1910,  ST 

FUNK   A   WAGNALLS  COMPANY 


Bflgtatered  at  Btattonen*  Hall,  London,  England 


iPrinUd  in  ihs  VniUd  SUOMOf  AfM/rita} 
PMUhad  February,  t9t0 


EDITORS 


SAMX7EL  KAOATTIiEY  JAOKSON,  B.B.,  LL.B. 

(EDITOR-m-CHIEF. ) 
Professor  of  Church  History,  New  York  University. 

ASSOCIATE   EDITORS 


OHABLSS  OOLEBBOOK  SHBBMAN 

Editor  in  Biblical  Criticism  and  Theology  on  "The  New 
International  Encyclopedia,"  New  York. 


GBOBOB  WILLIAM  GILHOBE,  H.A. 

New  York,  Formerly  Professor  of  Biblical  History  and 

Lecturer  on  Comparative  Religion,  Bangor  Theological 

Seminary. 


DEPARTMENT  EDITORS,  VOLUME   VI 


OLABBNOB  AX70T7STINB  BBOBWITH,  B.B. 

(DepartTnent  of  SysiemaHe  Theology.) 

Professor  of  Systematic  Theology,  Chicago  Theological 

Seminary. 

HENBT  KIKO  OABBOLL,  LL.B. 

iDepartmerU  <tf  Minor  Derunninations.) 
Secretary  of  Executive  Committee  of  the  Western  Section 
for  the  Fourth  Ecumenical  Methodist  Conference. 

JAMBS  FBANOIS  BBISOOLL,  B.B. 

(.DepartmetU  of  LitwrgicB  and  ReHgioua  Ordera.) 
President  of  St.  Joseph's  Seminary,  Yonkers,  N.  Y. 


JAMBS  BBBBBBIOK  McGUBBY,  Ph.B., 
LL.B. 

^Department  of  the  Old  Testament.) 

Professor  of  Oriental  Languages,  University  College, 

Toronto. 

HBNBT  SYLVBBTBB  NASH,  B.B. 

(Department  of  the  New  Testament.) 
Professor  of  the  Literature  and  Interpretation  of  the  New 
Testament,  Episcopal  Theological  School,  Cambridge,  Mass. 

ALBBBT  HBNBY  KBWMAN,  B.B.,  LL.B. 

(Department  of  Church  History.) 

Professor  of  Church  History,  Baylor  Theological  Seminary 

(Baylor  University),  Waco,  Tex. 


FBAKK  HOBAOB  VIZBTBLLY,  F.S.A. 

(Department  of  Pronunciation  and  Typography.) 

Managing  Editor  of  the  Standabd  Dictionart,  etc., 

New  York  City. 


CONTRIBUTORS  AND  COLLABORATORS,  VOLUME  VI 


HANS  AOHBLIS,  Ph.B.,  ThJ>., 

Professor  of  Theology   University  of  Halle. 

WILHBLM  ALTMANN,  F1l.B., 

Director  of  the  Deutsche  Musiksammlung,  Berlin. 

FBANXLIN  OABL  ABNOLB, 
Ph.B.,  TI1.B., 

Professor  of  Church  History,  University  of  Breslau. 

BBNJAMIN  WISNBB  BAOON,  B.B., 
LL.B.,  Litt.B., 

Professor  of  New  Testament  Exegesis,  Yale  Divinity  School. 

FBBBKOZ  BALOGH, 

Professor  of  Church  History,  Reformed  Theological  Aca- 
demy, Debreczin,  Hungary. 

aBOBGB  JAMBS  BAYLBS,  Ph.B., 

Writer  on  CivU  Church  Law. 

CTLABBNOB  AXTGirSTIBB  BBCXWITH, 
B.B., 

Professor  of  Systematic  Theology,  Chicago  Theological 
Seminary. 


JOHANNBS  BBLSHBIM  (f), 

Late  Pastor  Emeritus,  Christiania,  Norway. 

BtTBOLF  BBKBIZBK  (f), 

Late  Diaconus  in  Grimma,  Saxony. 

XABL  BBBBATH,  Ph.B.,  Th.B., 

Professor  of  Church  History,  University  of  KOnigsberg. 

IMMANX7BL    GXTSTAV   ABOLF    BBNZIK- 
GBB,  Ph.B.,  Tli.Lic., 

German  Orientalist  and  Vice-Consul  for  Holland  In  Jeru- 
salem. 

OABL  BBBTHBAX7,  Th.B., 

Pastor  of  St.  Michael's,  Hamburg. 

BBBNHABB  BBSS,  Th.Lic, 

Librarian,  University  of  Halle. 

BBWIK  MUNSBLL  BUSS,  B.B., 

Author  of  Books  on  Missions,  Washington,  D.  C 

BMIL  BLOBSCH  (f),  Th.B., 
Late  Professor  of  Theology,  Bern. 


▼l 


CO^THIBUTORS  and  collaborators,  volume  VI 


HXZNBIOK  BOSBXBB,  Fh.D.,Th.Lic., 

Profeasor  of  Church  History,  UniveTBity  of  Boon. 

AMY  GASTON  0HABLE8  AXTGXTSTB 
BOKET-KAXJBY,    D.D.,  LL.D., 

Profeaaor  of  Church  History,  Independent  School  of 
Divinity.  i>ari8. 

GOTTLIEB  KATHANAEL  BOKWETSOH, 
Th.D., 

Professor  of  Church  History,  University  of  GOttinsen. 

FBZEDBIOH  BOSSB,  Ph.D.,  Th.Lic.y 

Auxiliary  Librarian,  University  Library,  Marburg. 

GT7STAV  BOSSEBT,  Fh.D.,  Th.D., 

Retired  Pastor,  Stuttgart. 

AliBEBT  BBAOKBCAKK,  Ph.D., 

Professor  of  History,  University  of  Marburg. 

FBZEDBIOH  HEINBIOH  BBAJTDES, 
Th.D., 

Reformed  Minister  and  Chaplain  at  Bockeburg, 
Schaumburg-Lippe. 

EDXTABD  BBATB3!  (f),  Fh.D,  Th.D., 

Late  Professor  of  Church  History,  University  of  Breslau. 

FBANTS  PEDEB  WILLIAM  BUHL, 
"PhJD.f  Th.D., 

Professor  of  Oriental  Languages,  University  of  Copenhagen. 

KABL  BUBGEB  (f),  Th.D., 

Late  Supreme   Consistorial   Councilor,   Munich. 

KABL  VON  BUBX  (f),  Th.D., 

Late  Supreme  Councilor  in  Stuttgart. 

HEINBIOH  OALAUNirS, 

Superintendent  at  Elberfeld. 

OTIS  OABT,  D.D., 

Professor  of  Homiletics  and  Practical  Sociology,  Doshisha 
Theological  School,  Kyoto,  Japan. 

JAOaXTES  ETTGfiNE  OHOIST,  Th.D., 

Pastor  in  Geneva. 

PAX7L  OHBIST  (f),  TI1.D., 

Late  Professor  of  Systematic  and   Practical  Theology, 
University  of  Zurich. 

EMUJO  OOKBA  (t),  D.D., 

Late  Professor  of  Historical  Theology  and  Homiletics. 
Waldensian  College,  Florence,  Italy. 


HBNBT  OOWAN,  D.D., 

aistory 
Scotli 


Professor  of  Church  History,  University  of  Aberdeen, 
'  Dtland. 


AUGUST  HEBMANN  OBEMEB  (t),  Th.D., 

Late   Professor  of   Systematic   Theology,   University   of 
Greifswald. 

FBIEDBIOH  WILHELH  CX7N0  (t), 
Th.Iiic, 

Late  Pastor  at  Eddigehausen,  Hanover. 

THOMAS  WITTON  DAVIES,  Ph.D.,  D.D., 

Professor  of  Semitic  Lan^age.s,  University  College  of 
North  Wales,  Bangor. 

SAMX7EL  MABTIN  DEUTSGH,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  Church  History,  University  of  Berlin. 

EBNST  VON  DOBSOHUETZ,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  New  Testament  Exegesis,  University  of 
Strasburg. 


LEONHABD  EBNST  DOBN, 

Pint  Preacher  at  NOrdiingen,  Bavaria. 

PAUL  GOTTFBIED  DBEWS,  Th.I>.9 

Professor  of  Practical  Theology.  University  of  Halle. 

JAKES  FBANOIS  DBISGOLL,  D.I>., 

President  of  St.  Joseph's  Seminary,  Yonkers,  New  York. 

EVIL  EGLI  (t),  Th.D., 
Late  Professor  of  Church  History,  University  of  Zuricii. 

LXTDWIG  ALFBED  EBIOHSON  (f), 
Ph.D.y  Th.D., 

Late  Preacher  at  St.  Thomas',  Strasburg,  Germany. 

BUDOLF  EUOXEN,  Ph.D.,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  Philosophy,  University  of  Jena. 

GUSTAV  WILHELM  PBANX  (t),  TliJ>., 
Late  Professor  of  Docroatics.  Symbolics,  and  Christian 
Ethics.  University  of  Vienna. 

ALBEBT  FBEYBE  (f),  PhJ>.,  Th.I>.9 

Emeritus  Gymnasial   Professor,   Parchim,   Mecklenburg. 

ALBEBT  FBEYSTEDT  (f),  Th.Lic., 
Late  Pastor  in  Cologne. 

EKIL  ALBEBT  FBIEDBEBG, 
Th.D.,  Dr.Jur., 

Professor  of  Ecclesiastical.  Public,  and  German  Law,  Uni- 
versity of  Leipsic. 

HEINBIOH  GELZEB  (f),  Ph.D., 

Late  Professor  of  Classical  Philology  and  Andeftt  History. 
University  of  Jena. 

JOHANNES   ABRAHAM  GEBTH  YAJSl 

WIJX  (t),  Th.D., 

Late  Reformed  Church  Oergyman  at  The  Hague,  Holland. 

OHBISTIAN  GEYEB,  Ph.D., 

First  Preacher  at  St.  Sebald's.  Nuremberg,  Germany. 

GEOBGE  WILLIAM  GILMOBE,  M.JL., 

Former  Professor  of  Biblical  History  and   Lecturer  on 
Comparative  Religion.  Bangor  Theological  Seminary. 

KABL  GOEBEL  (f),  Ph.D., 
Late  Consistorial  Councilor  in  Posen,  Prussia. 

LEOPOLD  KABL  GOETZ,  Ph.D.,  Th.I>., 

Professor  of  Philosophy  in  the  Roman  Catholic  TheoloiEical 
Faculty,  University  of  Bonn. 

WALTEB  GOETZ,  Ph.D., 

Professor  of  History,  University  of  Tabingen. 

WILHELM  GOETZ,  Ph.D., 

Honorary  Professor  of  Geography.  Technical  High  School, 
and  Professor,  Military  Academy,  Munich. 

JOHANNES  FBIEDBIOH  GOTTSCHICK  (f), 
Th.D., 

Late  Professor  of  New  Testament  Exegesis,  Ethics,  and 

Practical    Theology,    Evangelical    Theological    Faculty. 

University  of  Tubingen. 

GASPEB  BENA  GBEGOBT,  Ph.D.,  Th.D., 
D.D.,  LL.D.,  I>r.Jiir., 

Professor  of  New  Testament  Exegesis,  University  of  Leipsic 

GEOBG  GBXTETZMAOHEB,  Ph.D.,  Th.Lic, 

Extraordinary  Professor  of  Church  History.  University  of 
Heidelberg. 

PETEB  BEINHOLD  GBXTNDEMANN, 
Ph.D.,  Th.D., 

Pastor  in  MOrz.  near  Belzig,  Prussia. 


CONTRIBUTORS  AND  COLLABORATORS,  VOLUME  VI 


vu 


HERMANN  GXJTHE,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  Old  Testament  Exegesis,  University  of  Leipsic. 

WILHXLM  HADOSN,  Th.Lic., 

Pastor  in  Bern  and  Lecturer  on  New  Testament  Exegesis. 
University  of  Bern. 

IXOF  HATiTiEK, 

Gymnasial  Professor.  Venersborg,  Sweden. 

ADOLF  HABNAGK,  PI1.D.,  TI1.D., 
Dr.Jur.,  M.D., 

General  Director  of  the  Royal  Library.  Berlin. 

ALBEBT  HAXTCK,  Ph.D.,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  Church  History,  University  of  Leipsic,  Editor- 
in-Chief  of  the  Hauck-Herzog  Realeneyklopddie. 

TTRKMAN  HAX7PT,  Ph.D., 
Professor,  and  Director  of  the  University  Library,  Giessen. 

AXraUST  WILHELH  HEGLEB  (t), 
Ph.D.,  Th.D., 

Late  Professor  of  Church  History,  University  of  Tflbingen. 

XABL  FBIEDBIGH  HEKAN, 
Ph.D.,  Th.Lic, 

Professor  of  Philosophy.  University  of  Basel. 

LTTDWIO  THEODOB  EDOAB  HENNEOXE, 
Ph.D.,  Th.Lic., 

Pastor  in  Betheln,  Hanover. 

HERMANN  HEBING,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  Philosophy  of  Religion  and  Ilomiletics,  Uni- 
versity of  Halle. 

PAX7L  HINSOHIUS  (t),  Th.D.,  Dr.Jiir., 

Late  Professor  of  Ecclesiastical  Law,  University  of  Berlin. 

GEOBGE  HODGES,  D.D.,  D.O.L., 

Dean  of  The  Episcopal  Theological  School,  Cambridge, 
Mass. 

FEBDINAND  H0EB8GHELMANN  (f), 
Th.D., 

Late  Professor  of  Practical  Theology,  University  of  Dorpat. 

BXn>OLF  HUGO  HOFKANN, 

Ph.D.,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  Homiletics  and  Liturgies,  University  of  Leipsic. 

OSWALD  HOLDEB-EGGEB,  Ph.D., 

Professor  at  Berlin  and  Director  for  the  Publication  of  the 
MonumerUa  OermanuB  hUtarica. 

KABL  HOLL,  Ph.D.,  Th.D.y 

Professor  of  Church  History,  University  of  Berlin. 

EBNST  IDELEB, 

Pastor  at  Ahrendorf,  near  Potsdam. 

LXJDWIG  HEINBIGH  IHMELS,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  Dogmatics,  University  of  Leipsic. 

SIMON  ISSLEIB,  Fh.D.. 

Professor  Emeritus,  University  of  Bonn. 

GEOBGE  THOMAS  JAOKSON,  M.D., 

Professor  of  Dermatology,  College  of  Physicians  and  Sur- 
geons, Columbia  University.  New  York  City. 

JOSEPH  JACOBS,  Litt.D., 

Professor  of   English    Literature   and    Rhetoric.   Jewish 
Theological  Seminary.  New  York  City. 

ADOLF  HEBMANN  HEINBIGH  XAMP- 
HAUSEN  (t),  Th.D., 

Late  Professor  of  Old  Testament  Exegesis,  University  of 
Bonn. 


FEBDINAND  FBIEDBIOH  WILHELM 
EIATTENBTTSGH,  Ph.D.,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  Dogmatics,  University  of  Halle. 

EMIL  FBIEDBIOH  KATJTZSOH, 
Ph.D.,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  Old  Testament  Exegesis.  University  of  Halle. 

PETEB  GX7STAV  EIAWEBAXT,  Th.D., 

Consistorial  Councilor.  Professor  of  Practical  Theology,  and 
University  Preacher,  University  of  Breslau. 

WILHELM  JULIUS  ADOLPH  KEIL, 

Pastor  in  Herzogswalde,  near  Dresden. 

JAMES  ANDEBSON  KELSO,  Ph.D.,  D.D., 

Professor  of  Hebrew  and  Old  Testament  Literature  and 
President,  Western  Theological  Seminary,  PitUburg,  Pa. 

HANS  KESSLEB,  Th.D., 

Supreme  Consistorial  Councilor,  Berlin. 

HUGO  WILHELM  PAUL  KLEINEBT, 
Ph.D.,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  Old  Testament  Exegesis  and  Practical  The- 
ology,   University   of   Berlin. 


HEINBIOH  AUGUST  KLOSTEBMANN, 
Th.D., 

Professor  of  Old  Testament  Exegesis,  University  of  Kiel. 

KABL  AUGUST  KLXHSPFEL  (t),  Ph.D., 
Late  Head  Librarian,  University  of  Tabingen. 

BXTDOLF  KOEGEL  (t),  Th.D.,  Ph.D., 

Late  Court  Preacher,  Berlin. 

OHBISTOPH  FBIEDBIOH  ADOLF  KOLB, 
Th.D., 

Prelate  and  Court  Preacher,  Ludwigsburg. 

THEODOB  FBIEDBIOH  HEBMANN 
KOLDE,  Ph.D.,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  Church  History.  University  of  Erlangen. 

BIGHABD  XBAETSOHMAB  (t),  Th.D., 

Late  Professor  of  Old  Testament  Exegesis.  University  of 
Marburg. 

HEBMANN  GUSTAV  EDUABD 
KBUEGEB,   Ph.D.,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  Church  History.  University  of  Giessen. 

JOHANNES  WILHELM  KUNZE, 
Ph.D.,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  Systematic  and  Practical  Theology,  University 
of  Greifswald. 

EUGEN  LAOHENNLANN, 

City  Pastor.  Leonberg,  WOrttemberg. 

BIOHABD  LAX7XMANN  (f). 
Late  Diaconus  in  Stuttgart. 

WILLIAM  LEE  (f),  D.D., 

Late  Professor  of  Church  History,  University  of  Glasgow. 

KABL  LXTDWIG  LEIMBAOH  (f), 
Ph.D.,  Th.Lic., 

Late  Provincial  Councilor  for  Schools,  Hanover.  Germany. 

EDUABD  LEMPP,  Ph.D., 

Chief  Inspector  of  the  Royal  Orphan  Asylum,  Stuttgart. 

FBIEDBIOH  BEINHABD  LIPSIUS, 
Ph.D.,  Th.Lic, 

Privat-docent  in  Symbolics,  University  of  Jena. 


Wii 


CONTRIBUTORS  AND  COLLABORATORS,  VOLUME  VI 


OXOBO  LOBSGHE,  Ph.D.,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  Church  History.  Evangelical  Theological 
Faculty,  Vleniia. 

FBZXDBIOH  ARMTTf  IiOOFS,  F1l.D.,  TI1.D., 

Professor  of  Church  History.  University  of  Halle. 

JOHAITH  LOSEBTH,  Fh.D., 

Professor  of  History,  University  of  Grac. 

WILHELM  PHILIPP  FBZXDBIOH 
FEBDINAKD  LOTZ,  Ph.D.,  TI1.D., 

Professor  of  Old  Testament  Exegesis,  University  of  Er- 
langen. 

JAXBS  7BEDEBI0X  XcOXTBDY, 
Ph.D.,  LL.D., 

Professor    of    Oriental    Languages,    Univenity    College. 
Toronto. 

HEBKANV  MAXLBT  (f ), 

Late  Pastor  in  Bremen. 

PHTTiTPP  KXYEB,  Th.D., 

Supreme   Consistorial   Councilor,   Hanover. 

OABL  THEODOB  MZBBT,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  Church  History.  University  of  Uarbuig. 

BBNST  FBIEDBIOH  KABL  KUBLLBBy 
Th.D., 

Professor  of  Reformed  Theology.  University  of  Erlangen. 

GBOBG  MmtTJiKB,  Ph.D.,  TI1.D., 

Inspector  of  Schools.  Leipsic. 

JOSEPH  THEODOB  ICITELLEB,  Th.D., 

Keeper  of  the  Archives  in  Herrnhut. 

NIK0LAX7S  MUELLEB,  Ph.D.,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  Christian  Archeology,  University  of  Berlin. 

HENBY  8YLVE8TEB  HASH,  D.D., 

Professor  of  the  Literature  and  InterpreUtion  of  the  New 
Testament,  Episcopal  Theological  School.  Cambridge, 


OHBISTOF  EBEBHABD  NESTLE, 
Ph.D.,  Th.D., 

Professor  in  the  Theological  Seminary.  Maulbronn, 
Warttemberg. 

ALBEBT  HENBY  NEWILAN, 
D.D.,  LL.D., 

Professor  of  Church  History.  Baylor  Theological  Seminary 
(Baylor  University).  Waco.  Texas. 

FBEDEBIB  KBISTIAN  NIELSEN  (f), 
D.D., 

Late  Bishop  of  Aarhus,  Denmark. 

OONBAD  VON  OBELLI,  Ph.D.,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  Old  Testament  Exegesis  and  History  of  Re- 
ligion, University  of  Basel. 

OABL  PFENDEB, 

Pastor  of  St.  Paul's  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church,  Paris. 

EBWIN  PBEX7SGHEN,  Ph.D.,  Th.D., 

Pastor  at  Hirschhom-on-the-Neckar,  Germany. 

EBNEST  OUSHINa  BICHABDSON,  Ph.D., 

Librarian,  Princeton  University. 

GEOBG  CHBISTLAN  BIETSOHEL,  Th.D., 

University  Preacher  and  Professor  of  Practical  Theology, 
University  of  Leipsic. 

SIEGFBIED  BIETSOHEL,  Dr.Jur., 

Professor  of  Law,  University  of  Tabingen. 


BEBNHABD  BIGOENBAOH  (f),  D.I>., 

Late  Pastor  in  Basel. 

XABL  BOENNEKE,  Th.Llc., 

Superintendent  in  Gommem,  Saxony. 

BOBEBT  WILLIAIC  BOGEBS, 
Ph.D.,  LL.D., 

Professor  of  Hebrew  and  Old  Testament  Exegesis.  Drew- 
Theological  Seminary,  Madison,  New  Jersey. 

HENDBEK  OOBNELIS  BOGGE  (f),  Plx.I>., 
Late  Professor  of  History,  University  of  Haarlem. 

ABNOLD  BTJEGG, 

Pastor  at  Birmensdorf  and  Lecturer  at  the  Univenity  of 
Zurich. 

OABL  VIOTOB  BYSSEL  (f),  Ph.D.,  Tli.I>., 

Late  Professor  of  Theology,  University  of  Zuricli. 

KABL  SOHAABSOHBmyr, 

Honorary  Professor,  University  of  Bonn. 

DAVID  SOHLEY  SOHAPF,  D.D., 

Professor  of  Church  History,  Western  Theological  Sem- 
inary. Pittsburg,  Pennsylvania. 

PHTT.TPP  SOHAFF  (f),  D.D.,  LL.D., 

Late  Professor  of  Church  History.  Union  Theological  Sem- 
inary, New  York,  and  Editor  of  the  Original  Schafp- 
Huuoo  Enctclopjbdia. 

OHBISTOPH  GOTTLOB  VON  SOHEXTHZ. 
(t),  Ph.D.,  Th.D., 

Late  Professor  in  Nuremberg. 

BBZNHOLD  80HMID,  Th.Lie., 

Pastor  in  OberhoUheim,  WQrttemberg. 


HEINBIOH  80HHIDT  (f),  Ph.D.,  Th.I>., 

Late  Professor  of  Theology,  University  of  Eriansen. 

KABL  SOHBLIDT,  Th.D., 

Provost  at  Goldberg.  Mecklenburg. 

WOLDEKAB  GOTTLOB  SOHKIDT  (t), 
D.D., 

Late  Professor  of  Theology.  University  of  Leipaic 

OABL  WILHELM  SOHOELL  (t), 
Ph.D.,  D.D., 

Late  Pastor  of  the  Savoy  Church,  London. 

THEODOB  FBIEDBIOH  SOHOTT  (f), 
Ph.D.,  Th.D., 

Late  Librarian  and  Professor  of  Theology,  University  of 
Stuttgart. 

EKIL  SOHUEBEB,  Ph.D.,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  New  Testament  Exegesis,  University  of  Got- 
tingen. 

JOHANN  FBIEDBIOH  BITTEB  VOK 

SOHQLTE  (t)»  Dr.Jur., 

Professor  of  Law.  University  of  Bonn. 

GXTSTAV  VON  SOHULTHESS-BBOHBEBa, 
Th.D., 

Professor  of  Systematic  Theology.  University  of  Zurich. 

VIOTOB  S0HX7LTZE,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  Church  History  and  Christian  Archeology. 
University  of  Greifswald. 

OTTO  SEEBASS,  Ph.D., 

Educator,  Leipsic,  Germany. 

BEINHOLD  SEEBEBG,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  Systematic  Theology.  University  of  Berlin. 


CONTRIBUTORS  AND  COLLABORATORS,  VOLUME  VI 


ix 


EMIL  SEHLING,  Dr.Jur., 

Professor  of  Eodesiasticai  and  Commercial  Law,  University 
of  Erlangen. 

EBNST  SELLIK,  Ph.D.,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  Old  Testament   Exegesis  and   Archeology, 
Evangelical    Theological    Faculty,    Vienna. 

CHSI8TIAAN  SEPP  (f),  Th.D., 

Late  Mennonite  Preacher,  Leyden. 


FBIEBBIOH  AKTON  SMIL  SIEFFEBT, 
Ph.D.,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  Dogmatics  and  New  Testament  Exegesis, 
University  of  Bonn. 

ERNEST  GOTTLIEB  SIHLEE,  PI1.D., 

Professor  of  Latin,  New  York  University. 

PHUJPP  FRIEDEICH  ADOLPH 
THEODOB  SPAETH,  B.D.,  LL.D., 

Professor  in  the  Lutheran  Theological  Seminary,  Mt.  Airy, 
Philadelphia. 

EHIL  ELLAS  STEIKMEYEB,  Ph.D., 

Professor  of  German  Language  and  Literature,  University 
of  Erlangen. 

HEKMANy  LEBEBEGHT  STEAOK, 
Ph.D.y  Th.D.y 

Extraordinary  Professor  of  Old  Testament  Exegesis  and 
Semitic  Languages,  University  of  Berlin. 

KABL  THIEME,  Ph.D.,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  Doiynatics,  University  of  Leipsic. 

PAT7L  TSCHAOXEBT,  Ph.D.,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  Church  History,  University  of  GOttingen. 

JOHANN  GEBHABD  WILHELM 

TJHLHOBN  (t),  Th.D., 

Late  Abbot  of  Lokkum,  Germany. 


HOBAOE  GRANT  XTKDEBWOOD,  D.D., 

Author  and  Missionary,  Seoul,  Korea. 

SIETEE  DOUWES  VAK  VEEN,  Th.D., 

Professor  of  Church  History  and  Christian  Archeology. 
University  of  Utrecht. 

WILHELX  VOLGK  (f),  Ph.D.,  Th.D., 

Late  Professor  of  Old  Testament  Exegesis,  University  af 
Rostock. 

BENJAMIN  BBEGKINBIDGE  WAB- 
FIELD,  D.D.,  LL.D., 

Professor  of  Didactic  and  Polemical  Theology,  Princeton 
Theological  Seminary. 

FBIEDBIOH  WILHELX  HEBKANN 
WASSEB8CHLEBEN  (f),  Ph.D., 

Late  Professor  of  Theology  in  Giessen. 

EDWABD  ELIHX7  WHITFIELD,  H.A., 

Plymouth  Brother,  Retired  Public  Schoolmaster. 

LEIGHTON  WILLIAMS,  D.D., 

Pastor  of  the  Amity  Baptist  Church,  New  York. 

JOSEPH  DAWSON  WILSON,  D.D., 

Professor  of  Ecclesiastical  History  in  the  Reformed  Episco- 
pal Seminary,  PhOadelphia,  Pa. 

FBANZ  THEODOB  BITTEB  VON  ZAHN, 
Th.D.,  Litt.D., 

Professor  of  New  Testament  Introduction,  University  of 
Erlangen. 

HEINBIOH  ZIEGLEB, 

Pastor  Emeritus  in  Jena. 

OTTO  ZOEOXLEB  (f),  Ph.D.,  Th.D., 

Late  Professor  of  Church  History  and  Apologetics,  Univer- 
sity of  Greifswald. 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  APPENDIX-VOLS.  I— 71 


The  following  list  of  books  is  supplementary  to  the  bibliographies  given  at  the  end  of  the  articles 
contained  in  volumes  I.-VI.,  and  brings  the  literature  down  to  November,  1909.  In  this  list  each  tittle 
entry  is  printed  in  capital  letters. 


Afocrtpha:  B.  Pick,  The  Apocryphal  Acts,  Chicago, 
1909. 

Arabia:  U.  Cbauvin,  Btbliographie  des  ouvrageB 
Arabes  ou  relaH/$  aux' Arabes  publiis  daru 
VEwrope  chrHimne  de  1810  h  1886,  XI. 
Mahomet,  Leipsic,  1909. 

ARCHrrEcnms:   E.  H.  Day,  Qatkic  Arehiiedure  in 
England,  Oxford,  1909. 
I.  B.  S.  Holbom,  An  Introduction  to  ths  Archi- 
tectures of  European  Religions,  Edinburgh, 
1909. 

Armenia:  L.  Arpee,  The  Armenian  Aufokening, 
Chicago,  1909. 

ATONBiflENT:  W.  L.  Walker,  The  Oospel  of  Reconr 
cUiation  or  Atonement,  Edinburgh,  1909. 

Bible  Text:   J.  Drummond,  The  Transmission  of 

the  Text  of  the  New  Testament,  London,  1909. 
E.  Kautsch,  Die  Evangelieneitate  des  Origens, 

Ldpsic,  1909. 
W.  O.  E.  Oesterley,  Our  Bible  Text;  some  Re- 
cently discovered  Bible  Documents,  London, 

1909. 
Biblical  Introduction:   F.  Egger,  Absolute  oder 

relative  WahrheU  der  heiligen  Sdirift  t    Dog- 

matist^'kritische  Untersuchung  einer  neuen 

Theorie,  Brixen,  1909. 
A.  S.  Geden,  Outlines  of  Introduction  to  the 

Hebrew  Bible,  London,  1909. 
E.   Jacquier,  Histoire  des  livres  du  Nouveau 

Testament,  4  vols.,  Paris,  1904-1909. 
A.  S.  Peake,  A  Critical  Introduction  to  the  New 

Testament,  London,  1909. 
T.  Zahn,  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament  (Eng. 

transl.  under  the  direction  ...  of  M.  W. 

Jacobus,  assisted  by  C.  S.  Thayer),  3  vols., 

Edinburgh,  1909. 

Biblical  Theology:  W.  T.  Adeney,  The  New 
Testament  Doctrine  of  Christ,  Edinburgh,  1909. 

J.  Stalker,  The  Ethic  of  Jesus  according  to  the 
Synoptic  Gospels,  London,  1909. 

G.  Westphal,  Jahwes  Wohnstdtten  nach  den 
Anschauungen  der  alien  Hebrder,  Giessen,  1908. 

Bona  VENTURA:   E.  Lutz,  Die  Psychologic  Bonaven- 

turas,  Milnster,  1909. 
Bowne,  B.  p.:  Studies  in  Christianity,  Boston,  1909. 

Brooks,  P.:  In  Heavenly  Heretics,  by  L.  P.  Powell, 

New  York,  1909. 
BusHNELL,  H.:  In  Heavenly  Heretics,  by  L.  P.  Pow- 

eU,  New  York,  1909. 
CATENiE:  O.  Lang,  Die  Catene  des  Vaticanus  Gr.  72 

sum  ersten  Korintherbrief,  Leipsic,  1909. 


Challoner,  R.:  E.  H.  Burton,  The  Life  and  Times 

of  Bishop  ChalUmer   (1691-1781),    2     vols.. 

New  York,  1909. 
Channing,  W.  E.:    In  Heavenly  Heretics,  by  L.  P. 

PoweU,  New  York,  1909. 
China:    J.  Ross,  The  Original  Religion  of  Ohirui, 

Edinburgh,  1909. 
W.  A.  Tatchell,  Medical  Missions  in  Chiria  in 

Connection    with    the     Wesleyan    Methodist 

Churdi,  London,  1909. 
J.  Webster,  The  Revival  in  Manchuria,  London, 

1909. 
Christian    Socialibii:     C.    B.    Thompeon,      The 

Churches  and  the  Wage  Earners,  London,  1Q09. 
W.  Rauschenbusch,  Christianity  and  the  Social 

Crisis,  New  York,  1907. 
Christmas:  F.Kepuel,  Christmas  in  AH;  the  Nativ- 
ity as  depicted  &y  Artists  in  the  ISth  and  I&ih 

Centuries,  New  York,  1909. 
H.  W.  Mabie,  The  Book  of  Christmas,  New  York, 

1909. 
Church  Hibtort:    H.  M.  Gwatkin,  Early  ChtirtJi 

History  to  A,  Z>.  313,  2  vols.,  London,  1909. 
L.  Ragg,  The  Church  of  the  Apostles,  New  York, 

1909. 

Church,  R.  W.:    D.  C.  Lathbury,  Dean  Church, 
London,  1909. 

Comparative  Religion:   G.  Foucart,  La  M^thode 
comparative    dans    Vhistoire   des    Reliavons 
Pans,  1909. 
8.  Reinach,  Orpheus,  Histoire  GhUrale  des  re- 
ligions, Paris,  1909;    Eng.   transl.,  Ornheus 
London,  1909. 

Covenantees:    A.  Smellie,  Men  of  the  Covenant 
London,  1903,  7th  ed.,  1909. 

Creation:  D.  L.  Holbrook,  Panorama  of  Creation 
Phihidelphia,  1909. 
E.  O.  James,  God's  Eight  Days  of  Creation, 
London,  1909. 

Dennet,  J.:  Jesus  and  the  Gospel,  New  York,  1909. 

Disciples  of  Christ:  J.  H.  Garrison,  The  Story  of 
a  Century.     A  brief  historical  Sketch  and  ^Ex- 
position of  the  Religious  Movement  inatigti- 
rated  by  Thomas  and  Alexander  Campbell 
St,  Louis,  1909.  '^ 

DoDB,  M.:  Footsteps  in  the  Path  of  Life,  New  York, 

Druids:   W.  F.  Tamblyn,  in  Am.  Hist.  Rev.,  Oct 
1909,  pp.  21-36  (gathers  scattered  references)  * 

Edwards,  J.,  the  Elder:   In  Heavenly  Heretics,  bv 
L.  P.  PoweU,  New  York,  1909.  ^ 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  APPENDIX— VOLUMES  I-VI 


Ethics:   R.  L.  Ottley,  Christian  Ideas  and  Ideals, 

London,  1909. 
H.  H.  Scullard,  Early  Christian  Ethics  in  the 

West,  London,  1909. 
EvBBETT,  C.  C:    Theism  and  the  Christian  Faith, 

New  York,  1909. 
Faith;  W.  R.  Inge,  Faiih,  London,  1909. 
FicHTB,  J.  G.:  A  bi^raphical  introduction,  by  E. 

Ritchie,  is  prenxed  to  the  Vocation  of  Man, 

Chicago,  1906. 
FiNDLAT,  G.  G.:  Fellowship  in  the  Life  Eternal,  New 

York,  1909. 
FoRSTTH,  P.  T.:    The  Crvciality  of  the  Cross,  New 

York,  1909. 
Francb:  J.  W.  Thompson,  The  Wars  of  Religion  in 

France,  1659-76,  Chicago,  1909. 
Francis   of   Assisi:    A.    Goffin,   Saint   Francois 

d' Assise  dans  la  Ugende  et  dans  Vart  primttlfs 

italiens,  Bnusels,  1909. 
French  Revolution:    P.  de  La  Gorce,  Histoire 

rdigieuae  de  la  r&voluHon  franfaise,   Paris, 

1909. 
Gaulee:   E.  W.  G.  Masterman,  Studies  in  Oalilee, 

Chicago,  1909. 
Gardiner,  S.:  In  Typical  English  Churchmen,  by  J. 

Gairdner,  London,  1909. 
Geil,  W.  E.:   The  Great  Wall  of  China,  New  York, 

1909. 
Gerhardt,  p.:  Two  new  eds.  of  the  poems  are  by 

W.  Nelle,  Hamburg,  1907,  and  W.  TUmpel, 

GQtersloh,  1907. 
Gladden,  W.:  Recollections  of  Washington  Gladden, 

Boston,  1909. 
God:     J.    Warschauer,    Problems    of   Immanence, 

Studies  crUical  and  constructive,  London,  1909. 
Gospels:  V.  H.  Stanton,  The  Gospels  as  Historical 

Documents,   part  2,    The  Synoptic  Gospels, 

London,  1909. 
Hammurabi:    Hammurabis  Gesetz,  Germ,    transl., 

by  J.  Kohler  and  A.  Ungnad,  Leipsic,  1909. 
Hawaiian  Islands:    S.  Dibble,  A  History  of  the 

Sandwich  Islands,  aeveland,  1909. 
Hebrew  Language  and  Literature:  J.  W.  Roth- 
stein,  GrundzOge  des  hdrr&ischen  Rhythmus 

und    seiner    Formenbildung    nebst    lyrischen 

Texten  mil  kritischen  Kommentar,   Leipsic, 

1909. 
Hellenism:    W.   Otto,   Priester  und   Tempd  im 

hellenistischen  Aegypten,  2  vols.,  Leipsic,  1908. 
Herbert,  G.:  Add  to  bibliograpy,  English  Works, 

newly  arranged  .  .  .  by   G.  H.    Palmer,  3 

vols.,  Boston,  1905. 
Herrmann,   J.  G.  W.:    English   transl.    of   Der 

Verkehr,  with  title  Communion  of  the  Chris- 
tian withGod,  London,  1896,  New  York,  1907. 
Hexateuch:    J.  Skinner,  Genesis,  Edinburgh  and 

New  York,  1909. 
Holt  Spnirr:  H.  B.  Swete,  The  Holy  Spirit  in  the 

New  Testament.    A  Study  in  primitive  Chris- 
tian Teaching,  London,  1909. 
Home  Missions:  A.  F.  Beard,  A  Crusade  of  Brother- 
hood; a  History  of  the  American  Missionary 

Association,  Boston,  1909. 
H.  P.  Douglass,  Christian  Reconstruction  in  the 

South,  Boston,  1909. 
HoMiLETics:  F.  E.  Cartor,  Preaching,  London,  1909. 
HuoxTENOTs:  See  France,  above. 
HuLSEAN  Lectures:  J.  N.  Fiegis,  The  Gospel  and 

Human  Needs,     Being  me  Hulsean  Lectures 

for  1908-09,  London,  1909. 


Htmnolooy:    Eveline  W.  Brainerd,  Great  Hymns 

of  the  Middle  Ages,  New  York,  1909. 
Idealism:    C.  Werner,  Aristote  et  I'idMisme  plato- 
nieien,  Paris,  1909. 

W.  R.  B.  Gibson,  God  with  us,    A  Study  in 
Religious  Idealism,  New  York,  1909. 
Immortalftt:    C.  Lombroso,  After  Death— What? 

Boston,  1909. 
India:  Linguistic  Survey  of  India,    V.,  3.     Tiftcto- 

-  Burman  Family.  Part  1.  General  Intro- 
duction, Specimens  of  the  TUtdan  Dialects, 
the  Himalayan  Dialects,  and  the  North  Assam 
Group,  comp.  and  ed.  by  G.  A.  Grierson, 
Calcutta,  1909. 
Inbcriptionb:  G.  Wessely,  Studienzur  Palaeographie 
und  Papyruskunde,  vol.  viii.,  Leipsic,  1908. 

M.  H.  pQgnon,  Inscriptions  shnitigues  de  la 
Syrie,  de  la  M^sopotamie,  Paris,  1908. 

G.  M6ller,  Hieratische  Paldographie,  Leipsic, 
1909. 

M.  von  Oppenheim,  Inschriften  aus  Syrien, 
Mesopotamien  und  Kleinasien,  gesammm  auf 
der  Ferschungsreise  des  Jahres  1899,  Leipsic, 
1909. 
Inspiration  and  Revelation:  ReveUutUm  and  In- 
spiration, London,  1909. 

T.  H.  Sprott,  Modem  Study  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment and  Inspiration,  London,  1909. 
Investiture:   E.  Bemheim,  Quellen  zur  Geschichie 
des  InvestUurstreUes,  Leipsic,  1907. 

J.  Drehmann,  Papst  Leo  IX  und  die  Simonie, 
Ein  Beitrag  zur  Untersuchung  der  Vorge- 
schUhte  des  InvestUurstreUes,  Leipsic,  1908. 

A.  Schamagl,  Der  Begriff  der  Investitur  in 
den  Quellen  und  der  Literatur  des  InvestUur- 
streUes, Stuttgart,  1908. 
Irenaeus:  p.  Beauzart,  Essai  sur  la  thdologie 
d*IrSnie,  Etudes  d'histoire  des  dogmes,  Paris, 
1908. 
Isaiah:  G.  H.  Box,  The  Book  of  Isaiah,  London, 
1908. 

F.  Feldmann,  Der  Knecht  Gottes  in  Isaias  Kap. 
J^O-66,  Freiburg,  1907. 

E.   Sellin,   Das  RMsel  des  deuterojesjanischen 
Buches,  Leipsic,  1908. 
Israel,  History  of:  A.  M.  Hyamson,  A  Hilary  of 
the  Jews  in  England,  London,  1908. 

C.  H.  H.  Wright,  Light  from  Egyptian  Papyri 
on  Jewish  History  before  Christ,  London,  1908. 

A.  Alt,  Israel  und  Aegypten,  Leipsic,  1909. 

A.  Buchler,  The  PolUical  and  Social  Leaders  of 
the  Jewish  CommunUy  of  Sepphoris  in  the 
Second  and  Third  Centuries,  London,  1909. 

W.  Caspari,  Aufkommen  und  Krise  des  ieraeL- 
itischen  Kdnigtums  unier  David,  Berlin,  1909. 

T.  K  Cheyne,  The  Decline  and  Fall  of  the  King- 
dom of  Judah,  London,  1908. 

S.  Funk,  Die  Juden  in  Babylonien  20Ch500,  vol. 
ii.,  Berlin,  1908. 

S.  Oppenheim,  The  Early  History  of  the  Jews  in 
New  York,  1667-1664,  in  Publications  of  the 
American  Jewish  Historical  Society,  New 
York,  1909. 

S.  Poznanski,  The  Karaite  Literary  Opponents 
ofSaadiah  Gaon,  London,  1908. 

S. '  Schechter,  Some  Aspects  of  Rabbinic  The- 
ology, London,  1909. 

N.  Slouschz,  Judio-Berbires.  Recherches  sur 
les  origines  des  juifs  et  du  judaisme  en  Afrique, 
Paris,  1909. 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  APPENDIX— VOLUMES  I-VI 


Jacob  (James)  of  Vitrt:  Jacob  von  VUry,  Leben 
und  Werke,  in  BeUrage  zur  Kulturgfuchichte 
des  MiUelaliera  und  dir  RenaisaanUf  ed.  W. 
Goetz,  Leipdc,  1909. 

Jainism:  Hem  Chandra  Suri,  Yogoaastram,  in 
Sanfikrit,  ed.  Muni  Maharaya  Sri  Dharma- 
vigay,  vol.  i.,  part  1,  Calcutta,  1907. 

James,  Epistle  of:  J.  Belzer,  Die  Epistel  der  heil. 
Jakoimsy  Freiburg,  1909. 

Japan:  M.  Steichen,  The  Christian  Daimyaa:  A  Cen- 
tury of  Religioue  and  Ptditical  Hietory  in 
Japan  (1649-1660),  Tokyo,  1909. 
N.  G.  MunrOi  Prehistoric  Japan,  London,  1908. 

Jeremiah:   Commentary  of  R,  Tobia  B.  Elienr  on 

Echah.     Edited  /or  the  first  tim^   from  the 

MSS.  at  Cambndqe,  Oxford,  and  Munich  by 

A.  W.  Greenup,  Htbrew  Text,  London,  1909. 

C.    H.    Comill,    Das    Bwh    Jeremia    erkldrt, 

Leipaic,  1905. 
M.  LOhr,  Die  Klaoelieder  des  Jeremias  ubersetzt 
und  erkldrt,  Freiburg,  1908. 

Jerusalem:   C.  R.  Conder,  The  City  of  Jerusalem, 

London,  1909. 
D*  S.  Margoliouth,  Cairo,  Jerusalem  and  Da- 

mascus;  three  chief  Cities  of  the  Egyptian  SiU- 

tans,  New  York,  1908. 
C.  Mommert,  Der  Teich  Bethesda  tu  Jerusalem 

und  das  Jerusalem  des  Pilgers  von  Bordeaux, 

Leipsic,  1907. 


Jesuttb:  p.  T.  Venturi,  Storia  deUa  Comvaqnia  di 
Gesu  in  Italia;  vol.  i..  La  vita  religtosa  in 
Italia  durante  la  prima  eta  dell*  ordine,  con 
appendioe  di  documenti  inediti,  Milan,  1909. 

Job:  Book  of  Job  ;  Introduction  by  (?.  K,  Chesterton, 

New  York,  1909. 
John  the  Apostle:    R.  Law,  The  Testo  of  lAfe:  a 

Study  of  the  First  Epistle  of  St.  John  (Kerr 

Lectures  for  1909),  New  York,  1909. 
John  Baptist:  N.  Heim,  Johannes.  Der  Vorldufer 

des  Herm,  nach  Bibel,  Oeschichte  und  Trcuii- 

turn  dargestelU,  Regensburg,  1908. 
Josephus:    J.  Frey,  Der  slavische  Josephu^)ericht 

uber     die      urchristliche     Geschichte      nebti 

seiner  Parallelen  kritisch  untersucht,  Leipsic, 

1908. 
Kbble,  J:  E.  F.  L.  Wood,  John  Keble,  in  Leaders  oj 

the  Church,  1800-1900,  series  ed.    G.  W.  E. 

Russell,  Oxford,  1909. 
Kings,  Books  of:   F.  A.  Herzos,  Die  Chronologic 

der  beiden  K&nigsbucher,  Mttnster,  1909. 
Lee,  J.:   W.  H.  Meredith,  Life  of  Jesse  Lee,  New 

York,  1909. 
Lefrot,  W.:  H.  Leeds,  Life  of  Dean  Lefroy,  London, 

1909. 
LrruRGics:    C.  Q.  C.  F.  Atchley,  The  Ambrosian 

Liturgy  done  into  English,  London,  1909. 
G.  Rietflchel,  Lehrbuch  der  LUurgik,  vol.  ii., 

Die  Kasualien,  Berlin,  1909. 


BIOGRAPHICAL  ADDENDA 


Bassermann,  H.  G.:    d.  in  Samaden  (70  m.  s.s.e. 

of  St.  Gall),  Switseiiand,  Aug.  30,  1909. 
Belsheim,  J.:  d.  at  Christiania  July  15, 1909. 
BoEHMER,  E.:  d.  at  Lichtental  (a  suburb  of  Baden) 

Mar.  1,  1906. 


Casai^i  DEL  Drago,  G.  B.:  d.  at  Rome  Mar.  17, 

1908. 
Hare,  W.  H.:  d.  at  Atlantic  Oty,  N.  J.,  Oct.  23, 

1909. 
Madben,  p.:  elected  bishop  of  Zealand,  1909. 


LIST  OF  ABBREVIATIONS 


Abbreviations  in  common  use  or  self-evident  are  not  included  here.     For  additional  information  con- 
cerning the  works  listed,  see  vol.  i.,  pp.  viii.-xx.,  and  the  appropriate  articles  in  the  body  of  the  work. 


^^^ 1      1876  sqa.,  vol.  63.  1907 


Leipsic, 


Ad9 
AJP, 


.advtrauM, 


against ' 
i  American    Journal 
•  }     more,  1880  sqq. 


AJT.. 
AKR. 


ALKG. 


of  PhUology,    Balti- 

American  Journal  oj  ThecioffVt  Chicago, 

1897  aqa. 
Ardiiv     Jwr     katholieehee     Kirchenreeht^ 

Innsbruck,  1867-61,  Mains.  1872  sqq. 
Ardiiv    fUr    LUteratur-    und    Kirchenge- 
echichie  du  Mittdaltere,  Freiburg,  1886 
»qq. 
American 
Abhandlunoen  der  Mlinchener  Akademie^ 

Munich,  1763  sqq. 
Ani^Nieene   Falhert.    American    edition 
by  A.  Qevelana  Ooze.  8  vols,  and  in- 
dex, Buffalo.  1887;    toI.  ix..  ed.  Allan 
MenaiM,  New  York,  1897 

Apoe. ApooryphiL  apocryphal 

ilpol Apdooui,  Apology 

Arab Arable 

Aram Aramaie 

art. article 

Art.  Schmal Sohmalkald  Artidee 

iAda  eanetomm,  ed.  J.  Holland  and  others, 
Antwerp.  1643  sqq. 
Ada  eandorum  oratme  8.  BenedicH,  ed. 
J.  MabiUon,  9  vok.,  Paris,  1668-1701 

Assyr Assyrian 

A.T AUee  Teetamenl,  "  Old  Testament " 

Augs.  Con Augsburg  Confession 

A.  V Authorised  Version  (of  the  English  Bible) 

AZ AUpemeine  ZeiiumL  Augsburg,  TObingen, 

Stuttgart,  and  Tflbingen,  1798  sqq. 
(J.  M.  Baldwhi,  IHekonary  of  Philoeophy 
^     and  Pt^koloQy,  3  vols,  m  4.  New  York, 

Thr  Biriionarjf  HUt&ricol  tmd  Critieal  cf 
Mr.  Ptitr  BayU^  2tJ  tU.,  6  vols.,  London, 

L   BeniiEiflfflr.    f/«dr«)i«cA«  ArdtOUogie,  2d 
e*l,  Fmbunj,  1007 

British  and  Foreiga  Bible  Society 
.»-„.,*.  (J*    Bingham,    OHginee   ecdeaiaeHcas,    10 

'rSSS^  I     "f^'  Undon,  170^^;    new  ed.,  Ox- 


Am... 
AMA. 

ANF. 


ASB,. 
ASM. 


Baldwin, 
DtcUonary. . 

Bavle, 

Dictionary. . 

Bensinger, 
ArekOologie. 

BFB8 

Bingham. 


1^ 


(      ford/ 1855 

( M.  Unuquet,  BemeU  dee  hietoriene  dee 
Bouquet,  Recueili     Gatdes  ft  de  ta  Fmnce,  continued  by 

(      vflrn.i].  1.LM  I..  :■'.  .01.,  Paris,  1738-76 

1  Archil:.!  ^rry  of  thM  Pqpee 

Bower,  Pope9..A     .  .  .  i^  I7ikf,  cvtU^i^uedhy  8,  H.  Cox, 

'     3  yob..  Philadelphia,  1846-47 


BQR. 


\Baptiet   Quarterly   JSsvtfw,    Phibulelphia, 
\      1867  sqq. 

BRG SeeJaff^ 

Cant Canticles,  Song  of  Solomon 

cap caput,  "  chapter  " 

r^i'ii;^     >i  «<«.«*•  (  ^  Ceillier.  Hietoire  dee  auteure  eacrie  et 
iSSL  ^***'^*-!     ecd^tioslwttss,    16  vols,   in   17.    Paris, 

*'*^- 1      1868-69 

Ckron Chronieon,  '*  Qironlele  " 

I  Chron. I  Chroniotes 

II  Chron II  Chronicles 

QjQ  \Corvue  ineeripHonum  Oracarum,  Berlin, 

f^jj^  t  Corpus  ineeriptionum  Latinarum,  Berlin, 

f^jg  S  Corvue  ineeriptionum  8emiiicarum,  Paris, 

cod. codex 

cod.  D codex  Beea 

cod.  Theod codex  TTheodoeiantte 

Col Epistle  to  the  Colossians 

col.,  eols column,  columns 

Conf Confeeeionee,  "  Confessions  " 

I  Cor First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians 

II  Cor. Seoond  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians 

COT See  Schrader 

mo  i  7^  Church  Quarterly  Review,   London, 

^^* 1      1876  sqq. 


CR. 


Creighton, 
Papacy . 


CSCO. 

C8EL. 
C8HB. 


Currier.  ReLigioue 

Order  9 

D 

DACL { 

Dan 


DB... 
DC  A. 
DCB, 

DCG. 


Corvue   rtformatorum,    begun    at    Halle, 

1834,  vol.  Ixxxix.,  Berlin  and  Leipsic, 

1906  soq. 
M.  Creighton.  A  Hietory  qf  the  Pavaey 

from  the  Ofreat  8ehiem  to  the  Sa^  of 

Rome,  new  ed.,  6  vols..  New  York  and 

London,  1897 
Corpue  Bcripiorum  Chrietxanarum  orienta- 
'     {turn,  ed.  J.  B.  Chabot,  I.  Quidi,  and 

others,  Paris  and  Leipdc.  1903  sqq. 
CoTpue  eeriptorum  ecdeeiaeticorum  ixUi- 

fwrum,  Vienna,  1867  s()q. 
CoTpue  eeriptorum  hietoria  Bysanhnor,  49 

vob.,  Bonn,  1828-78 
C.  W.  Currier,  Hietory  of  Religioue  Ordere, 

New  York,  1896 
Deuteronomist 
F.  Cabrol,  Dictionnaire  d'archSdlogie  thr^ 

firvne  €t  de  liturtiit,  Paris,  1903  sqq. 

J,    HiuiiUnigK,    Dvctkifiizry  of  the  Bible,   4 

\'nU.   and  ejitm  lol..  Edinburgh  and 

xSfw  York,  ISM- 1004 
W.  Hmiih  lind  ^,  Cbwtham,  Dictionary 

tifCkriMHun  An.tiguitie$,  2  vols.,  London, 

1875-80 
W.   Smith   asd   H.   Wace,   Dictionary  of 
'     CArifllidii  BiixiQru:dky,  4  vols.,   Boston, 

1877-87 
J„  If  ib»tiap,  J.  A.  S«lbiA  and  J.  C.  Lambert, 

A  Dictutrmri/  itfChnai  and  the  Goepele,  2 

vnlf...  i-:ilifiiiiif,?li  and  New  York,  1906- 


Peut Deuteronomy 

De  vir.  iU De  virie  iUuelribue 

DGQ See  Wattenbaeb 

L.   Stephen  and   S.   Lee,    Dictionary 
National     Biography,     63     vols. 


DNB. 


Driver,  Introduo' 
tion 

E 

EB 


^y,     63 

supplement  3  vols.,  London.  1886-1901 
S.  R.  Driver.  Introduction  to  the  Literature 
of  the  Old   Teetameni,   6th  ed..    New 
York,  1894 
.  .Elohist 

JT.  K.  Cheyne  and  J.  S.  Black,  Eneydo- 
piedia   BiUica.    4   vols.,    London   and 
New  York  1899-1903 
Ecd Eedeeia,  "  Church  ";    ecolesiosficus.  "  ec- 
clesiastical " 

Eccles r 

Ecclus I--  ■-  .,--.' .-ij^ 

ed ediliun;   edidit,  "  edited  hy  " 

Eph Epi»tle  iQ  i  hv  KpheeMnnn 

Epiet EpiMtoia,  Eputt^^lit^  "'  Epiatk/' "  Epistles  " 

inch  and  Qru-(J.  B.  Ersch  and  J,  fj.  Gruttfr,  Aug^mtin^ 
her,     EncyklO'  I      Encukiifpfidie    der     W  iutr^fhafltn    Ufttl 

p6aie (       K^naix,  LeipAc,  1818  wg. 

E.  y EtiffliAh  vttfiions  ((if  the  Bible) 

Ex Eatodua 

Esek Eflekkl 

faee fuedmiuM 

¥t French 

*nednch,  KD..^      ^^,  .^  ^^^  flKnl»T».  1807-09 

Gal Kpktle  to  ibe  QalatJan» 

'P.   B.  Gwns,  Seriee    epi4iajpfirum  ««(»#«■' 

C^ihfilica,  ReicenMburg,  187S,  &ntl   tfup* 

plement.  18SB 

H.    n«   and   W.    J.    Hardy.    Bocum^nie 

Rhtitratii^e  *if  EnoiUh   Ckurth   Hiatifryt 

.      Loudon.  180& 

Gen Genesis 

Germ German 

/3/yM  S  OdtHngieche  GeUhrie  Aneeigen,  Gdttingen, 

^^^ 1      1824  sqq. 

n;KK^n  n.— i.-«-iE.  Gibbon,  Hietory  of  the  Dedine  and 
W  %«H  ^  ^aff  V^  ^^^^  Empire,  ed.  J.  B. 
^^  ^<M I     Bury,  7  vols.,  London,  1896-1900 


Gams,  iSsrtss 
epieooporum . 

Gee  and  Hardy,. 
Doeumente  . 


Gk.. 

Gross,  iSouress, 


Hab.. 


•) 


Greek, 

C.  Gross.   The  8ourcee  and  Literature  of 
Bnglieh  Hietory  ,  ,  ,  to  1485,  London, 

Habakkuk 


XIV 


LIST  OF  ABBREVIATIONS 


HadcUn  and 
Stubbt,  Couf^ 
dU 


Bar. 


H.«    , . , 

Harduis,  Con* 


A.  W.  Haddan  and  W.  Stubbt.  CouneiU 
and  BedntawHeal  Doeum^nta  BeUMng 
to  GtmI  Britain  and  Inland,  3  vols., 
.     Oxford,  1860-78 

Refers  to  patristie  works  on  heresies  or 
heretios,  Tertullian's  Ds  vrmeriptiona, 
the  Pro9  hairamit  of  iretusus,  the 
Panarion  of  £i»iphaiiiuA,  etc. 

mfoima.  12  vols.,  I'&rK  I7t5 
A.  Hjiriuck.  fiiiikfru  <3/  Di^ama  ,   .   ,  ftoni 
thf  3d  Grrman  ckftlton,  7  vtih.,  tkniUm, 

Hamsck.  iAHura- I      ^^^1^^,^^  (^   ^i4#efriii#,  2  Viili     in   3, 
"^ -J      LeiMic  lg»3^lOCW 

fA.  Haudc.  Kirthmtffa^dehU  Dtutaeh- 
lafidM.  vol.  [.,  Lpipoicp  ll^CM:  vol.  li., 
1900;  vol  L«..  1906;  toL  iv..  1903 
1Bmi*y\€yfdopMit  ftkt  ptfji*tiantUche  Thx- 
^jiiHne  und  A'incAf,  royiitl^d  by  J,  J. 
Herxffff,  ^d  «<!.  by  A.  Haudt,  LeIpKb, 
1896-1009 

Heb EpLnKv  to  the  Hebrews 

Hebr  ..►..* Hebrew 

<      linufed  by  J,  H^fKenrdtiiiir.  volii.  L-vi., 
f      viii.-!x..  Frpibum.  18S3-1>3 
Heimbiicher.^Of-  1  M.   Hfimtniielier,   />«  OrtJfn  urvi  Kongrf 
dtn    tMh^  Koti^'l      Qiitmntn  der  kath^tltMrAfn  A'i^cAr,  2d  ed, 
fr'fV<ci^^<v'Ufn.  .     f      3  vols.,  Pii*l*frl'Mjrn,  1907 

^^^7^1      I      **<P«*'   r^i(ri^  **  maUairma^   8   veil., 
moM*/i^/u«.    ,  ]      Parin   1714-19:   new  ed..  Iftt9-t2 

vm^nis     .  .         t      mentM  of  thf  Midtilt  Agtt,  I^mion*  189^ 

Hist History,  hiattrin,  hiatoria 

HiaL  aed  \  ^**^?^^^  acdaaiaaUoa,   aodaaia,   "  Chtireh 

Horn HomUia,  hamaiai,  **  homily,  homilies  " 

Hos. Hosea 

lea Isaiah 

Ital Italian 

J Jahvist  (Yahwist) 

J  A Journal  AsioliotM,  Paris,  1822  sqq. 

1 A  Standard  Bible  DieUonary,  ed.  M.  W.  Ja^ 
oobus,  .  .  .  E.  E.  Nourse,  .  .  .  and  A.  C. 
Zenos,  New  York  and  London.    1009. 
I  P.     JafT^,     BiUiothaca    rerum    Oarmani~ 
j      carum,  6  vols.,  Berlin,  1864-73 
j  P.  Jaff^.  Rageata  ponHflcum  Romanorum 
.  .  .  ad    annum    1198,    Berlin,    1861; 
,      2d  ed..  Leipsio,  1881-88 
fAnQ  S  Journal  of  tKa  American  Oriental  Society, 

^^^^ 1      New  Haven,  1849  sqq. 

[Journal  of  BiiUical  Literature  and  Bxeoe- 
aia,  first  appeared  as  Journal  of  the 
Society  of  Btblical  LitertUure  and  Ex^ 
0ett«,  Middletown,  1882-^88,  then  Bos- 
ton, 1890  sqq. 
,»  3  7^  Jewiah  Eneydopadia,  12  vols..  New 

^^ 1      York,  1901-06 

re  j  The  combined  narrative  of  the  Jahvist 

•^ 1      (Yahwist)  and  Elohist 

Jer Jeremiah 

Joeephiis,Ani..]^*5jJjJ..'^«*P^'«'    "  Antkiuities   of   the 

Joeephus,  Avion  .  Flavius  Joaephus,  **  Against  Apion  " 
Josephus,    Life. . .  Life  of  Flavius  Josephus 
Joeephus,    TTor . . .  Flavius  Josephus,  "  The  Jewish  War  " 
Josh   Joshua 


Jacobus. 
Didionary. 

Jaff«,  BAG..., 
Jaff^,  Raffeata.  . 


JBL. 


:\ 


JPT . 
JQR  . 


JahrbHeher  far  proteatantiache    Thaoloffie, 
'  1      Leipsic,  1875  sqq. 
i  The   JetotA   Qumieriy   Review,    London. 
1      1888  sqq. 
roAQ  i  Journal  of  the  Royal  Aaiatic  Society,  Lon- 

•'''^^ 1      don.  1834  sqq. 

,^o  S  Journal  of  Theological  Studiea,  London, 

^^^ 1      1899  sqq. 

Julian.  Hym-       jJ.    Julian,    A    Dictionary  of  Hymnology, 

ndoffy I      revised  edition.  London.  1907 

ruTT  iJaarboeken  voor  Wetenachappeliike  Theo- 

^*^^ 1      logU,  Utrecht.  1845  sqq. 

KAT See  Schrader 

KB See  Schrader 

KD See  Friedrich.  Hauck,  Rettbere 

i  Wetter   und    Wdte*a   KirchenUxikon,    2d 

KL '      ed..  by  J.  HergenrOther  and  F.  Kaulen, 

*      12  vols.,  Freiburg.  1882-1903 
G.    KrQger,    Hiatory   of  Early   Chriatian 
Literature  in  the  Firat  Three  Centuriea, 
New  York,  1897 
K.    Krumbsrcher,    Geachichte    der    bytan- 
tiniaehen    Litteratur,    2d    ed.,    Munich, 
1897 
P.  Labbe,  Sacrorum  oonciliorum  nova  et 
ampliaaima  coUectio,  31  vols..  Florence 
and  Venice.  1759-98 


KrQger.  Hiatory 

Krumbacher, 
Oeachichte 

Labbe,  Concilia 


.  Lamentations 


T^»t— «    c-i      t  J'  Lanigan.  Ecdaaiaatical  Hiatory  of  Ire- 
La^nn,  BcO,     3     landlolka  ISth  Century,  4  vols..  I>ub- 

^•^ I      lin,  1829 

Lat Latin,  Latinised 

Lag  Lagaa^  Legum 

Lev Leviticus 

F.   Lichtenberger. 


Liohtenberger, 
ESR 

Lorens,  DOQ  . , 


•1 


Mann,  Popes  . . . 
Mansi,  Concilia. 


Matt. 


MGH . 


Bncydopidie  dea    aci- 

sness  rdiifiauaaa,  13  vols..  Paris,  1877- 
1882 
O.    Lorens.    I>sttlsoUa»ufs   Oaaehiehtaouel' 
Ian  im  MittdaUer,  3d  ed..  Berlinri887 

LXX The  Septua^nt 

IMaco  IMacoabeee 

II  Maoo II  Maccabees 

Mai,    Nova    col- {A,    Mai,    Scrintomm   vatentm   nova    eol- 

lectio 1     lectio,  10  vols.,  Rome.  1825-38 

Mai Malaohi 

R.  C.  Mann.  Livaa  of  the  Popaa  in   the 

EaHy  Middla  Agaa,  London,  1902  sqq. 

Q.     D.     Mansi,    aanetorum    coneHiarmmi 

eoUactio  novti,  81  vols.,  Florence  and 

Venice,  1728 

.Matthew 

Monumanta  Oarmanim  hiatorica,  ed.  G.  H. 
Perts  and  others,  Hanover  and  Ber- 
lin, 1826  sqq.  The  following  abbrevia- 
tions are  used  for  the  sections  and 
subsections  of  this  work:  ilnl.  Antioui' 
tatea,  "  Antiquities  ";  Auct.  ant.,  Awy 
torea  antiftuiaaimi,  *'  Oldest  Writers  "; 
Chron.  mxn..  Chronica  minora,  "  Leaser 
Chronicles ";  Dip.,  Diplomata,  "  Di- 
plomas, Documents ";  Bpiat,,  Epi^ 
tdm,  *' Letters";  Oaat.  pont,  Rom., 
Oeata  pontiftcum  Romanorum,  "  Deeds 
of  the  Popes  of  Rome  ";  Leg.,  Legea, 
"  Laws  ";  Lib.  da  lite,  l£2%  de  lite 
inter  regnum  sf  aacerdotium  aiwculorum 
xi.  et  xii.  oonaeripti,  "  Books  ooncemins 
the  Strife  between  the  CSvil  and  Eccle- 
siastical Authorities  in  the  Eleventh 
and  Twelfth  Centuries":  ^sc..  No- 
erologia  Oarmania,  "  Necrology  of 
Germany ":  Post  LaL  cm  Car., 
PoeUa  Latini  avi  Carolini,  **  Latin 
Poets  of  the  Caroline  Time";  Poet 
LaL  med.  ani,  PoeUa  Latini  meidii  tni, 
"Latin  Poets  of  the  Middle  Ages"; 
Script.,  Scriptorea,  "  Writers  ";  Script, 
rer.  Cferm.,  Scriptorea  rerum  Oermani- 
earum.  "  Writers  on  German  Sub- 
jects '*',  Script,  rer.  Langob.,  Scriptorea 
rerum  Langobardicamm  at  Italicarum, 
"  Writers  on  Lombard  and  Italian 
Subjects  ";  Script,  rer.  Merov.,  Scrip- 
torea rerum  Merovinpicarum,  "Writers 
on  Merovingian  Subjects  " 
.Micah 

H.  H.  Milman.  Hiatory  of  Latin  Chria- 
tianitv,  Indiidinq  that  of  the  Popea  to 
.  .  .  rfidiolaa  v.,  8  vols.,  London. 
1860-61 
I C.  Mirbt,  QueUen  aur  Oeachichte  dea  Papat- 
tuma  und  dea  rCmiadten  Katholiciamua, 
TQbingen,  1901 
i^z>/i  j  J.  P.  Migne.  Patrdogia  curaua  compUtua, 

"^^ 1      ssriss  Orowo.  162  vota..  Paris.  1857-66 

rnfor  j  J.  p.  Migne.  Patrologias  curaua  compUtua, 

^^^ }     ssn«sLa«fM».  221  vota.,  Paris.  1844-64 

MS..  MSS Manuscript,  Manuscripts 

Muratori.  Scrip-  j  L.  A.  Muratori.  Rerum  Italicarum  acrip' 

torea I      toraa,  28  vota..  1723-51 

( i^suss  Archiv  der  OeaeUaehaft  far  Oltere 

NA •<     deutaehe      Oeachichtakunde,     Hanover. 

f      1876  sqq. 

Nah Nahum 

n.d no  date  of  publication 

v»..^^.    /^iW-_  \  A.  Neander,  Oeneral  Hiatory  of  the  Chria- 
Ncanden   CAjts- J      ^^  Rdigion  and  Church,  6  vota.,  and 
turn  Church. .  ^     ^^^^  Boston.  1872-81 

Neh Nehemiah 

Niceron,  Af^-(R.   P.   Niceron.   Mimoirea  pour  aarvir  d 

moiraa •<     I'hiatoire  dea  hommea  illuatria  ....  43 

I     vols.,  Paris,  1729-45 
NKZ  SNeue  kirddiche  Zeitachrift,  Leipsic,  1890 

Nowack,  Archil- \w.    Nowack,    Lehrbuch    der    hebrHiachen 

dogia 1      ArchOdogie,  2  vota..  Freiburg,  1894 

n.p no  place  of  publication 

^The  Nicene  and  PoaUNicene  Fathera,  Ist 
series,  14  vota..  New  York.  1887-92:  2d 
series,  14  vota..  New  York,  1890-1900 
V  q«  (New    Testament.    Novum    Teatamentum, 

'*'  * 1      Nouveau    Teatament,  Neuea   Taatament 

Num Numbers 

Ob Obadiah 


Mic 

Milman,  Latin 
ChritManity . . 


Mirbt,  QudUn. 


LIST  OF  ABBREVIATIONS 


^'°'^ i     Benedict" 


'Order    of   St. 


O.  T Old  Testament 

OTJC See  Smith 

P Prieetly  document 

( L.  Pastor,  The  Hiatoru  of  Ihe  Popea  from 
Pastor,  Popea.  .A     the  Clote  of  ike  MvddU  Agee,  8  vols.. 

(     London*  1891-1908 

I  Pa^  ecdeaim  AnoUeana,  ed.  J.  A.  Giles, 


*^^^ 1     34  vols.,  London,  1838-46 

PEF Palestine  JSxploration  Fund 

I  Pet First  Emstle  of  Peter 

II  Pet Second  Epistle  of  Peter 


Platina,  Popee 


■\ 


B.  Platina.  Livee  of  the  Popee  from  .  .  . 
QreooryVII.  to  .  .  .  Paul  II.,  2  vols.. 
London,  n.d. 
Pliny,   HieL  fio<... Pliny,  Historia  noluralis 
i>^*«k-^       nr-^^A.   Potthast,   Bibliotheea  hietorica  medii 
PottW,      We(h\     ^.     Wegweieer  dweh  die  Qeethichte- 

«*»^ I     tosrfce.  Berlin.  1896 

Prov Proverbs 

Pa Psalms 

ocDA  \Proeeedinae    of   the    Society    of   BMieal 

P^o^ \     i4r<*aoiWj  London,  1880  sqq. 

[.v..  qq.v ^'^  iouot)  tide,  "  which  see  " 

n u.   i>..«^       iL.    von    Ranke.    Hietory   of   the   Popee, 

Ranke.  Popss. . .  {     3  ^^y^  London.  1906 

RDM Revue  dee  deux  mondee,  Paris.  1831  sqq. 

RE See  Hauek-Hersos 

Reich.  Doeu^         S  R  Reich,  Sdetl  Doeumente  IttuelraHng  Me- 

merUe ( dioBval  and  Modem  Hietory,  London,  1905 

REJ Revue  dee  Hudee  iuivee,  Paris.  1880  sqq. 

T>  ..1  „,,    wrrk       iF.yf,BjettheTK,KtrchenifeechieMeDeuteeh- 
Rettbcrg.  KD. . .  ^     ^^  g  vols.,  GOttingen.  1846-48 

Rev Book  of  Revelation 

w>uM>  \ Revue  de    Vhieloire  dee  rdiifione,   Paris. 

*^'' 1      1880  sqq. 

'E.  C.  Richardson.  Alphabetical  Sufneet  In- 


& 


Richardson,  En^  , 
cyclopaedia. 

Richter.  Kirckenr 


dez  and  Index  Encyclopaedia  to  Period- 
ical Artidee  on  Rdtoion,  1890-&9,  New 
York.  1907. 
:«k*A*  ir.Vri.n   \  A  L.  Richter.  Ltkrbu€h  dee  kaOuAiedien 
lenter.AtrcMfiri     ^^    evanodie(ken    Kirchenrechte,    8th 
^*^^ f     ed.  by  W.  KahL  Leipeic,  1886 


Robii 


inson,     J 
ne,    Bost 


iiblioal    *Reeearehee 


I  Paleetine,  Boston,  1841.  and  Later 
I  Biblical  Reeeardiee  in  Paleetine,  3d  ed. 
L     of  the  whole,  8  vols..  1867 


Robinson,     Re-fE.^ 
eearehee,      and. 
Later      Re- 

eearehee ^ 

Robinson,   Euro- S  J.  H.   Robinson,  Readinife  in  European 

peon  Hietory. .  1     Hietoru.  2  vols..  Boston,  1904-06 
Robinson     and  i  J.  H.  Robinson,  and  C.  A.  Beard,  DeveLop- 
Beard,  Modem  <     ment  of  Modem  Europe,  2  vols. ,  Boston. 

Europe I      1907 

Rom Epistle  to  the  Romi^ns 

j  Revue  dee  eciencee  eccUeiaetiquee,  Arras. 

1      1860-74.  Amiens,  1875  sqq. 

SReviuf    de    th^hfoffie    et    de    philoeophie. 


USE.. 


SBA 


8BE  . 


SBOT. 


•1 


*^^ y   Lausanne,  1873' 

R.  V Revised  Version  (of  the  English  Bible) 

acBc eaculum,  "  century  " 

I  Sam I  Samuel 

II  Sam II  Samuel 

SitnmMberichte  der   Berliner    Akadem&e, 

Berlin,  1882  sqq. 
F.  Max  Mailer  and  others.   The  Sacred 
Booke  of  the  Eaet,  Oxford.  1879  sqq.. 
vol.  xlvui..  1904 
Sacred  Booke  of  the  Old  Teetament  ("  Rain- 
bow  Bible  ^'),    Leipdc,    London,    and 
Baltimore,  1894  sqq. 
P.  Schaff,  Hietory  of  the  Chrietian  Church, 
vols,  i.-iv.,  vi..  vii.,  New  York,1882-92, 
vol.  v..  part  1.  by  D.  S.  Schaff.  1907 
P.    Schaff,    The   Creede   of  Chrietendom, 
^     3  vols..  New  Yoric,  1877-84 
E.  Schrader,  Cuneiform  Inecriptione  and 
the  Old    Teetament,   2   vols..    London. 
1885-88 
E.  Schrader.  Die  Keilineehriften  und  doe 
Alie  Teetament,  2  vols.,  Berlin.  1902-03 
E.  Schrader,  Keilinechriiaiche  Bibliothek, 

6  vols..  BerUn.  1889-1901 
K    SchOrer,    Oeechichte     dee     jildiechen 
Volkee  im  ZeitalterJeeuChrieH,  4th  ed.. 
3  vols.,  Leipsio,  1902 sqq.;  £Ing.  transl.,  5 
,     vols.,  kew  York,  1891 

Script Scriptoree,  '*  writers  " 

Scrivener,  ( F.  H.  A .  Scrivener.  Introduction  to  New  Tee- 

Introduction  . .  \     tament  Criticiem,  4th  ed..  London,  1894 

Sent Sententia,  "  Sentences  " 

S.  J Societae  JeeU,  **  Society  of  Jesus  " 

8MA ( SitMungeberi<jue     der     MUnchener     Aka- 

1     demM,  Munich,  1860  sqq. 
flmUk    r.*«..&.',.    jW.  R.  Smith,  Kinehip  and  Marriage  in 
Smith.  Kxnehxp. .  \     ^^^^  Arabia,  London.  1903 


i 


Schaff.   Christian 
Church 

Schaff.  Creede. 

Schrader.  COT.  . 

Schrader.  KAT . 
Schrader.  KB... 


SchOrer. 
GeechidUe. 


Smith.  OrjC... 

Smith,  Prophete.. 
of 


ReL 


Smith. 
Sem 

S.  P.  a  K. . . 
S.P.G 


M.,  sqq. 
Strom. . . 


s.v 

Swete,  InirodiiO' 

tion 

8; 


tSs". 


Thatcher  and 
MoNeal,Soiiroe 
Book.... 

I  These 

II  Thess. . . 

ThT 


Tillemont, 
moiree... 

I  Tim 

II  Tim. . . . 


TJB. 


MS- 


W,  R.  Smifh.  The  Old  Tetiament  in  the 
J^fish  Church,  Londcjti.  1S&2 

W.  R.  Smith,  i^rophfts  of  /fno^i  .  *  .  to 
Iht  EighUi  Centurif.  l^ndon,   lSW5 

W.  R.  StiiJlh.  R^liQiafi  of  (km  Sumiiee, 
London,  1894 

Sodt'ty  for  the  PromotiQi)  of  Chrifitian 

Society  for  tlie  Proposation  ol  the^Gospel 

in  Foreign  Pafta 
.and  follow] D|E 
.Stromata^  '"  M\6tx:}}a.ni66  " 
.sub  vo«?,  or  itub  verbo 
|H.  B.  Swele,  intr^uction  to  thm  QM   Tme~ 
\      tamfnt  in  Greek,  Londoa,  1900 
.Syriao 
.Trinitarian  Bible  Society 

iO.  J.  Thatcher  and  E.  H.  MoNeal.  A 
Source    Book    for   Mediaval    Hietory, 
New  York.  1905 
.  .First  Epistle  to  the  Theesalonians 
.  .Second  Epistle  to  the  Thessalonians 
Theolooiedie  Tijdeehrift,  Amsterdam  and 

Leyden.  1867  sqq. 
L.  S.  le  Nain  de  Tillemont,  Mhnoiree 
.  .  .  eeeUeiaetiquee    dee    eix    premiere 
eiidee,  16  vols.,  Paris.  1693-1712 
First  EciBtle  to  Timothy 
Second  iB^stle  to  Timothy 


iTheologiedier  Jakreebericht,  Leipeio.  1882- 
1887.  Freibu 


TLB... 

TLZ... 
Tob. . . . 
TQ.... 

TS 

TSBA. 

TSK... 


burg,  1888,  Brunswick,  1889- 
(     1897.  Berlin.  1898  sqq. 
J  Theoloaieekee  LiUeratwblatt,  Bonn.  1866 

Litleraturaeitung,     Leipeio^ 


TU 

TZT 

Ugolini,   Tkeeau- 

rue 

V.  T 


Quarialechrift,     TQbingen, 
and    Studiee, 


Wattenbach. 
DOQ 


Wellhausen. 
Heidenium. . . 

Wellhausen, 
ProUgomena. 


•• 


ZA 

Zahn,  Einleir- 
tung 


Zahn,  Kanon. , 

ZATW 

ZDAL 


ZDMQ. 

ZDP.... 
ZDPV., 


Zech.. 
Zeph. 


ZHT. 


ZKG... 
ZKR... 
ZKT.... 
ZKW. . . 
ZNTW. 
ZPK.... 


ZWT. 


.Tobit 
Theologieeke 

1819  sqq. 
J.    A.     Robinson.     7*exte 

Cambridge.  1891  sqq. 
Traneactione   of  tke   Society  of  BiMiool 

AnkmAogy,  London,  1872  sqq. 
Theologietke  Studien  und  KritOeen,  Ham- 
burg, 1826  sqq. 
Texte  und  Untereuchungen  eur  Oeediidite 

der  altchrie&idien  Litteratur,  ed.  O.  von 

Gebhardt   and   A.    Hamaok.    Leipeio. 

1882  sqq. 
TUbinger   Zeitechrift  fOr  Theologie,    TH- 

bingen,  1838-40 
B.     Ugolinus.     Theeaurue    aniiquitatum 

eacrarum,  34  vols.,  Venice,  1744-69 
Vetue  Teetamentum,  Vieux  Teetament,  "Old 

Testament " 
W.  Wattenbach,  Deuteeklande  Oeechukte- 

quellen,  5th  ed..  2  vols..  Berlin,  1885; 

6th  ed.,  1893-94 
J.  Wellhausen,  Reete  arabiedken  Heiden- 
i     tume.  Berlin,  1887 
J.  Wellnausen,  Prolegomena  eur  Oeediichte 
'     leraele,    6th   ed..    Berlin,     1905,    Eng. 

transl..  Edinburgh.  1885 
Zeitechrift    JUr     Aeeyriologie,      Leipeie. 

1886-88.  BerUn,  1889  sqq. 
T.  Zahn,  Binleitung  in  doe  Neue  Teeta- 
ment, 3d  ed.,  Leipsic,  1907 
T.    Zahn,    Qeediitkte    dee    neuieetament- 

luken  Kanone,  2  vols.,  Leipsic,  1888-92 
Zeitechrift  fOr  die  aUteetamenilitke   Wie- 

eenechaft.  Giessen.  1881  sqq. 
Zeitechrift  far  deutechee  A  Uerthum  und  deut- 

eche  Ltteratur.  Berlin,  1876  soq. 
Zeitechrift  der  deutechen  morgeruAndiechen 

Oeedlechaft,  Leipsic,  1847  sqq. 
Zeitechrift  fOr  deuteche  PhiMogie,  Halle. 

1869  sqq. 
Zeitechrift   dee   deutechen   Paldetina-Ver- 

.:->§,  Lf^ipdCi  1878  sqq. 
ZeruMriiiti 

Zepbiiniab 

Zcittchrift  fOr  die  hiMtmitdie    Theologie, 

Fnhlim^     tFU(Ti%^4ive]y     at     Leipsic. 
iaoibnrff.  and  Gotlifl.  1H32-75 
ZeiiMchrift  fiif    Kirthenifrfrhukte,    Gotha, 

Zfd-rJinff  pit  KiTchfnrecAU    Berlin.  TQ- 

bin^ori.  Kreibiiti^,  \Ml  *qq. 
ZtiUcknJi  /ur  kafholMhe  Theologie,  Inns- 

bruck,  1877  wiq, 
ZeiUcAriJi  far  kircUiche  Witeenediaft  und 

kiffjiiithfs  f^etten^  t^ipaic,  1880-89 
ZnUehriJt  far  (tie  n^utrntamcntliche  Wie- 

Zriifdmfi  jur  Proientanhsmua  undKircke, 
^      Erlaiipn/lfOS  76 
Zdistthriii  fur  ii-iMM€nachafUiche  Theologie, 

Jenii,  1Bd^-60,,  Hallc^  lSai-67.  Leipdc. 

1868  sqq. 


SYSTEM  OF  TRANSLITERATION 


The  following  system  of  tr&nsliteration  has  been  used  for  Hebrew : 

K  =  '  or  omitted  at  the 

beginning  of  a  word. 

a  =  b 


3  =  bh  or  b 

j  =;  gh  or  g 

^  =  d 

1  =  dh  or  d 

n  =  h 

1  =  w 


n  =  t 

3  =  k 

3  =  kh  or  k 

D  =  m 

D  =  B 


fi  =  ph  or  p 

n  =  r 

e^-sh 
n  =  t 

n  =  th  or  t 


The  vowels  are  transcribed  by  a,  e,  i,  o,  u,  without  attempt  to  indicate  quantity  or  quality.  Arabic 
aud  other  Semitic  languages  are  transliterated  according  to  the  same  system  as  Hebrew.  Greek  is 
written  with  Roman  characters,  the  common  equivalents  being  used. 


KEY  TO  PRONUNCIATION 


When  the  pronunciation  is  self-evident  the  titles  are  not  respelled ;  when  by  mere  division  and  accen 
tuation  it  can  be  shown  sufficiently  clearly  the  titles  have  been  divided  into  syllables,  and  the  accentei 
syllables  indicated. 

iu        as  in  duration 

c  =  k    "    "    cat 

ch         "    "   cfeurcb 

cw  =  qu  as  in  ^ueen 

dh  (th)    "  "  the 

f  "  "  fsney 

g  (haid)  "  "  go 

B  "  "  loch  (Scotch: 

hw  («*)  "  "  u*y 


'  Id  aooented  ■jllsblea  only ;  In  onaooentod  syllablea  tt  approzlmatei  tbe  loaiid  ol  e  In  over.    The  letter  n,  wlUi  a 
benestti  it,  indicates  tbe  loand  of  n  m  In  Ink.    Nasal  n  (as  In  French  words)  to  rendered  n. 
*  In  German  and  French  names  Q  approximates  the  sound  of  a  In  dtine. 


as  in 

i  sofa 

u 

tt 

arm 

a 

tt 

at 

tt 

tt 

fare 

tt 

tt 

pen> 

tt 

tt 

fata 

i 

tt 

tt 

ttn 

t 

tt 

tt 

machine 

0 

tt 

tt 

obey 

0 

tt 

tt 

no 

e 

as 

in 

not 

0 

tt 

tt 

nor 

u 

ft 

tt 

fidl« 

Q 

tt 

tt 

rule 

V 

tt 

tt 

but 

0 

tt 

tt 

bum 

ai 

it 

It 

pine 

QU 

tt 

tt 

out 

ei 

tt 

it 

Oil 

iQ 

t* 

tt 

ffW 

THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 

ENCYCLOPEDIA  OF  RELIGIOUS  KNOWLEDGE 


IRHOCBinS,  FEAST  OF  THE  HOLT:  A  church 
festival  in  honor  of  the  children  slain  by  Herod  in 
Bethlehem  (Matt.  ii.  16-18).  They  were  very  early 
regarded  as  Christian  martyrs,  as  Irenseus,  Ter- 
tullian,  Cyprian,  and  many  later  authors  speak  of 
them  in  that  way.  At  what  time  the  festival  be- 
came oonunonly  celebrated  is  not  known.  In  the 
fifth  century  the  holy  innocents  were  oonunemorated 
in  connection  with  the  adoration  of  the  Magi  at 
the  feast  of  Epiphany.  The  Carthaginian  calendar, 
edited  by  Mabillon  from  a  manuscript  of  the 
seventh  century,  has  the  entry  opposite  Dec.  28 
"  (the  day)  of  the  holy  children  slain  by  Herod." 
This  day  is  still  kept  by  the  Roman  Catholic  and 
Protestant  Episcopal  churches,  but  the  Greek 
Church  observes  I>ec.  29.  In  coiu'se  of  time  the 
feast  received  an  octave.  (A.  Hauck.) 

In  the  Saiwmalia  (II.,  4,  11)  of  Macrobius, 
the  Roman  writer  in  the  fifth  century,  is  this 
anecdote:  "When  he  (Augustus)  heard  that 
among  the  boys  whom  in  ^ria  Herod,  the  king 
of  the  Jews,  had  ordered  to  be  killed  there 
were  infants  of  two  years  and  under,  he  exclaimed: 
'  I  had  rather  be  a  pig  of  Herod's  than  a  son.' " 
As  the  Sahtmalia  contains  many  anecdotes  which 
carry  with  them  indubitable  evidence  of  being  of 
contemporary  origin,  there  is  no  reason  for  sup- 
posing that  this  one  was  the  creation  of  a  time 
subsequent  to  Augustus ,  but  every  probability 
that  it,  too,  was  contemporary,  and  so  is  an  inci- 
dental, undesigned,  but  striking  witness  to  the 
tnithfuhiess  of  the  Gospel  story.  E.  G.  Sihlbr. 
Bibuoobafht:  Bin^iam,  Onffin§9,  XX.,  vii  12;   J.  0.  W. 

Ausiuti,   DenkwQrdiffheiien,  I  304  sqq.,   Leipdo,   1817; 

P.  GoBranger,  L'AntUe  Utwrgique,  I  366  aqq.,  Paris,  1880; 

W.  E.  Addia  and  T.  Arnold,  CaihoUe  DieHonary,  pp.  487- 

488,  London,  1903;  O.  Wuaowa,  Analeda  Maenbiana,  in 

ff§t  wm,  zvi.  400  iqq. 

INQUISITION. 

L  In  the  Older  Churoh. 
XL  Tike  Inquieiiion  in  the  Middle  Ages. 
OrBsniiation  and  Gompetenoe  (|  1). 
Relation  to  the  Secular  Powers  (|  2). 
In  Italy  (|  3). 
FiBnoe  (I  4). 
Qpain  (I  6). 

Oennany,  the  Netherlands,  and  England  (|  6). 
m.  The  Inquisition  and  the  Oountei^Refonnation. 
The  Refonnation  Suppressed  in  Itoly  (|  1). 
In  Siiafai  and  the  Netherlands  (|  2). 

L  In   the  Older  Church:  The   Inquisition    (/n- 
quisiiio  hcenltica  pravitatis)  or  the  ''  Holy  Office  " 
(Sanctum  qfficium)  is  the  name  of  the  spiritual  court 
VI.— 1 


of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  for  the  detection 
and  punishment  of  those  whose  opinions  differ 
from  the  doctrines  of  the  Church.  It  was  a  com- 
paratively late  outgrowth  of  ancient  ecclesiastical 
discipline.  "  In  t]^  primitive  Church  there  was 
no  arrangement  that  could  have  borne  even  a  re- 
mote resemblance  to  the  Inquisition.  .  .  The  whole 
instinct  and  the  prevailixig  cast  of  thought  of 
Christendom  in  the  first  four  centuries  was  opposed  to 
compulsion  in  religious  affairs."  (J.J.  I.  von  DOllin- 
ger,  Kleinere  Sckrifien,  p.  295,  Stuttgart,  1890.)  The 
institution  of  "  elder  for  repentance  "  (see  Pbni- 
tbntiart),  which  occurs  in  the  third  century, 
bears  quite  a  different  character,  as  the  very  name 
denotes.  Of  course  deviations  in  the  sphere  of 
Christian  doctrine  were  combated,  but  hardly 
with  other  than  spiritual  weapons;  and  this  prac- 
tise continued  imtil  Theodosius  (d.  395),  before  a 
Christian  emperor  foimd  it  advisable  to  impose  an 
ultimate  death  penalty  on  (Manichean)  heresy. 
Chrysostom  repudiated  such  action:  "  It  is  not 
right  to  put  a  heretic  to  death,  since  an  implacable 
war  would  be  brought  into  the  world  "  (Ham.  xlvi. 
on  Matt.  xiii.  24-30);  and  still  in  the  neighborhood 
of  450  the  church  historian  Socrates  characterized 
persecution  for  heresy  as  foreign  to  the  orthodox 
Church.  Nevertheless,  in  the  meantime  Augustine, 
in  his  conflict  with  the  Donatists,  had  set  up  the 
contrary  doctrine  in  the  West  and  had  recommended 
compulsion  as  well  as  penalties  against  heretics 
{Epist,  xciil.,  clxxxv.),  though  he  did  not  approve 
the  death  penalty.  Six  oentiuies  more  passed 
before  the  theory  of  religious  compulsion  and  of  the 
violent  extirpation  of  heresy  came  to  have  universal 
validity,  although  Pope  Leo  I.  (JSpiH.  xv.,  ad 
Twrribium)  had  approved  it  in  the  fifth  century. 
This  long  season  of  comparative  tolerance  is  the 
more  impressive  in  view  of  the  circumstance  that 
in  Italy  under  East  Gothic  and  Lombard  rule. 
Catholics  and  Arians  lived  whole  centuries  in  close 
proximity,  or  even  together  (as  in  Ravenna).  The 
impulse  to  more  severe  methods  came  from  the 
decision  that  the  numerous  remnants  of  paganism 
must  be  finally  rooted  out;  and  certain  measures 
in  this  direction  were  devised  by  the  Carolingian 
legislation  (Capitularia  CaroLi  Magm  of  769  and 
813).  The  beginnings  of  episcopal  inquisition  are 
thus  to  be  sought  in  the  synodal  courts  for  inves- 
tigations with  reference  to  heresy  (see  Synodal 
Courts;  and  cf.  P.  Hinschius,  Kaiholiaches  Kircherir 
recht,  V.  427,  Berlin,  1895). 


Inquisition 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


n.  The  Inquisition  in  the  Middle  Ages:  By  the 
terms  of  their  n^otiations  at  Verona  in  1184|  Pope 
Lucius  III.  and  Emperor  Frederidc 
X.  Oigani-  Barbarossa  converted  the  episcopal  in- 
zationand  quisition  into  a  universal  institution, 
CompetenceJto  be  imconditionally  supported  by  the 
I  temporal  power.  Tliis  was  the  period 
when  a  new  and  dangerous  doctrine,  oonmiingling 
Christian  and  pagan  elements  in  the  manner  of  the 
ancient  Gnostic  speculations,  diffused  itself  by  way 
of  the  East,  and  lent  its  aid  to  popular  religious 
antagonism  that  was  constantly  inflamed  by  the 
conditions  of  the  worldly  fashioned  hierarchy 
(manifested  by  the  Patarenes,  Arnold  of  Brescia, 
the  Waldenses,  and  others)  .*  By  1 179,  the  followers 
of  the  new  doctrine  had  become  so  nimierous,  es- 
pecially in  southern  France  (see  Nbw  Mamichsans) 
that  Alexander  III.  urged  the  plan  of  suppressing 
them  forcibly.  Innocent  III.  (d.  1216)  organised 
a  systematic  religious  war  against  them;  and  among 
the  agencies  everywhere  employed  were  the  epis- 
copal inquisitions,  with  their  modes  of  operation 
guaranteed  by  the  agreement  at  Verona  and  the 
ready  support  of  all  temporal  tribunals.  However, 
this  form  of  the  Inquisition  appeared  even  to  Hon- 
orius  III.  (d.  1227)  subject  to  obstruction,  and  not 
swift  or  comprehensive  enough  in  its  workings,  for 
want  of  centralisation.  He  and  his  successor, 
Gregory  IX.,  grasped  the  entire  procedure  in  a 
single  hand,  thus  creating  the  new  form  of  papal 
inquisition,  which  now  received  the  specific  name 
of  Sanctum  officium  in  distinction  from  the  epis- 
copal office.  The  most  exact  information  as  to  this 
institution  is  furnished  by  Eymerich's  Diredoriutn. 
The  officers  are  accountable  directly  to  the  pope. 
It  is  not  the  bishop  who  stands  at  their  head,  but 
the  grand  inquisitor,  who  is  reinforced  with  notaries, 
oonsultors  on  the  judicial  side,  servants  and  attend- 
ants of  every  sort  (e.g.,  jailers)  on  the  practical  side. 
In  the  Venetian  RepubUc,  each  case  was  tried  with 
a  supplementary  attendance  of  three  "  learned  in 
heresy,"  who  safeguarded  the  interests  of  the  State. 
The  new  institution  was  accorded  important  priv- 
ileges, in  fact,  full  power  in  the  ecclesiastical  prov- 
ince; the  officers,  being  commissioned  by  the  pope 
directly,  were  independent  of  the  bishops,  and, 
protected  by  high  prerogatives,  were  inviolable  and 
inmiime.  All  their  privileges  were  newly  confirmed 
to  them  in  1458  by  the  bull  Injunctum  nobis,  and 
again  in  1570  by  the  constitution  Sacroaancta 
RomanoB  ecdeaicB.  After  the  Dominican  order  had 
arisen  in  the  thirteenth  century,  and  its  adherents 
had  shown  themselves  exceptionally  qualified,  the 
office  was  transferred  to  them  especially,  though  not 
to  the  exclusion  of  members  of  other  orders.  The 
inquisitors'  official  powers  were  great,  including 
sentence  of  excommunication  and  interdict,  sus- 
pension of  those  under  suspicion,  and  adjudication 
of  all  sorts  of  Exemption  (q.v.).     The  trial  pro- 


*  There  is  no  evidence  thftt  Arnold  of  Bresde  or  the  Wal- 
denses oommingled  pagen  elements  with  Christian.  On  the 
contrary,  they  combated  with  the  utmost  decision  the  pecan 
elements  that  had  been  incorporated  in  the  doctrines  nnd 
practise  of  the  domin*nt  Church  They  appear  to  have  been 
jfcbsolutely  free  from  Manichean  or  Gnostic  tendencies. 

▲.H.N. 


ceedings  were  held  either  in  special  court  rooms  or 
in  the  official  diocesan  court.  For  the  trial  in  its 
different  stages,  for  the  imposition  of  the  penalty, 
and  the  Uke,  the  most  exact  prescriptions  are 
extant,  and  these  were  continually  supplemented 
as  occasion  demanded.    But  for  all  the  exceedingly 

I  detailed  form  of  procedure,  much  was  left  to  tl« 
inquisitor's  discretion.  The  new  papal  tribunal 
encroached  in  various  ways  upon  the  sphere  of  the 
episcopal  inquisition,  and  conflicts  of  jurisdiction 
arose,  which  the  popes  did  not  always  find  it  easy 
to  adjust,  because,  in  any  case,  the  episcopal  in- 
quisition was  not  to  be  abrogated.  Neverthe- 
less, in  a  critical  case,  the  higher  authority  was 
lodged  in  the  inquisitor,  and  his  executive  scope  was 
more  extended  than  that  of  the  episcopal  officiaLi. 
Charges  of  heresy  against  bishops,  and  even  nuncios, 
were  subject  to  the  papal  inquisitors. 

The  unconditional  support  of  the  secular  arm 
was  invoked  for  the  papal  inquisition  by  virtue  of 
the  Veronese  agreement  (though  this 
a.  Rela-    was  not  properly  made  for  that  end), 
tion  to  the  The  secular  arm  was  *'  executor,''  or 
Secular     "  minister  "  of  the  inquisition.    The 
Powers,     popes  constantly  strove  to  get  the  co- 
operation of  the  secular  powers  em- 
bodied in  state  laws,  municipal  statutes,  and  the  like. 
To  this  end  Innocent  IV.,  in  the  bull  Ad  ezstirpanda, 
conceded  to  the  State  a  portion  of  the  property  to 
be  confiscated;   and  the  State  in  return  assumed 
the  odium  and  burden  of  inflicting  the  penalty, 
even  to  capital  execution,  if  need  were.    The  first 
instance  of  an  execution  imder  imputation  of  heresy 
was  supplied  in  385  by  the  usurper  Maximus  (see 
Pribciluan) — an  event  by  no  means  approved  by 
Augustine.    While  the  Veronese  agreement  left  the 
question  open,  King  Peter  of  Arsgon,  as  early  as 
1197,  threatened  the  death  penalty  against  heretics 
who  did  not  submit  to  the  decree  of  expulsion;  and 
in  the  course  of  the  thirteenth  century  this  threat  was 
enforced  in  the  widest  terms.    Even  the  Emperor 
Frederick  II.,  "  free-thinking  "  man  though  he  was 
reputed  to  be,  decreed  the  death  penalty  for  Look 
bardy  m  1224;  for  Sicily  in  1230;  and,  with  Greg- 
ory DC.,  for  Rome  in  1231.   The  sentence  itself  was 
determined,  as  might  be  expected,  by  the  ecclesi- 
astical (papal)  court;  whereupon  the  execution  was 
.committed  to  the  temporal  authorities.    Hence  it 
is  possible  for  certain  apologists  of  the  Romsui 
IChurch  to  urge  that  the  Cihurch  of  Rome  has  never 
(shed  blood  (cf.  Die  Selbtibiographie  dee  CardinaU 
BeUarmine,  ed.  J.  J.  I.  von  DoUinger  and  F.  H. 
Reusch,  pp.  233  sqq.,  Bonn,  1887). 

This  new  form  of  the  Inquisition  was  now  made 
effective  with  iron  strictness  in  Italy,  Fralboe,  the 
Netherlands,  and  England.    In  Italy, 
3*  In  Italy,  which,   especially  in  the  north    and 
central  regions,  was  honeycombed  with 
heresy,  the  situation  was  managed  by  Innocent  III. 
At  Viterbo,  for  example,  proceedings  were  instituted 
with  unexampled  severity  against  the  Paterenes  in 
1207   (cf.   Muratori,   Rerum  Italiearum  ecripiq^'em, 
iii.,  1,    Milan,   1723).     The   civil   strife  that    waa 
stirred  up  led  repeatedly — as  at  Viterbo  in    1265, 
in  Parma,  1277 — ^to  the  expulsion  of  the  inquisitors; 
they  were  even  slain,  as  Peter  Martyr  at  Veronsi  in 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Xnaiiiaitioa 


1246,  who  thus  became  the  saint  of  the  Inquisition. 
**  But  this  occasioned  frightful  vengeance  ...  If 
the  complaints  became  too  loud,  a  pope  did  indeed 

(now  and  tjuNi  serve  a  note  of  reproof  on  the  inquis- 
itor; but  it  does  not  appear  that  so  much  as  one 
pope  wished  to  lop  the  institution's  rankest  out- 
crops" (DOllinger,  ut  sup.).  For  the  detailed  pro- 
cedure, cf.  Lea,  vol.  ii.,  chap.  iv.  A  special  arrange- 
ment prevailed  at  Venice  in  the  interest  of  the 
State,  but  a  milder  policy  in  this  case  was  excep- 
tional. Moreover,  the  pope  appointed  the  inquis- 
itor whom  the  Senate  claissed  as  an  officer  of  the 
State  by  granting  him  a  ''  provision  •'  or  salary; 
and  the  extent  of  his  influence  on  the  "  learned  in 
heresy  "  depended  entirely  on  the  Roman  Curia's 
influence  over  the  Senate  itself. 

In  France  the  Inquisition's  most  appalling  opera- 
tion began  in  the  thirteenth  century  (see  New 

Manichbanb,    II.;    Innocent    III.), 
4.  France,  and  did  not  reach  an  end  with  the 

annihilation  of  the  Albigenses.  The 
people  endured  the  yoke  with  extreme  reluctance; 
in  1242  a  desperately  goaded  multitude  assailed  the 
inquisitors  in  the  territory  of  Avignon.  (Those 
then  slain  were  canonised  by  Pius  IX.  in  Sept., 
1866;  and  he  did  the  same  thing,  in  the  year  follow- 
ing, for  the  atrocious  Spanish  inquisitor,  Pedro 
Arbues.)  The  attitude  of  the  French  kings  to  the 
Inquisition  shows  various  phases.  Louis  IX.  (Saint 
Louis)  promulgated  a  mandate  in  1228  which  binds 
the  temporal  sovereignty  to  imconditional  collabora- 
tion with  the  Inquisition;  on  the  other  hand,  Philip 
the  Fair  decreed,  in  1290,  that  due  circumspection 
should  be  observed  in  the  matter  of  arresting 
alleged  heretics.  The  violent  reactions  of  the 
tortured  people  and  various  royal  edicts  had  at 
last  their  effect;  and  in  time  the  complete  revolu- 
tion brought  forth  by  the  Great  Schism  and  the 
growing  independence  of  the  French  nation  made 
an  end  of  the  Inquisition  in  France  sooner  than  in 
other  lands. 

Meanwhile  the  Inquisition  in  Spain  blossomed  out 
with  peculiar  fulness.    It  is,  to  be  sure,  an  error  to 

ascribe  to  it,  with  Hefele  {Cardinal 
$•  Spain.    Ximenei,  Tubingen,  1844)  and  Ranke, 

the  character  of  a  royal  court  of  justice; 
for,  as  the  Jesuits  Grisar  and  Orti  y  Lara  prove, 
it  is  altogether  ecclesiastical,  having  only  certain 
special  state  privileges  and  a  certain  influence  being 
allowed  the  king  in  the  choice  of  inquisitors.  It 
develc^ied  from  the  thirteenth  century,  on  the 
background  of  persecution  of  Moors  and  Jews. 
Prior  to  the  sixteenth  century,  its  principal  opera- 
tion was  against  the  Maranos  or  alleged  converts 
from  Judaism  to  Christianity.  The  inquisitor- 
general,  Tomas  de  Torquemada  (q.v.),  appointed 
by  Pope  Sixtus  IV.,  outdid  all  precedents  in  the 
way  of  executions  and  confiscations;  it  was  under 
him,  in  Saragossa,  that  Arbues  came  to  his  bloody 
end.  To  say  naught  of  the  fact  that  the  national 
character  was  favorable  to  it,  the  Spanish  Inqui- 
sition underwent  a  peculiar  development  on  three 
sides:  in  the  first  place,  it  had  a  royally  acknowl- 
edged head  in  the  inquisitor-general;  in  the  second 
place,  under  the  inquisitor^general,  the  Conujo  de 
la  9uprema  acted  unifonnly  for  all  Spain,   with 


assistance  from  the  state  authorities;  in  the  third 
place,  while  the  king's  influence  on  the  tribunal  was 
undoubtedly  large,  it  was  never  exerted  against  the 
interests  of  the  Church — on  the  contrary,  the 
presence  of  the  king  or  of  his  representative  at  the 
atUas  da  fi  imparted  to  these  the  quality  of  great 
spectacles  authorised  by  the  State,  almost  popular 
festivals.  It  is  impossible  to  estimate  the  number 
of  the  victims.  Llorente's  data  are  questioned,  and 
may  be  disregarded.  However,  from  the  Inquisitor 
Paramo's  treatise  De  origine  et  progreseu  inqui- 
eitumia  (Madrid,  1508),  p.  140,  it  appears  that  in 
forty  years  (1480-1520),  at  Seville,  4,000  were 
burned,  and  30,000  ''  penitents  "  were  sentenced  to 
various  penalties. 

In  Germany,  Conrad  of  Marburg  (q.v.)  was  to 

bring  the  institution  to  its  flower.    But  the  wrath 

of  the  people  slew  him  and  his  assistant, 

6.  Ger-     Droso,  just  as  their  activity  began  to 

many,  the  ripen  (1233).  Hence  in  Germany  the 
Nether-     Inquisition,  for  the  most  part,  failed 

lands,  and  to  attain  to  thoroughgoing  activity. 

England.  Nevertheless,  until  the  fifteenth  cen- 
tury a  good  many  instances  of  separate 
procedures  occur.  The  acts  collected  by  Fr6d£ricq 
show  what  was  ordained  for  Germany  and  the 
Netherlands  in  common.  This  author  gives  the 
directions  of  Gregory  IX.,  addressed  to  the  bishops, 
in  1233,  to  the  effect  that  they  shall  catch  the 
''  little  foxes  '' — that  is,  the  heretics  ostensibly  con- 
verted; while  a  whole  series  of  similar  ordinances 
ensues  to  the  time  of  the  bull  Snmmie  deaiderarUes 
in  1484,  by  the  terms  of  which  the  special  activity 
of  the  Inquisition  was  directed  against  Witchcraft 
(q.v.).  It  was  furthermore  directed  against  the 
**  Waldenses "  along  the  Rhine,  in  Bavaria  and 
Austria,  in  Bohemia,  and  as  far  as  the  mark  of 
Brandenburg  and  Pomerania,  as  well  as  against 
sects  of  every  kind  in  the  Netherlands.  It  had 
waged  a  fearful  war  of  extermination  in  North 
Germany,  in  the  district  of  Bremen,  1233,  against 
the  Stedingi  (q.v.).  From  the  exact  information  in 
FrM^ricq's  work,  it  appears  that  the  extent  of 
the  bloody  doings  at  Antwerp,  Brussels,  Ghent, 
Utrecht,  and  other  cities  was  greater  than  previously 
known.  During  the  period  before  the  Reformation, 
England  was  less  affected  by  the  Inquisition.  It 
first  became  active  against  the  Lollards  (q.v.).  In 
1401  Henry  IV.  had  parliament  oonfinn  the  statute 
De  haretico  comhurendo, 

in.  The  Inquisition  and  the  Cottnter-Reformation: 

In  1542  Cardinal  Caraffa,  subsequently  Pope  Paul 

IV.,  reorganised  the  Roman  Inquisi- 

I.  The      tion  after  the  pattern  of  the  Spanish. 

Reforma-  He  himself  assumed  the  direction  of 

tion  Sup-  the  Holy  Office  created  by  the  bull 
pre—sd  Licet  ab  initio.  The  executive  pro- 
hi  Italy,  cedure  was  to  be  centralised  at  Rcune, 
primarily  for  all  Italy;  and  the  out- 
come was  to  be  guaranteed  by  uniform,  ruthless, 
and  swift  operation.  The  new  organisation,  having 
at  its  disposal  the  entire  influence  of  the  Ronum 
Curia  over  every  state  of  Italy,  by  the  time  of 
Pius  V.  had  made  an  end  of  the  Reformation  in 
that  country  (see  Italy,  the  Rbvobmation  in); 
its  advocates  were  either  incarcerated  or  killed,  or 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


driven  to  flight,  while  literary  produets  were  sought 
out  and  destroyed,  save  insignificant  remnants.  As 
an  example  of  the  Inquisition's  operation  in  Italy, 
its  actions  against  "  Lutherans  "  or  other  heretics  in 
Venice  may  be  enumerated:  in  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury, according  to  the  acts  still  preserved  in  the 
state  archives,  there  were  803  trials  for  "  Lutheran- 
ism  "  ;  five  for  "  Calvinism  "  ;  thirty-five  for  Ana- 
baptism;  forty-three  for  relapse  of  converts  into 
Judaism;  sixty-five  for  blasphemous  speeches;  148 
for  sorcery;  forty-five  for  contempt  of  religion  (that 
is,  of  ecclesiastical  ceremonies,  etc.) ;  and  more  of  the 
sort.  Later  these  figures  notably  vanish.  Branches 
of  the  new  Roman  office  were  organised  in  all  other 
cities  of  Italy,  Naples  excepted.  Rome,  however, 
continued  the  center;  and  how  numerous  the  trials 
conducted  at  that  place  must  have  been  appears 
from  the  circumstance  that  the  single  protocol-book 
accessible  records  during  the  three  years  1564-67 
no  fewer  than  111  sentences,  all  involving  severe 
punishment,  some  the  death  penalty,  and  some 
imprisonment  for  life. 

As  in  Italy,  so  in  Spain,  the  reformatory  move- 
ment of  the  sixteenth  oentiuy  fell  a  prey  to  the 
Inquisition  (see  Spain,  I^vorica- 
2.  In  Spain  tion  Movements  op  Sixteenth  Cen- 
and  the  turt  in).  At  Seville  and  Valladolid 
Nether-  the  movement  was  crushed  and  obliter- 
lands.  ated  in  the  course  of  four  atttoa  da  /^, 
1550  and  1560  (of.  £.  SchAfer,  SeviUa 
und  Valladolid,  dieevangeliachenOemeinden  Spaniena 
im  R^armaHanaMeitaUer,  Halle,  1903);  and  the  In- 
quisition still  flourished  in  all  the  land  until  1700;  ac- 
cording to  Llorente,  782  more  autos  occurred  under 
the  first  Bourbons  (1700-46),  wherein  14,000  persons 
were  subjected  to  heavier  or  lighter  penalties.  Indeed, 
Ferdinand  VII.  restored  the  Inquisition  along  with 
the  Restoration  in  1814;  but  it  was  finally  set  aside 
in  1834.  The  Inquisition  persisted  long  also  in 
Portugal,  where  it  was  mainly  directed  against  the 
Jews;  it  came  to  an  end  there  in  1826.  In  the  im- 
perial Netherlands,  the  Inquisition  effectively  com- 
bated the  Reformation  in  the  sixteenth  century. 
From  Brussels  as  a  center,  it  was  so  actively  con- 
ducted, or  supported,  from  1522  downward  by  the 
officials  of  Charles  V.,  then  by  the  two  stadtholder 
princesses,  that  by  1530  its  goal  seemed  achieved. 
The  spirit,  however,  it  could  not  subdue,  and  it 
raged  afresh  under  Philip  II.,  and  anticipated  the 
cruel  deeds  of  Alva.  When  eventually  the  north 
provinces  conquered  their  religious  and  political 
freedom,  the  Inquisition  had  annihilated  the 
Reformation  in  the  south  provinces.  Its  activity 
was  also  carried  into  the  Spanish  possessions  in 
America,  and  into  the  East  Indies  by  the  Portu- 
guese. 

The  CongrtgaHa  mindae  Romatiae  d  umvenaUa 
inquintumiB  is  still  maintained  by  the  Curia;  and 
the  estimate  which  Rome  puts  on  the  institution 
appeared  in  1867  in  the  canonisation  of  Pedro 
^jfbues,  and  in  1869  in  the  constitution  ApoMieae, 
which  threatens  penalty  for  every  infraction  of  the 
Inquisition's  activity.  Not  one  of  all  the  regulations 
which  define  its  actt(Mi  and  determine  its  aims  has 
been  repealed.  K.  Beneath. 


Bzbuookapbt:   In  the  fint  rank  m  »  aourae  it  tlM  Dtrw* 
torium  of  Eymerioh,  written  »t  ATifnon  u  a  muaU  oC 
procedure  in  1376,  edited  by  Pccna*  Rome,  IttOi  cf.  P.  H. 
Denifle  in  ArdUv  fUr  LittenUttr-  und  Kutskm^wAieUe, 
1885,  p.  10.    Thel46«rfenl«nlianimifi«ttuitfontf7ko2o«afMi 
ie  reprodueed  m  en  addition  to  P.  van  Limboroh,  Atitona 
InquitUionu,  Amsterdam.    1002,   Enff.  tnoiL,  London, 
1731,  often  abbreviated  and  republiahed  in  Enclawl  tad 
America.    The  PraeUea  InquimHanu  of  Bemtrd  Quidonis, 
ed.  C.  Douaia,  appeared  Paria,  1886.    The  bttt  oolleetion 
of  aoureee  for  the  Netherianda  is  sathered  in  P.  FrM^oq, 
Corpus  doamefUarum  InqutBitionU,  2  vols.,  Ths  Htsu^ 
1880-06.    Eariy  material  on  Spain  and  Itely  retpeetively 
is  included  in  J.  A.  Llorente,  Hialona  erOies  d«  la  /n- 
ffuisioofi  ds  Etpatia,  10  vols.,  Madrid,  1822,  abridftd  Eng. 
transl..  Ui^  of  Ms  Inqmmiiyon  nS  Spain  from  tiu  Timt  <f 
Ois  BwbMiahmmU  to  ike  Rmon  <tf  Ferdinand  VIK  London. 
1826,  and  in  E.  C.  Comba,  /  noatri  PrefsttoiKi,  vol  ii., 
Florenof,  1807.    An  index  to  some  souroet  is  found  in 
CaUdoffuo  cf  a  CdUeHon  of  ManuaaipU  formoHy  Mono- 
ing  to  tho  Holy  Office  ,  .  ,  in  ths  Canary  Itlanii,  1490- 
1603,  2  vols.,  Edinburgh.  1003. 

On  the  general  history  of  the  InquisiUon  the  belt  work 
is  H.  C.  Lea,  HitL  of  ikt  Inquxeiikwn  in  the  Middle  Aget, 
revised  ed.,  3  vols..  New  York.  100<M)7.    Contult  further: 
J.  ManoUier,  UiaL  de  Vinqpiieiiion  die  eon  ort^ne,  Cologne, 
1603:  W.  H.  Rule,  HieL  of  ike  InquieiHon  in  Every  Coun^ 
try  where  He  TribunaU  have  been  BetabUehed,  London.  1874; 
Orti  y  Lara.  La  Inquieieum,  Madrid.  1877;    J.  Havet, 
L*Hir4eie  et  le  brae  eieulier,  Paris.   1881;    A.  Henner. 
Beitrdae  eur  OrgameaHon  der  pdpediehen  KeUergerichle, 
Leipsic,  1800;    J.  Hansen,  Zauberweeen,  Inqui*i*i''»^  u**d 
Hexenproaete  im  MiUelalier,  Munich,  1000;  P.  von  Hoen»> 
broech.  Dae  Papettum  ine  eoeial^JeuitureUen  Wirkeamkeil, 
vol.  i.,  Leipsic  1000;  C.  V.  Langlois,  L'lnquieiHon  d*apr^ 
dee  fravottx  rSeente,  Paris,  1002;    E.  Schtfer,  BeitUge  tur 
Geeehiehie  ,  .  ,  der  InquieiHon,  3  vols.,  OOtenloh,  1002; 
C.  Douais,  L'lnquieiHon,  ee  eoriQinee,  ea  procidure,  Paris, 
1006;    E.  Vacandard,  L'lnquieiHon;  ...  Is  pottvoir  ooer- 
dHfde  riglise,  ib.  1006,  Eng.  transit  CriHeal  and  Hietorieal 
Study  cS  tkt  Coercive  Power  nf  Ike  Church,  London.  1008; 
T.  de  C^uaons,  Lee  Albioeoie  el  Vinquieition,  lee  Vaudoie  e( 
rinquieiHon,  2  vols.,  Paris,  1007;  SchafI,  ChrieHan  Churdi, 
V.  1,  pp.  616  tqq.;  the  literature  under  Naw  Mamicbkans 
and  in  general  the  treatises  on  Church  history. 

For  the  institution  in  France,  consult:    C.  Molinier, 
L'lnquieiHon  done  le  midi  de  la  France,  Paria,  1881;    W. 
Esmein,  HieL  ,  ,  ,  de  la  proeidure  inquieikrire,  ib.  1882; 
L.  Tanon.  HieL  de  I'inquieiHon  en  France,  ib.  1803;    T. 
de  Oauaons,  HieL  de  VinquieiHon  en  France;   vol.  i..  Les 
Originee,  Paris,  1000.    For  Gennany  consult:    H.  Htiupt, 
Waldeneerlhum  und  inquieiHon  im  eOd-^eUickan  Deuteeh- 
iand,  Freiburg,  1800;  P.  Flade,  Dae  rdmietha  InquieiHonm- 
verfahren  in  Deuteehland,  Berlin,  1002.    For  the  Nether- 
lands: W.  MoU.  Kerkoeeehiedenie  van  Nederland,  U.,  ohap. 
16.  Utrecht,  1800;    J.  Q.  de  Hoop-Scheffer,  Oaaehiadrntia 
der   Kerkhervorming   in   Nederland,    Amsterdam,     1873; 
P.  dastsent,  L'tnquieiHon  done  let  Paye-Baa,  Tumhout, 
1886:  V.FTMiMon,Oeetkiedenu  der  InquieiHa  in  da  Naders 
landen,  2  vols.,  Ghent,  1802-07;   J.  Frederioba.  Twa  Ver- 
handeUnifen  over  de  Inquieitie  in  de  NedoHmdan,    The 
Hague,  1807.    For  Italy:  L.  Witte,  A  Olanoe  at  the  JtaUcm 
InquieiHon,  London,  1886;    L.  Amabile,  11  Sonio  QfflcU 
deUa  Inquieieione  in  Napoli,  2  vols.,  Cittm  di   CasteUo, 
1802.    For  Spain:    H.  C.  Lea,  7^  InquieiHan  in,  SjxUn 
4  vols..  New  York,  1006-07;   fclem.  The  Inguimtion  in  tK 
Spanieh  Dependenase,  ib.  1006;    idem,  Chaptarm  from,  th 
HieL  ^  Spain  oonneeted  wif%  the  InquieiHon,  PhUadelpbia 
1800;    E.  de  Moltoas,  Torquemada  el  rinquiaiUon,   Parii 
1807;  C.J.vonHefele,Li/sa«*drifiMS<^Canfina<Ximene3 
London,  1886.    For  South  America:    B.  V.    Mswsketiai 
^Vttaetseo  Moyen;  or,  Ae  InquieiHon  ae  it  waa  in  Atnai  ict 
London.  1860.    J.  T.  Medina  has  written  m  number   < 
volumes  in  Spanish,  on  the  Inquisition  In  Lima*  Santia^s 
1887;   in  Chile.  8  vols.,  ib.  1800;   in  QtftacMiA.  ib.  ISO 
in  De  la  Plata,  ib.  1800;  in  the  Phlfippinea,  ib.  1800;   aa 
in  Mexico,  ib.  1006. 

mSABATATI   (SABOTIBRS):    A  name  siven 
the  Waldenses  (q.v.)   from   thoir  nbots,    m&rki 
with  a  painted  croes,  or  from  the  wandalw  tied  croc 

wise. 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Inqoiaitlon 
Znaoriptiona 


I.  Egyptian  InattiptiiaDB. 
Fonns  and  Ghai«et«r  (|  1). 
Number,    Ac0*     uid     OontenU 

(12). 

Th«  RoMtta  Stone  and  Decipher- 
ment (i  3). 

lUustration  of  the  Bible  (|  4). 

II.  Cuneiform  Inacriptiona. 


INSCRIPTIONS. 

The  Name;    Area    Corered  by 
the  Script  (I  1). 

Discoveries;     Decipherment     of 
Fenamn  (|  2). 

Decipherment  of  Babylonian-As- 
syrian (i  3). 

Origin    and    Character    of    the 
Script  (i  4). 
III.  Christian  Inscriptions. 


1.  Andent  Christian  Inseriptioos. 
Methods  of  Writing  (I  1). 
I^nguagn  Employed  (|  2). 
Contents  (|  3). 

Value  of  the  Material  (i  4). 

2.  Medieval  and  Later  Inscriptions. 

3.  History  of  Epigraphy. 
The  Early  Period  (i  1). 

The  Nineteenth  Century  ({  2). 


L  Egyptian  Iiucriptioiis :  The  inBCriptions  of 
Egypt   are   no   new  discovery.    The    term    most 

used  to  describe  the  characters  em- 

1.  Forma    ployed    in    the    inscriptions,    "  hiero- 

Ohmotar    K^yP^^*"  '^  ^^  Greek  origin  (hieros, 

"  sacred  "  +  glypkein,  "  to  carve")  and 
bears  witness  both  to  early  knowledge  of  the  exist- 
ence of  the  writing  and  to  the  conception  at  that 
time  that  the  priestly  class  was  its  executor.  In 
more  modem  usage  the  term  is  not  confined  to  the 
Egyptian  inscriptions,  but  is  used  generally  of  any 
kind  of  picture-writing.  The  inscriptions  on  the 
monimients  of  Egypt  are  in  the  main  in  a  picture- 
writing,  the  individual  signs  of  which  are  representa- 
tions of  objects  or  actions  more  or  less  convention- 
alised. This  detailed  representation  passed  by  the 
method  of  abbreviation  into  a  shorter  form  called 
the  hieratic  script,  and  by  the  extension  of  this 
process  to  a  still  shorter  form,  the  demotic.  But 
in  only  the  very  late  period  of  Egyptian  history 
was  either  the  hieratic  or  demotic  form  employed 
upon  the  monimients,  though  both  were  used  on 
papyri  from  an  early  age.  While  originally  the 
signs  stood  for  the  objects  they  pictured,  at  a  very 
early  stage  they  came  to  have  phonetic  quality, 
and  from  this  to  the  development  of  an  alphabet 
the  steps  were  rapid  and  easy.  While  this  process 
was  going  on,  the  signs  were  given  values  associated 
with  those  already  customary  and  also  others 
disconnected  from  the  original  connotation.  The 
alphabet  was  of  twenty-one  letters  (some  authori- 
ties say  twenty-two,  others  twenty-four),  all  conso- 
nants, though  some  of  the  letters  were  employed  to 
indicate  vowel  sounds,  as  in  the  Semitic  languages. 
The  signs  became  also  signs  of  syllables  as  well  as 
of  single  letters,  and,  still  further,  signs  of  words  or 
ideographs.  In  all,  the  number  of  symbols  known 
from  the  monuments  is  slightly  imder  1,400.  Since 
some  of  these  symbols  might  express  several  ideas, 
it  became  necessary  to  use  certain  signs  as  deter- 
minatives to  fix  the  meaning  of  the  group  in  which 
they  occurred,  thus  to  remove  ambiguity.  The 
signs  composing  a  word  or  idea  are  grouped  in 
quadrangular  form,  though  the  order  of  grouping 
is  not  invariable,  being  either  perpendicular  or 
horixontal,  according  to  the  shape  of  the  com- 
ponents, the  exigencies  of  the  space  at  disposal 
or  the  artistic  taste  of  the  scribe.  The  groups  were 
arranged  in  colimins  or  in  lines,  according  to  the 
material  used  and  the  space  and  form  available  for 
the  inscription.  The  writing  runs  either  (prefer- 
ably) from  right  to  left  or  the  reverse  when  arranged 
horisontaUy,  or  from  above  downward  when  it  is 
in  columns. 


The  area  within  which  these  inscriptions  are  found 
embraces  the  whole  of  the  Nile  valley  as  far  as 
Nubia,  parts  of  the  peninsula  of  Sinai, 
*a2b^^'  and  locations  in  Syria  and  Palestine. 
OMitents.  ^<»"^  begin  with  the  second  dy- 
nasty; during  the  fourth,  fifth  and 
sixth  dynasties  they  become  numerous,  though 
largely  centralized  aroimd  Memphis,*  then  they 
become  fewer  until  with  the  eleventh  dynasty  they 
again  grow  abundant  and  spread  out  over  a  wide 
area,  continuing  numerous  till  the  fourteenth  dy- 
nasty. Of  the  Hyksos  kings  few  remains  are  foimd. 
With  the  seventeenth  dynasty  inscriptions  once 
more  become  abimdant  and  continue  so,  with  ex- 
ceptions in  some  dynasties  or  single  reigns,  till 
down  into  Roman  times.  The  inscriptions  were 
placed  on  the  waUs  of  temples,  on  stel»  and  monu- 
ments set  up  within  the  temple  courts,  on  obelisks, 
and  in  tombs  both  of  the  Pharaohs  and  of  the  nobil- 
ity and  the  wealthier  classes,  and  on  gems,  rings, 
and  scarabs.  Since  the  temples  of  the  earlier  period 
have  vanished,  it  foUows  that  the  inscriptions  of 
those  times  have  for  the  most  part  perished.  Yet 
while  some  of  the  earliest  monuments  were  des- 
troyed at  a  very  early  date,  it  sometimes  occurs 
that  the  record  which  they  bore  was  copied  on  a 
more  perishable  material  which  has  survived.  A 
matter  which  often  causes  embarrassment  to  the 
decipherer  is  that  it  was  the  known  habit  of  some 
Pharaohs,  as  in  the  case  of  Rameses  II.,  to  remove 
the  royal  name  in  the  cartouche  oi  the  original 
Pharaoh  who  ordered  the  inscription,  and  to  in- 
scribe their  own  in  its  place,  thus  claiming  the 
deeds  originally  assigned  to  another  and  dislocating 
the  order  of  history.  The  earliest  inscriptions  come 
from  massive  masonry  tombs,  where  often  little 
more  than  names,  titles,  and,  sometimes,  the  legal 
provisions  for  maintenance  of  the  tomb  are  pre- 
served. Later,  in  addition  to  these  bare  statements, 
the  Usts  of  titles  are  extended  to  include  something 
of  the  career  of  the  deceased.  Finally  they  contain 
records  of  achievement — whether  of  Pharaohs, 
generals,  or  administrators— -of  the  occasion  which 
the  record  commemorates,  and  may  even  include 
the  royal  patent  for  the  work  of  which  the  inscrip- 
tion speaks.  But,  in  general,  a  vagueness  charac- 
terises the  content  of  the  inscriptions  and  makes 
them  illusive  and  difficult,  not  only  in  themselves 
but  also  in  the  historical  matter  to  which  they  refer. 
Thus,  in  a  story  of  conquest,  the  foe  is  often  referred 
to  not  by  name  or  country,  but  is  described  by  some 
derogatory  epithet:  again,  the  events  narrated 
were  often  contemporary  and  matters  of  general 
knowledge;  it  therefore  did  not  seem  to  the  maker 


Znsoriptlons 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


neoessary  to  give  spedfio  details,  so  that  the  iden- 
tification of  the  events  is  often  doubtful  or  im- 
possible. Not  seldom,  the  inscriptions  are  mere 
laudations  of  the  Pharaoh,  or,  again,  are  hymns  in 
praise  of  him.  Others  are  records  of  building  enter- 
prises, giving  the  personal  history  of  the  ruler  or 
administrator.  Decrees  of  administration  appear. 
In  private  tombs  records  of  filial  performance  in  the 
maintenance  of  the  tomb  occur,  and  there  are  also 
found  interesting  acooimts  referring  to  wars  or 
enterprises  otherwise  unknown.  The  longest  in- 
scriptions are  the  Pyramid  texts  of  the  Pharaohs 
of  the  fifth  and  sixth  dynasties,  discovered  in  1880, 
dealing  laigely  with  matters  religious,  including 
magic.  The  Palermo  Stone  is  one  of  the  most  noted 
monuments — a  fragment  of  a  stele  containing  a 
record  of  pre-dynastic  kings,  continuing  to  the 
middle  of  the  fifth  dynasty,  and  giving  brief  royal 
annals.  The  various  erections  at  Karnak  afforded 
space  for  voluminous  inscriptions,  to  some  of  which 
reference  must  be  made  later. 

Since  the  fifteenth  century  attempts  were  made 
to  decipher  the  Egyptian  hieroglyphics,  though 
without  success  till  the  early  part  of  the 
8.  The  Bo-  nineteenth  century.  But  meanwhile  a 
'm^^^m  foundation  was  laid  for  a  broader  and 
pherment.  ^^^<^®^  appreciation  of  Egyptian  arche- 
ology by  the  work  done  on  Coptic 
since  the  time  of  Athanasius  Kircher,  who  published 
the  first  Coptic  grammar  (Rome,  164^-44).  The 
epoch-making  work  of  ChampoUion  (see  below)  was 
in  no  small  part  due  to  his  mastery  of  Coptic.  But 
all  attempts  to  read  the  hieroglyphics  were  complete 
failures  until  the  key  was  furnished  by  the  Roeetta 
Stone.  This  is  a  slab  of  black  granite,  three  feet 
nine  inches  by  two  feet  four  and  a  half  inches  and 
eleven  inches  thick,  bearing  an  inscription  in  hiero- 
glyphic and  demotic  Egyptian  and  in  Greek.  It 
was  found  in  1709  by  M.  Boussard,  a  French  mili- 
tary officer,  at  Fort  St.  Julien,  near  Rosetta,  on  the 
Rosetta  branch  of  the  Nile  (40  m.  n.e.  of  Alexan- 
dria), was  taken  to  England  after  the  fall  of  Alex- 
andria, and  was  presented  to  the  British  Museum 
by  George  III.  (1801).  The  upper  portion  and  the 
lower  right-hand  comer  are  broken  away.  It  con- 
tains a  decree  of  the  Egyptian  priests  in  honor  of 
Ptolemy  V.  Epiphanes  (205-181  B.C.),  and  ito  date  is 
Bfar.  27, 195  B.C.  It  bears  100  lines  of  text,  fourteen 
of  hieroglyphic  (about  half  of  the  original),  thirty- 
two  of  demotic,  and  fifty-four  of  Greek  (the  ends 
of  some  of  the  lines  broken  off)*  Its  significance  is 
not  in  its  contents,  but  in  the  fact  that  it  proved 
to  be  the  key  to  the  decipherment  of  the  hiero- 
glyphic and  demotic  writing,  and  consequently 
opened  up  nearly  all  that  is  Imown  of  and  through 
Egyptian  texts.  The  results  gained  through  the 
decipherment  of  this  text  were  checked  and  con- 
firmed by  the  trilingual  stele  of  Oanopus  found  by 
Lepsius  at  Tanis  in  1806,  containing  a  similar  decree 
of  the  year  238  b.c,  in  honor  of  Ptolemy  III. 
Eueigetes  I.  (247-222  B.C.).  Yet  the  process  of 
decipherment  was  somewhat  tedious.  Sylvestre  de 
Sacy  (1802)  detected  several  groups  in  the  demotic 
text  which  corresponded  to  the  Greek  forms  of 
the  names  Ptolemy,  Berenice,  and  Alexander.  The 
Swede  J.  D.  Akerblad  (1802)  obtained  the  phonetic 


values  of  most  of  the  demotic  characters  in  the 
proper  names  and  used  the  0>ptic  to  determine 
the  meaning  of  several  words.  Thomas  Young 
(1814),  an  English  scientist,  determined  the  mean- 
ings of  several  groups  of  demotic  charactera  and 
established  four  alphabetical  hieroglyphic  charac- 
ters. Jean  Franco's  ChampoUion  put  the  crown 
upon  all  these  efforts  by  reading  from  a  bilingual 
obelisk  in  Phil»,  in  hieroglyphic  and  Greek,  the 
names  of  Ptolemy  and  Cleopatra,  deciphering  the 
names  of  Greek  and  Roman  rulers,  making  out  all 
the  characters,  discovering  ideograms  and  deter- 
minatives, gaining  insight  into  the  phonetic  system, 
and  discerning  the  relations  of  the  three  kinds  of 
script.  He  made  a  statement  of  his  discoveries  and 
expoimded  his  system  to  the  Academic  des  Inscrip- 
tions, Sept.  22,  1822.  Karl  Richard  Lepsius  worked 
on  the  lines  of  ChampoUion  and  corrected  some 
mistakes,  but  proved  the  general  soundness  of 
ChampoUion's  conclusions  against  the  captious  and 
envious  criticism  of  several  German  writers.  The 
science  of  Egyptology  has  been  advanced  by  many 
later  scholars,  such  as,  to  name  only  a  few,  Emman- 
uel de  Roug6,  Auguste  Mariette,  Paid  Pierret,  Jacques 
de  Morgan  and  Gaston  Maspero  in  France,  Heinrich 
Brugsch,  Alfred  Wiedemann,  CSeorg  Ebera,  Adolf 
Erman  and  Geoig  Steindorff  in  Germany,  John 
Gardner  Wilkinson,  Samuel  Birch,  Peter  le  Page 
Renouf,  Edward  NaviUe,  Ernest  Alfred  Thomp- 
son, Wallis  Budge,  and  WiUiam  Matthew  FUn- 
ders-Petrie  in  England,  W.  Max  Mailer  and  James 
Henry  Breasted  in  the  United  States. 

The  scantiness  of  iUustration  of  BibUcal  history 
afforded  by  the  Egyptian  monuments  as  compared 
with  the  abimdance  gained  from  the 
^S^^^t  Assyro-Babylonian  records  has  been 
the  Bibto.  ^  niany  a  cause  of  great  disap- 
pointment. The  explanation  of  this 
scantiness  is,  however,  not  hard  to  discover.  One 
reason  is  the  vagueness  of  Egyptian  records  (see 
above).  Another,  which  is  on  the  surface,  is  that 
after  the  Hebrews  settled  in  Palestine  contact  of 
Egypt  with  Palestine  was  occasional  and  not 
always  of  such  a  character  as  to  dispose  the  monu- 
ment-makers to  speak  of  it — they  recorded  only 
victories,  not  failures  or  defeats.  That  mention  of 
the  Hebrews  who  had  broken  away  from  Eg3rptian 
control  would  appear  in  the  inscriptions  was  hardly 
to  be  expected,  nor  that  pre-Mosaic  Israel  would 
be  differentiated  from  the  numerous  nomads  of 
Semitic  stock  who  occasionally  sought  refuge  in 
the  NUe  land.  Accordingly,  apart  from  that  general 
iUustration  of  mannere  of  living  which  is  a  conse- 
quence of  a  sort  of  conmionality  of  Ufe  in  the  East, 
little  of  specific  detail  need  be  looked  for  from  the 
Egyptian  inscriptions  either  corroborating  or  con- 
tradicting Bibhcal  statements,  especially  if,  accord- 
ing to  the  view  now  generaUy  accepted,  the  He- 
brews were  very  few  in  numbera.  What  Uttle  specific 
illustration  there  is  takes  on  either  a  geographical 
or  ethnological  char^u^r.  The  first  comes  through 
the  mention  of  places  conquered  in  Palestine  by  the 
Pharaohs.  Thothmes  III.  (eighteenth  dynasty), 
who  made  fifteen  expeditions  into  S3rria  and  Pales- 
tine, has  recorded  in  the  temple  of  Amon  at  Karnak, 
on  the  wall  of  the  southern  pylon  and  on  the  north- 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Insoriptioiui 


em  wall  at  the  western  end  of  the  temple,  a  list  of 
places  in  that  region  the  submission  of  which  he 
claims  to  have  received  (cf.  Records  of  the  Past, 
new  series,  v.  29-63,  for  the  list  of  names).  Note- 
worthy and  productive  of  a  vast  amount  of  dis- 
cussion are  the  names  Yakob-^  and  Yosep-d,  which 
seem  to  represent  an  early  form  of  the  names 
Jacob  and  Joseph.  The  real  significance  of  these 
names,  paralleled  from  the  cimeiform  inscriptions, 
is  as  yet  under  debate,  but  eponymous  derivation 
seems  to  be  favored.  The  geography  is  also  il- 
luminated by  the  lists  of  Seti  I.  and  Rameses  11. 
(nineteenth  dynasty),  the  latter 's  inscriptions  on 
the  Ramesseum  at  Thebes  and  at  Kamak,  and  by 
that  of  Rameses  III.  at  Medinet  Haba. 

Shishak  I.  (twenty-second  dynasty)  also  fur- 
nished on  the  south  wall  of  the  great  temple  at 
Kamak  a  list  of  geographical  names  in  which  there 
are  156  cartouches,  not  all  legible  (cf.  W.  M.  Mailer, 
Asien  und  Evropa,  Leipsic,  1893,  pp.  166  sqq.). 

The  monuments  of  Seti  I.,  Rameses  II.  and  IV., 
and  Meneptah  contain  references  which  are  thought 
by  the  advanced  school  to  bear  on  pre-Mosaio 
history.  That  the  Aperiu  (cf.  Heb.  *Ibhrx,  "He- 
brew "  and  the  Habiri  of  the  Amama  Tablets,  q.v.) 
were  Hebrews  is  not  yet  assured,  though  it  is 
possible.  Seti  I.  and  Rameses  II.  speak  of  an  Aseru 
or  Asaru  in  western  Galilee  in  the  region  assigned 
to  the  tribe  Asher  in  the  Hebrew  records  (Judges 
V.  17,  cf.  i.  32).  Of  this  alternative  explanations 
are  given:  the  Asherites  were  a  Canaanitic  tribe 
absorbed  later  into  the  Hebrew  confederation 
(which  would  go  with  the  assumed  eponymous  de- 
rivation of  the  name  and  with  the  Biblical  ac- 
count of  descent  from  a  concubine)  or  the  He- 
brews who  settled  in  the  region  took  the  name 
of  the  country  (W.  M.  Mailer,  ut  sup.  pp.  236-239). 
On  a  stele  of  Meneptah  discovered  in  1895  occurs 
the  only  known  mention  of  Israel  on  the  Egyptian 
monuments  (in  the  form  I-sv-r-'l)  as  a  people  whom 
Meneptah  had  reduced.  This  mention  is  compli- 
cated by  the  fact  that  Meneptah  is  now  quite 
generally  regarded  as  the  Pharaoh  of  the  Exodus; 
how,  then,  could  Israel  be  in  Palestine  during  his 
reign?  Accordingly  many  conunentators  are  dis- 
posed to  see  in  the  Israel  of  Meneptah's  inscription 
a  part  of  the  Hebrews  settled  in  Palestine  who  did 
not  go  down  into  Egypt  and  gave  their  name  to 
the  confederation  in  later  times;  these  oonmien- 
tators  regard  as  confirmation  of  this  the  occurrence 
of  YdktML  and  Yosep-d  (ut  sup.).  Light  on  the 
Exodus  of  the  Hebrews  comes  not  from  the  hiero- 
glyphic, but  from  a  combination  of  a  Greco-Ro- 
man inscription  with  the  identification  of  Succoth 
and  Pithom  through  indications  in  the  0>ptic 
version  of  the  Old  Testament  and  through  indica- 
tions in  Greek  writers  (see  Eqtft).  While  the 
bearing  of  Egyptian  inscriptions  on  Hebrew  history 
and  ethnology  is  thus  vague  and  indecisive,  if  it 
has  any  value  at  all  it  is  in  the  way  of  strengthen- 
ing the  case  of  the  newer  school  of  constructive 
history.  Geo.  W.  Gilmorb. 

IL  Cuneiform  Inscripttons:  Cuneiform,  from  the 
Latin  euneus,  "  wedge,"  was  first  applied  in  the 
year  17(X)  by  Thomas  Hyde,  professor  of  Hebrew 
in  the  University  of  Oxfoid.    In  that  day  Hyde  was 


acquainted  only  with  some  rude  copies  of  Assyrian 
characters,  and  with  some  equally  rude  copies  of 

Sassanian  and  Palmyrene  inscriptions, 

1*  7he      concerning  which  he  argued  that  they 

0*'ered?*^®'®   not   letters,    nor    intended    for 

the  Borip^  letters,    but    were     mere    ornament. 

Later  investigation  has  shown  that  the 
cuneiform  method  of  writing  is  one  of  the  oldest 
known  to  man  and  one  of  the  most  widely  diffused, 
and  that  it  sufficed  for  more  than  five  thousand  years 
to  express  the  ideas  of  nearly  a  score  of  peoples, 
among  whom  were  some  of  the  greatest  culture  races 
of  antiquity.  It  was  invented  by  the  pre-Semitic 
Sumerian  inhabitants  of  Babylonia,  was  adopted 
by  their  conquerors,  the  Semitic  Babylonians,  and 
thence  carried  to  Assyria.  It  was  besides  dif- 
fused among  all  the  neighboring  peoples  and  came 
into  use  as  far  east  as  Elam  and  as  far  west  as  Egypt 
(see  Amarna  Tablets). 

The  first  modem  observer  of  cuneiform  characters 
was  Pietro  della  Valle,  about  1618  a.d.,  who  copied 

from  the  ruins  of  Persepolis  in  Persia 

la  -^Ml'"  *  ^®^  characters  in  random  but  fairly 

pherment    *<*urate  fashion.     The  material  thus 

of  Persian,  provided  was  too  scanty  to  stimulate 

any  earnest  effort  at  decipherment. 
The  first  opportunity  afforded  European  scholars 
for  study  of  the  cuneiform  was  given  in  1774  by 
Carsten  Niebuhr,  a  Dane,  father  of  the  famous 
Roman  historian,  who  had  copied  at  Persepolis  a 
number  of  small  inscriptions,  grouped  in  threes 
upon  the  remains  of  the  palaces  of  the  Achamenian 
kings.  Previous  travelers  had  expressed  the  opinion 
that  three  languages  were  represented  in  these 
Persepolis  texts,  and  later  study  has  shown  the 
three  languages  to  be  Persian,  Susian,  and  AssyTO- 
Babylonian.  The  task  of  decipherment  was  ren- 
dered difficult  by  the  fact  that  no  bilingual  inscrip- 
tion was  foimd  in  which  a  known  language  occurred. 
The  method  of  decipherment  was  to  be  archeolog- 
ical  rather  than  philological,  and  the  process  was 
necessarily  slow  and  insecure.  The  first  efforts  in 
decipherment  of  the  Persian  inscriptions — ^the  sim- 
plest in  each  group  of  three — ^put  forth  by  Friedrich 
Christian  Karl  Heinrich  Mttnter  and  Olaf  Tychsen 
seemed  to  show  that  these  texts  contained  only 
forty-two  signs,  which  were  therefore  mainly  al- 
phabetic with  some  syllabic  values,  but  only  a  few 
correct  values  for  the  signs  were  determined.  The 
first  decipherment  of  an  entire  text  was  made  by 
George  Frederick  Grotefend,  who  was  almost  con- 
tinuously engaged  upon  decipherment  from  1802 
until  1844.  The  facts  with  which  he  began  were 
that  these  texts  came  from  Persepolis,  and  that  the 
ruins  there  were  the  remains  of  palaces  erected  by 
C!yrus,  Darius,  and  Xerxes.  He  assimied,  conse- 
quently, that  each  text  began  with  the  name  of 
a  king,  and  his  success  was  achieved  by  comparison 
of  two  inscriptions,  which  Grotefend  finally  trans- 
lated as  follows:  "  I.  Darius,  the  mighty  king, 
king  of  kings  .  .  .  son  of  Hystaspes.  II.  Xerxes, 
the  mighty  king,  king  of  kings  .  .  .  son  of  Darius, 
the  ki^."  TUs  result  was  small  in  itself,  but  it 
afforded  the  clue  for  the  decipherment  of  several 
languages,  besides  the  three  found  at  Persepolis. 
At  the  same  time  that  Grotefend  was  engaged  in 


Znaorliitioas 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


this  task,  Major  (afterward  Sir)  Henry  Rawlinson 
was  trying  to  reach  a  solution  and  in  the  same  way. 
Quite  independently  of  Grotefend  he  worked  out 
some  of  the  sign  values,  and,  when  later  provided 
with  Grotefend's  results,  far  surpassed  him  in  the 
power  to  translate  Persian  inscriptions.  He  dis- 
covered the  great  rock-cut  inscription  of  Darius 
at  Behistun  in  Persia,  which  he  copied,  laboriously 
and  successfully  deciphered,  and  published  in  an 
English  translation,  nearly  complete,  in  the  year 
1S46. 

The  dedphennent  of  Persian  was  followed  by  a 

determined  attempt  to  solve  the  far  more  difficult 

problem  of  the  Assjrro-Babylonian  cu- 

8.  J>6oipli«r-  neifonn  script,  in  which  the  third  in- 

sJbtvT   iLi  ■^^P*^®'^  "*  these  groups  of  three  was 

AsSt^*^*  written.  The  first  to  attempt  it  was 
Grotefend,  who  identified  the  names 
of  the  kings,  but  was  unable  to  go  much  further. 
Isidor  Loewenstein  secured  the  correct  meanings 
of  the  signs  for  "  king,"  "  great,"  and  the  sign  for 
the  plural.  He  first  suggested  that  Assyrian  be- 
longed to  the  Semitic  family  and  was  therefore 
related  to  Hebrew,  Arabic  and  Aramean.  Far 
more  successful  was  the  Rev.  Edward  Hincks  (q.v.), 
who,  in  two  papers  during  1846  and  a  third  in  1847, 
determined  most  of  the  numerals,  assigned  correct 
values  to  a  number  of  signs,  and  seemed  on  the 
very  verge  of  being  able  to  rrad  a  whole  text.  His 
rigidly  scientific  spirit,  however,  restrained  him 
from  such  an  endeavor,  and  he  worked  steadily  on 
with  the  patient  solution  of  one  difficulty  at  a  time. 
When  the  immense  mass  of  cuneiform  documents 
which  Emil  Botta  had  discovered  at  Nineveh 
reached  Paris,  the  hope  of  deciphering  Assyrian 
increased  because  of  the  accession  of  material,  but 
diminished  when  Botta  pointed  out  the  great 
difficulty  of  the  problem.  He  made  little  effort  to 
decipher  or  translate,  but  collated  all  the  inscrip- 
tions which  they  contained  and  made  lists  of  all  the 
signs  which  he  found,  differentiating  642  separate 
signs.  This  great  number  proved  that  the  Assyrian 
cuneiform  script  was  not  alphabetic;  some  of  the 
characters  must  be  syllabic,  some  must  be  kieo- 
gn^hs  and  represent  a  word  or  an  idea.  Botta's 
discoveries  were  carried  further  by  Edward  Hincks. 
In  a  paper  read  before  the  Irish  Academy  on  June 
25,  1849,  he  showed  that  there  was  a  sign  for  RA, 
another  for  RI,  and  yet  another  for  RU.  He 
proved  the  sign  for  AR,  and  presumably  also  for 
IR  and  UR,  though  he  did  not  fully  define  the 
last  two.  This  represented  a  great  advance  in  the 
study  of  the  problem.  Rawlinson  soon  dared  to  do 
what  Hincks  would  not,  and  ventured  to  translate 
the  great  Behistun  text.  There  was  needed  then 
only  the  minute  study  of  the  characters  until  the 
entire  syllabic  system  with  its  polyphones  and 
kleographs  should  yield  up  its  secrets.  To  this  not 
only  Rawlinaott,  but  in  even  greater  degree  Hincks, 
contributed,  and  also  the  distinguished  French 
Assyriologist,  Jules  Oppert.  Contemporaneously 
with  the  decipherment  of  Assyrian  went  forward 
the  decipherment  of  the  Susian,  or  second  language 
of  the  groups  of  three  found  at  Persepolis.  In  this 
work  the  diief  leaders  were  Niels  Ludwig  Wester- 
gaard,  Hincks,  F^liden  Gaignart  de  Saulcy,  and 


Archibald  Henry  Sayoe.  When  Persian,  Susian, 
and  Assyrian  (or  Babylonian)  had  been  deciphered, 
the  foimdations  of  the  new  science  of  Assyriology 
had  been  laid. 

The  cuneiform  method  of  writing  originated 
among  the  Sumerians,  the  earliest  known  inhabi- 
tants  of  Babylonia.  When  the  Semites 
dC^^»  entered  the  land  they  foimd  in  posses- 
^aoterof*  ^^°  ^  round-headed  people,  of  small 
theSorlpt.  Btature  and  with  black  hair,  whose 
'  origin  and  racial  connections  are  un- 
known. A  small  though  learned  company  of 
scholars  has  maintained  that  the  supposed  Sume- 
rians had  no  existence,  and  that  their  script,  civilisa- 
tion and  religicm  were  all  originated  by  Semites. 
This  view  has  lost  support,  and  can  hardly  be 
longer  regarded  as  seriously  disputing  the  current 
view  as  stated  above.  The  cuneiform  characters 
were  originally  a  form  of  picture-writing.  At  first 
the  pictures  represented  natural  objects;  they  then 
became  associated  with  certain  words,  and  were 
used  phonetically  to  represent  the  sound  of  the 
words  without  the  meaning.  In  very  early  times, 
these  rude  pictures  were  scratched  on  any  material 
that  came  to  hand.  Later  stone  was  used  for  pei^ 
manent  records.  But  as  stone  is  scarce  in  Baby- 
lonia, the  easily  worked  clay  took  its  place,  and 
the  straight  lines  made  by  a  single  pressure  on  the 
stylus  tended  to  become  wedges.  The  pictures 
therefore  lost  their  original  character  and  gradually 
became  groups  of  wedges  which  were  so  thoroughly 
conventionalLsed  that  it  is  now  impossible  to  deter- 
mine their  origin  save  in  a  very  few  cases.  Even 
to  the  Assyrians  themselves  the  original  form  of  but 
very  few  characters  was  known,  though  a  few 
tablets  still  preserved  (cf.  TSBA,  vi.  454  and  Cunei' 
form  Texta  from  BabyUmmn  TciblUU  in  British 
Museum,  part  v.,  London,  1808)  show  that  the 
Ass3rrians  retained  a  consciousness  of  the  pictorial 
origin  of  their  script.  The  Assyrians  never  devel- 
oped a  consonantal  alphabet.  They  had  only  a 
syllabary,  with  separate  signs  for  the  vowels  a,  % 
or  e,  and  u.  The  syllabic  signs  consisted,  in  the 
first  instance,  of  a  separate  sign  for  each  conso- 
nant with  each  separate  vowel,  thus,  ab,  ib,  vb,  ba, 
bi,  bUt  agt  ig,  ug,  ga,  gi,  gu,  the  former  serving  also 
for  apt  ipf  up,  etc.  In  addition  to  these  simple 
syllables,  the  script  had  a  large  niunber  of  com- 
pound signs,  such  as  5al,  bil,  kak,  man,  kun,  etc. 
There  were  also  very  many  ideograms,  a  sign  being 
used  as  the  symbol  for  a  wh(^e  idea;  thus  there 
was  a  single  sign  for  ilu,  "  god,"  bdu,  "  lord,"  aplu, 
"  son,"  duppu,  "  tablet,"  umu,  " day."  Difficulties 
are  further  increased  by  the  fact  that  many  signa 
are  polyphonous;  a  single  sign  may  have  several 
syllabic  values,  and  besides  may  stand  as  an  ideo- 
gram for  several  ideas.  The  difficulties  were  some- 
what lessened  by  the  use  of  signs  called  deter- 
minatives placed  before  a  word  to  show  the  daas 
to  which  it  belonged.  Robbbt  W.  RoaKm. 

nL  Christian  Inscriptknii:  By  Christian  inscrip- 
tions in  this  article  are  meant  non-literary  writings 
executed  or  provided  by  Christians  which  have 
some  relation  to  the  Christian  religion.  Christian 
epigraphy  is  concerned  with  inscriptions  carved, 
scratched,  painted,  or  stamped  on  various  materials. 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Xhsoriptioxui 


Buch  as  stone,  metal,  day,  ivory,  and  wood,  in- 
tended to  designate  the  source  or  purpose  of  an 
object,  and  also  with  documents  which,  on  account 
of  general  or  permanent  interest,  are  inscribed  on 
durable  material,  usually  stone  or  metal.  This 
comparatively  new  science  has  hitherto  devoted  its 
attention  chiefly  to  the  days  of  the  early  Church, 
but  it  is  hoped  that  more  attention  will  be  paid  to 
the  collection  and  study  of  medieval  and  later 
inscriptions  which  are  in  danger  of  perishing  with 
the  lapse  of  time. 

1.  Ancient  Ohzietian  Xnacriptions:  (1)  Letters 

and  figures.   The  workmen  who  made  the  earliest 

Christian  inscriptions  adopted  the  let- 

??       ters  and  numeral  system  of  their  pre- 

Writinff.  ^'^^'^^^^t  which  was  already  old,  and 
continued  its  development  steadily, 
except  in  cases  of  deliberate  archaism.  Thus  by 
degrees  new  forms  arose,  more  slowly  in  some  places 
thui  in  others,  and  usually  later  in  the  provinces 
than  in  Rome.  At  the  date  of  the  earliest  Christian 
inscriptions,  there  were  three  principal  types  of 
characters:  one  used  for  carving  on  stone  or  metal, 
one  for  painting  on  walls  or  woodwork,  which  corre- 
sponded to  that  inscribed  on  parchment  or  papyrus, 
and  the  vulgar  or  cursive  script,  which  was  either 
impressed  on  soft  material  such  as  wax,  fresh  day, 
or  plaster,  or  scratched  on  a  hard  surface,  especially 
walls  (the  so-called  graffito).  These  three  types 
were  not  always  sharply  distinguished,  and  Christian 
epigraphy  shows  examples  that  can  with  difficulty 
be  assigned  to  any  of  the  three  classes,  and  others 
in  whidi  the  forms  appear  in  a  confused  mixture — 
sometimes  even  one  half  of  a  letter  being  in  monu- 
mental and  the  other  half  in  painter's  script.  The 
most  important  class  of  letters,  in  the  Christian  as  in 
the  older  pagan  inscriptions,  is  the  capitals,  in- 
cluding the  laigest  number  of  symbols  for  letters 
and  numbers.  Besides  these  there  were  the  imcial 
forms,  developed  from  the  capitals  by  the  roimding 
off  of  sharp  angles,  and  the  cursive  form,  which 
sought  for  speed  in  writing  by  using  as  few  separate 
strokes  as  possible.  This  last  form  occurs  among 
the  dated  inscriptions  in  Rome  as  early  as  291. 
(2)  Ligatures.  In  the  formation  of  words  the  letters 
are  sometimes  separate,  sometimes  two  or  more  are 
united  into  a  single  symbol.  These  ligatures  were 
originally  peculiar  to  coins,  where  the  limited  space 
made  them  useful,  and  then  were  adopted  in  in- 
scriptions. The  rule  for  reading  them  was  that 
eacb  element  entering  into  their  composition  was 
to  be  read  only  once.  From  the  ligatures  developed 
the  monogrammatic  signs,  which  continued  even 
in  the  Middle  Ages  to  be  employed  for  imperial 
signatures  and  the  like.  (3)  Abbreviations.  The 
words  may  be  either  written  in  fuU  or  abbreviated, 
sometimes  to  a  single  letter.  The  omission  of  letters 
is  indicated  by  strokes  or  projections  above,  below, 
or  beside  the  letters,  or  by  periods  and  other  signs 
following  them.  Connected  with  these  signs  are 
the  strokes  frequently,  though  not  invariably, 
placed  over  numbers  to  distinguish  them  from 
ordinary  letters.  (4)  Punctuation.  A  large  number 
of  various  punctuationrmarks  were  used.  The  com- 
monest is  the  period,  usually  written,  not  on  the 
line,   but  half-way  up  the  letters;    its  shape  is 


generally  round  or  approximately  so;  sometimes 
it  is  represented  by  a  small  circle,  and  less  often  by 
two  sides  of  a  triangle  in  various  positions.  Out  of 
this  latter  form  developed  leaves,  somewhat  like 
ivy-leaves,  which  used  to  be  considered  as  intended 
for  pierced  hearts,  and  thus  as  signs  of  martyrdom. 
Occasionally  the  Greek  cross,  or  even  the  Chi  Rho, 
is  used  as  a  pimctuation-mark.  It  was  the  rule  in 
the  classical  period  to  place  punctuation-marks 
only  within  lines,  not  at  the  end,  but  in  many 
Christian  moniunents  this  rule  is  not  observed; 
indeed,  in  many  the  entire  system  of  pimctuation 
is  irregular,  points  being  placed  even  in  the  middle 
of  words — ^though  this  is  to  be  distinguished  from 
"  syllabic  pimctuation,"  where  the  syllables  were 
divided  to  facilitate  reading.  (5)  Direction  of  the 
writing.  Writing  from  right  to  left  had  become 
very  rare  among  the  Greeks  and  Romans  at  the 
date  of  the  earliest  Christian  inscriptions,  and  only 
a  few  instances  of  it  occur  among  them.  While 
no  certain  example  of  the  ancient  boustrophedon 
form  is  known,  there  are  a  number  which  are  read 
downward,  and  arrangements  still  less  usual  exist, 
dictated  sometimes  by  the  shape  of  the  space  at 
command,  but  in  other  cases  probably  by  nothing 
more  than  a  love  of  singularity. 

The  great  majority  of  extant  early  Christian  in- 
scriptions are  in  Latin,  Greek  coming  next.  Even 
in  the  West  there  is  a  considerable 

8.  lAn-  number  of  Greek  inscriptions,  generally 
Bu^loyed.  ^^^  ^^  ^^  people  who  were  not  Greeks, 
*  but  Romans.  This  phenomenon  finds 
a  parallel  in  the  fact  that  the  earliest  Christian 
literature  was  in  Greek,  even  when  the  authors  lived 
in  the  West.  The  parallel,  however,  must  not  be 
pressed  too  far,  since  they  were  educated  men, 
while  most  of  those  to  whom  the  inscriptions  are 
due  belonged  to  the  lower  classes.  The  number 
of  Greek  inscriptions,  even  in  Rome,  is  to  be  ex- 
plained by  the  fact  that  in  the  primitive  Church 
Greek  was  the  official  langua^.  All  the  third-cen- 
tury popes  who  are  buried  in  the  catacombs  of 
St.  Calixtus  have  Greek  inscriptions,  while  Cornelius, 
whose  grave  is  in  his  family  burying-groimd,  has  a 
Latin  one.  The  mixture  of  Greek  and  Latin  in  a 
number  of  inscriptions  is  probably  due  less  to 
defective  education  than  to  an  instinctive  opposi- 
tion in  people's  minds  to  the  use  of  a  language 
which  was  really  foreign  to  them.  An  interesting 
light  is  thus  thrown  upon  the  final  struggle  of  the 
two  languages  in  the  West,  beginning  while  Greek 
was  still  the  ecclesiastical  tongue.  After  the  second 
century  Greek  inscriptions  and  those  showing  a 
mixture  of  Greek  and  Latin  become  increasingly 
rare,  and  Pope  Damasus  uses  nothing  but  Latin. 
The  linguistic  qualities  of  the  inscriptions  deserve 
careful  study  as  giving  an  insight  which  cannot  be 
obtained  from  literature  into  the  speech  of  the 
common  people.  While  departures  from  classical 
orthography  are  to  be  attributed  partly  to  ignorance 
or  carelessness,  this  is  not  so  much  the  case  with 
the  vocabulary  and  the  grammar,  which  in  many 
of  the  later  Latin  inscriptions  clearly  show  the 
transition  to  the  Romance  languages.  The  inscrip- 
tions are,  like  the  pagan  ones,  either  in  prose  or  in 
verse,  prose  inscriptions  being  the  more  numerous, 


ZhaoriptionB 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


10 


8.  Oon* 
Uata. 


especially  in  the  earlier  period.  The  Hebrew 
language,  except  in  the  caae  of  amulets,  which  are 
rather  Jewish-pagan  than  Christian,  is  very  rare; 
only  one  Christian  inscription  in  that  language  has 
thus  far  been  discovered  in  Rome. 

(1)  To  inscriptions  in  the  narrower  sense  belong 
honorific  inscriptions  and  a  laige  class  of  eulogies 
of  saints  and  martyrs,  especially  those 
of  Damasus.  Partly  to  this  class  and 
partly  to  the  dedicatory  belong  nu- 
merous inscriptions  on  public  buildings,  especially 
churches  and  parts  of  churches,  such  as  altars  and 
ambones.  But  the  largest  class  is  composed  of 
funeral  inscriptions,  on  tablets,  gravestones,  or 
sarcophagi.  Those  on  stone  are  usually  carved  or 
scratched,  sometimes  painted  in  addition,  most 
often  in  red.  Relatively  few  occur  with  the  painted 
script,  which  was  more  often  used  on  tiles,  in  red, 
black,  and  occasionally  white.  The  wooden  tablets 
which  in  Egypt  Christians  and  non-Christians  alike 
placed  near  the  mummies  of  the  departed  are  usu- 
ally inscribed  with  a  dark  ink,  or  painted.  Other 
methods  are  occasionally  employed,  such  as  the 
frequent  use  of  mosaic  in  North  Africa  and  Spain. 
An  equally  great  diversity  is  visible  in  the  style 
of  the  inscriptions,  though  a  careful  study  reveals 
a  more  or  less  regular  development  of  definite 
formulas.  In  many  cases  the  influence  of  the  cus- 
tom and  taste  of  the  period  or  locality  is  discern- 
ible, others  show  traces  of  a  conscious  adherence 
to  ancient  tradition.  Thus  the  phrase  Dia  MambuSj 
so  frequently  used  on  pagan  tombs  to  dedicate  them 
to  the  manes  of  the  deceased,  occurs  in  no  less  than 
134  cases  of  undoubted  Christian  inscriptions — not, 
of  course,  with  the  old  meaning,  but  merely  as  a 
traditional  formula;  and  the  same  is  true  of  the 
phrases  damua  aetema,  aeUmalis,  perpdva  for  the 
grave.  Belonging  also  to  the  class  of  inscriptions 
in  the  narrower  sense  are  the  laige  number  of  those 
on  objects  of  domestic  use;  but  their  infinite 
variety  makes  it  impossible  to  enter  upon  a  detailed 
discussion  of  them.  (2)  Of  inscriptions  in  the 
broader  sense  (documents)  the  most  numerous  in 
the  primitive  Christian  period  are  attestations  of 
the  purchase  of  a  grave  or  agreements  between  the 
relatives  of  the  deceased  and  the  fouores  or  other 
church  officials.  These  are  sometimes  exceedingly 
explicit,  giving  the  names  of  witnesses,  the  purchase 
price,  and  the  location  of  the  grave.  Documents 
expressing  a  gift  in  the  giver's  name  become  fre- 
quent in  the  Middle  Ages,  but  examples  are  not 
lacking  toward  the  end  of  the  early  period.  Another 
class  of  inscriptions  gives  the  fasts,  calendars,  cycles, 
or  lists  of  saints;  of  this  kind  one  of  the  most 
famous  is  the  Easter  cycle  on  the  base  of  the  statue 
of  Hippolytus.  Under  this  general  head  also  come 
the  graffiH,  or  inscriptions  scratched  upon  the  walls 
of  the  Catacombs. 

Christian  inscriptions,  especially  those  of  the  early 
Church,  deserve  careful  attention  by  students  of 
history.     While  not  a  single  original 
oftoa*    n""^^*^"?*  of  this  period  is  extant, 
if^^^^l     and  a  succession  of  copyists  has  intro- 
duced a  variety  of  difficulties  into  the 
text  of  literary  works,  the  inscriptions  are  practically 
in  their  original  shape.    It  has  therefore  long  been 


admitted,    in   theory   at   least,    that   inscriptions 
deserve  the  first  place  among  the  sources  for  the 
history  of  their  period.    Again,  the  literature  of  a 
period  is  practically  all  the  work  of  learned  or  at 
least  well-educated  men,  and  gives  only  a  second- 
hand account  of  the  thoughts  and  feelings  of  the 
populace;    while  the  inscriptions,  the  majority  of 
which  come  from  the  lower  classes,  present  these 
directly  and  faithfully,  at  least  in  religious  and 
ethical  matters.    Much  valuable  historical  material 
is  found  in  them  which  would  have  been  almost  or 
quite  unknown  from  the  literary  sources.     Thus 
the  schism  of  Heraclius  in  Rome  is  known  solely 
from  an  inscription  in  the  catacomb  of  St.  Calixtus, 
and  knowledge  of  an  African  schismatic  community 
and  its  head,  Trigarius,  is  confined  to  the  notice  of 
another  inscription.     The  history  of  the  planting 
and  earliest  growth  of  the  Church  in  Gaul  as  told 
by  the  historians  is  fragmentary,  and  a  complete 
idea  of  it  can  be  gained  only  from  inscriptions. 
Until  recently  almost  nothing  was  known  of  the 
history  of  Christianity  on  the  islands  of  the  Mg^tJi 
in  the  second  century;   but  it  is  now  possible,  on 
the  basis  of  inscriptions  lately  discovered,  not  only 
to  show  the  existence  of  Christianity  there,  but 
even  to  determine  its  nature,  a  mixture  of  Christian, 
Jewish,  and  pagan  elements.    A  list  of  the  writings 
of  Hippolytus  can  be  made  complete  only  by  the 
help  of  the  inscription  on  the  back  of  his  statue. 
The  frequent  use  of  Scripture  in  inscriptions  gives 
not  only  valuable  indications  of  the  manner  in 
which  it  was  employed  in  the  early  Church,  but  also 
useful  points  of  departure  for  textual  criticism. 
Not  a  few  particulars  of  the  marriage  system  are 
gained  in  the  same  way,  especially  as  to  the  legal 
age,  remarriage,  and  the  marriage  of  clerics.    The 
inscriptions  are  a  more  trustworthy  authority  for 
early  Christian  nomenclature  than  the  manuscripts; 
and  of  course  the  customs  connected  with  dc^th 
and  burial  may  be  much  more  fully  known  in  this 
way. 

8.  Kedieval  and  lAter  Inscriptions:  In  the  pres- 
ent state  of  inadequate  investigation  of  this  class  of 
inscriptions  it  is  impossible  to  give  final  condusions 
as  to  their  types  of  characters,  language,  and  con- 
tent. It  may  perhaps  suffice  to  give  some  provisional 
observations  on  the  results  for  a  Single  country — 
Germany.  The  history  of  the  characters  employed 
is  divided  into  three  main  periods.  Speaking 
generally,  the  type  known  as  majuscule  prevailed 
until  the  fourteenth  century,  though  with  many 
variations.  As  early  as  the  tenth  century  it  took 
on  the  Roman  form;  in  the  eleventh  and  twelfth 
it  was  influenced  by  Romanic  art,  and  adapted 
Gothic  principles  to  its  own  use  in  the  period  of  the 
latter 's  dominance.  But  the  Gothic  majuscule 
gradually  gave  way  to  the  Gothic  minuscule,  which 
was  the  prevailing  form  from  1350  to  1500.  In  the 
sixteenth  century,  the  character  used  in  inscriptions 
(apart  from  conscious  archaisms)  began  to  be  assim- 
ilated to  the  type  of  ordinary  writing.  As  to  num- 
bers, the  Roman  numerals  were  regularly  used 
until  the  fourteenth  century,  when  the  Arabic 
began  to  be  conunon,  without  ever  wholly  exclud- 
ing the  older  type.  Ligatures  are  frequent  in  the 
Middle  Ages,  especially  when  the  Gothic  minuscules 


11 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Insoriptions 


showed  the  tendency  to  do  away  as  far  as  possible 
with  spaoes  between  the  letters;  but  they  become 
less  usual  from  the  sixteenth  century  on.  Abbre- 
viations also  were  very  common  in  the  Middle  Ages, 
but  later  become  much  less  usual.  Punctuation 
was  not  systematic  until  comparatively  modem 
times;  in  the  Middle  Ages  the  commonest  marks 
were  dots  half-way  up  the  letters,  though  crosses 
and  other  signs  are  occasionally  used.  The  language 
employed  until  late  in  the  Middle  Ages  was  afanost 
always  Latin — seldom  the  vernacular,  and  still 
less  often  Greek  or  Hebrew.  The  Latin  continued 
to  be  used  on  the  tombs  of  scholars  and  in  similar 
places  until  modem  times;  and  the  Renaissance 
brought  in  the  use  of  Greek,  especially  in  the  six- 
teenth century.  Medieval  inscriptions,  like  the 
ancient,  show  many  peculiarities  in  spelling,  vocab- 
ulary and  grammar. 

8.  History  of  Xpl^ntphy:  The  first  demonstrable 
collection  of  inscriptions  is  assigned  to  various  dates 

within  the  period  from  550  to  839; 
^3^*  but  a  number  of  collections  resulted 
PerM.     ^^°^    ^^    Carolingian    Renaifisance, 

headed  by  the  Codex  Einsidlensis,  the 
unknown  author  of  which  flourished  in  the  eighth 
or  early  in  the  ninth  century.  These  collections  in- 
cluded both  Christian  and  non-Christian  specimens, 
and  were  made  laigely  for  the  purpose  of  instruc- 
tion in  writing  Latin  verse.  A  period  of  inaction 
followed,  closed  by  the  revival  of  classical  learn- 
ing at  the  Renaissance.  Cola  Riensi  and  Giovanni 
Dondi  in  the  fourteenth,  Ciriaco  de' Pixsicolli  in  the 
fifteenth,  and  in  the  sixteenth  century  Felice  Felio- 
iano,  Giovanni  Marcanuova,  Johannes  Jucimdus, 
and  Petrus  Sabinus  were  the  principal  collectors. 
Much  new  material  was  discovered  in  the  sixteenth 
century,  especially  in  the  Roman  catacombs,  opened 
in  1578  by  Antonio  Bosio.  The  leading  investi- 
gators of  this  century  were  Aldus  Manutius  the 
younger  and  Martin  Smetius,  while  Melanchthon 
did  not  a  little  for  the  study,  writing  the  introduc- 
tion to  the  IrucripHones  tacroaandae  vetustaHa  of  his 
friends  Apian  and  Amantius  (Ingolstadt,  1534), 
besides  mAlrlng  independent  researches  of  his  own. 
The  already  published  and  newly  discovered  ma- 
terial was  put  together  by  Gruter,  Scaliger,  and 
Velser  in  their  Inacnpiionea  antiquae  totitu  orbis 
Romani  (Heidelberg,  1602-03).  More  Christian 
material  would  have  been  included  in  Giovanni 
Battista  Doni's  Inacnpiionea  antiquae  if  he  had 
lived  to  complete  its  publication,  but  as  edited  by 
Gori  and  others  (Florence,  1731)  a  large  part  of 
this  was  neglected.  Bosio  also  died  (1629)  before 
publishing  the  results  of  his  labors,  but  they  fell 
into  better  hands  and  appeared  as  Roma  sotterranea 
(Rome,  1632).  A  supplement  to  Gruter 's  collection 
was  published  by  Reinesius,  a  Leipsic  physician 
(Leipsic,  1682),  while  Spon,  Mabillon,  and  Mont- 
faucon  were  not  only  working  at  home,  but  under^ 
taking  journeys  outside  of  France  for  the  purpose 
of  collecting  inscriptions.  The  eighteenth  century 
did  less  for  Christian  epigraphy  in  the  way  of  laige 
general  collections  than  in  that  of  local  publications 
and  monographs,  particularly  by  such  Italian  schol- 
ars as  Muratori,  Maffei,  Zaccaria,  Gori,  Rivaute  la 
Ricolvi,  and  De  Vita. 


From   the   Carolingian   period   down   into   the 
eighteenth  century  Qiristian  epigraphy  was  as  a 

science  far  behind  classical  epigraphy. 

VinAtMuTth  ^^^  ^^  nineteenth  century  h^  quite 

Om^r^  a  different  story  to  tell.     Christian 

inscriptions  are  now  collected  with  the 
same  care  and  thoroughness  as  the  classical,  a  result 
due  in  the  first  instance  to  the  initiative  especially 
of  August  Bdckh  and  Theodor  Mommsen;  and 
they  found  in  Giovanni  Battista  de  Rossi  a  master 
who  elevated  the  study  of  them  from  a  mere 
dilettante  amusement  to  a  serious  science.  After 
Gaetano  Marini  had  published,  in  1785,  his  Iscrigioni 
aniiche  deUe  viUe  e  de*  palazzi  Albanif  and  ten  years 
later  OH  aUi  e  tnonumentt  de'/ratelli  Arvali,  scholars 
looked  forward  eagerly  to  the  publication  of  his 
great  collection  of  Christian  inscriptions,  which 
now  fills  thirty-one  volumes  in  the  Vatican  library. 
But  he  died  in  1815,  and  none  of  it  saw  the  light 
unto,  in  1831,  Angelo  Mai  published  one  of  the  four 
volumes  planned  by  him  (Nova  coUectio,  v.),  having , 
in  some  places  condensed  the  manuscript,  and  in 
some  enlarged  it  from  his  collection.  But  no  great 
loss  to  the  science  was  involved  in  the  failure  of 
the  others  to  appear,  since  (apart  from  other  defects) 
his  classification  by  subjects  had  now  been  finally 
discredited  by  BOckh.  The  German  scholar,  in- 
sisting on  geographical  arrangement,  persuaded  the 
Berlin  Academy  of  Sciences  to  take  up  the  gigantic 
task  of  uniting  in  one  all  the  Greek  inscriptions. 
In  the  great  Corpus  tnacriptionum  Graecarum  (Ber- 
lin, 1825  sqq.)  some  scattered  Christian  inscriptions 
appeared  in  the  first  three  voliunes,  but  the  main 
bixly  of  them  was  united  in  the  second  part  of 
Vol.  IV.,  under  the  editorship  of  Adolf  Eirchhoff. 
In  the  revised  form  of  this  great  work,  the  parts  of 
especial  value  for  Christian  inscriptions  are  that 
including  Italy,  Sicily,  Gaul,  Spain,  Britain,  and 
Germany  (ed.  Eaibel,  1890),  and  that  on  the 
islands  of  the  JBgean  (ed.  Hiller  de  Gaertringen, 
1895-98).  A  complete  Corpus  inscriptionum  Grae- 
earum  dirisHanarum  is  hoped  for  from  the  French 
School  at  Athens,  under  the  direction  of  Laurent 
and  Cumont.  Even  more  than  BOckh  accomplished 
for  Greek  epigraphy,  Mommsen  did  for  Latin. 
While  he  was  not  the  first  to  conceive  the  idea  of  a 
Corpus  inscriptionum  LaUnarum,  in  his  memorial 
(1847)  on  its  plan  and  scope  he  laid  down  the 
proper  lines  for  its  execution  and  carried  out  a 
great  part  of  the  work  himself,  the  rest  being  done 
by  his  friends  and  scholars.  An  account  of  new 
discoveries  made  since  the  appearance  of  the  various 
volumes  is  given  in  the  Ephemeris  epigraphioa,  1872 
sqq.  Until  the  Corpus  inscriptionum  Liuinarum  is 
complete,  it  will  still  be  necessary  to  make  use  of 
the  older  collections  (which,  indeed,  will  always 
have  a  value  for  their  notes  and  illustrations)  as 
well  as  of  the  works  of  the  greatest  authority  in 
this  subject  west  of  the  Vosges,  Edmond  Le  Blant: 
InscripUons  ckritiennes  de  la  Oaule  (Paris,  1856-65); 
Nouveau  rectieU  des  inscriptions  chritiennes  de  la 
Gatde  (1892).  Long  before  De  Rossi  was  requested 
by  the  Berlin  Academy  of  Sciences  to  take  part 
in  the  Corpus  inscriptionum  Laiinarum  (from  1854 
until  his  death  he  was  one  of  the  editors  of  vol.  vi. 
on  the  Latin  inscriptions  of  Rome),  he  had  planned 


ZhscriptionB 
Xnspixution 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


12 


and  begun  preparations  for  a  ooUeotion  of  the  early 
Christian  inscriptions  of  the  city.  The  results 
appeared  in  the  Inscriptionea  ehriatianae  whi$ 
Bamae  aeptimo  ioeculo  antiquiorea  (vol.  i.,  Rome, 
1881,  vol.  ii.,  part  1,  1888).  The  first  volume 
contains  the  dated  inscriptions,  a  preface  which 
reviews  the  epigraphy  of  the  past  and  lays  down 
his  own  scheme,  and  extensive  prolegomena,  dealing 
especially  with  early  Christian  chronology.  The 
firat  part  of  the  second  volume  reproduces  the 
manuscript  collections  from  the  so-called  parch- 
ments of  Scaliger  down  to  Petrus  Sabinus  with 
admirable  critical  sureness  and  insight.  Another 
work  of  like  interest  is  the  Muaeo  epigrafieo  eriatiano 
Pio-Lateranenae  (1877),  containing  photographic 
reproductions  of  the  specimens  in  the  lapidary 
gallery  at  the  Lateran,  together  with  noteworthy 
essays  on  various  cognate  subjects.  Numerous 
other  contributions  to  Christian  epigraphy  are  con- 
tained in  his  Roma  aoUerranea  criatiana  (3  vols., 
1864-77),  in  the  BoUettino  d^archeoloffia  criatiana 
(1863  sqq.),  and  Muaaiei  della  chieae  di  Rama,  1872- 
1900.  Although  De  Rossi's  enterprises  were  too 
great  for  accomplishment  in  even  the  longest  and 
busiest  life,  they  have  not  been  allowed  to  drop. 
The  continuation  of  the  Inacriptianea  has  been 
placed  in  the  hands  of  his  old  friend  and  faithful 
collaborator,  Giuseppe  Gatti;  the  (Nuovo)  BolUUino 
has,  since  1805,  been  edited  first  by  De  Rossi's 
brother  Michele  Stefano  and  his  personal  pupils, 
Stevenson,  Armellini,  and  Marucchi,  to  whom  have 
been,  added,  since  the  death  of  the  first  three,  G. 
Bonavenia,  P.  Croetarosa,  G.  Gatti,  R.  Kantzler, 
and  J.  Wilpert.  The  completion  of  the  Rama 
aoUerranea,  beginning  with  a  fourth  volume  on  the 
cemetery  of  Domitilla,  has  been  undertaken  by 
Marucchi,  Wilpert,  Gatti,  Crostarosa,  and  Kantzler. 
For  the  medieval  and  later  periods  there  is  no  single 
work  which  can  be  placed  by  the  side  of  the  Corpua 
inacriptionum  Oraeoarum  and  Latinarum, 

(NiKOLAUS  MOller.) 

Bibuoorapht:  On  I.,  betides  the  literature  under  Egypt, 
much  of  whieh  is  pertinent,  ooneult:  J.  DQmiohen,  Hi*- 
forucA«  InMckrifUn  aUagypii$dier  DenkmAUr,  Leipeie,  1807- 
1809;  idem.  AUAgyptiaelm  Tempelifuchriften,  ib.  1868;  P. 
le  P.  Renouf,  Egjfp^n  Phonolooy,  London,  1880;  £. 
Revillout.  Courf  de  langue  dhnoHque,  Paris,  1883;  C.  Abel, 
Zur  OuchieKU  tUr  HieroglyphitMBkTift,  Leipsie,  1800; 
Aeojfptuchs  Inaehriften  au9  <Un  k&nioUchen  Muutm  ku 
Berlin,  2  parts,  Berlin,  1001-05;  O.  Karlbent,  Den  tdnga 
.  .  .  inMkriftten  %  RamtM  III,*9  tempel  i  MedineUHahu, 
Upsala.  1003;  C.  R.  Honey,  The  Boypdian  Hieroglvph, 
BoBoombe,  1004;  R.  Weill,  ReeueU  dee  inecriptume  du 
Sinai,  Paris,  1004;  and  especially  numerous  papers  in 
P8BA  and  TSBA,  in  the  Memoire  of  the  Egypt  Explora- 
tion Fund,  in  ZDMO,  J  A,  ZeUeekriSifUr  IkgypHeche  SpracKe 
und  AUetihumekunde,  and  the  Revue  4ovpiologiiiue.  On 
the  Rosette  Stone  consult  H.  Brugsch,  Die  Inechrift  von 
RoeeUa,  Berlin,  18M);  F.  Chabas,  L'lneenpHon  hiSrv 
glyphique  de  RoeeUa,  Paris,  1807;  8.  Sharps,  The  RoeeUa 
Stone  in  Hieroalyphiee  and  Oreek,  London,  1871;  J.  J. 
Hess,  Der  demoHeehe  Teil  der  ,  .  .  Inechrift  von  Roeette 
HbenelMt,  Fraibuig,  1002;  E.  A.  T.  W.  Budge.  The  Deereee 
ef  Mempkie  and  Canopue,  8  vols.,  London,  1004.  On  the 
Meneptah  inscription  consult  Spiegelberg,  SitiunoeberidUe 
der  Berliner  Akademie,  1800,  pp.  603  sqq.;  O.  Steindorff, 
in  ZATW,  1800,  pp.  330  sqq.;  A.  Wiedemann,  in  Mueion, 
1808,  pp.  1-10.  On  the  relation  of  the  inscriptions  to  the 
Bible  the  most  sober  and  sdentifio  discussion  is  by  S.  R. 
Driver  in  Authority  and  Archaeology,  Sacred  and  Profane, 
ed.  D.  G.  Hogarth,  London,  1800. 

IL  A  great  deal  of  the  literature  under  Abstrxa;  Babt- 


LONiA  bears  on  the  inscriptions,  and  some  of  the  principal 
coUeotions  are  named  there.  Consult  further:  R.  E.  Brttn- 
now,  Claeeifted  Liet  <^AU  Simple  and  Compound  Cuneiform 
Ideographe,  Leyden,  1880-07;  P.  T.  Dangin,  Reehereket 
ew  roriffine  de  VScriiwre  cunHforme,  Paris,  1808-00;  F. 
Delitasch,  Die  Bnietehuno  dee  Olteeten  Sdiriftayeleme  eder 
der  Ureprung  der  KeiiedinftMeichen,  Leipsie.  1800-08; 
P.  Toscanne,  Lss  ^i^fisf  sum^risfis  ditivie,  Paris,  1006; 
A.  V.  W.  Jackson,  Portia  Poet  and  Preeent,  New  Yoric, 
1000;  H.  Pognon,  IneeripHone  eimiHQuee  de  la  Syrie,  de  Is 
Meeopotamie,etde  la  region  deMeeeoul,FaiiB,  1907;  A.H. 
Sayce,  7*^  Arehaeoloffy  of  the  Cuneiform  IneeripHone,  New 
York,  1007.  On  the  deciphennent:  R.  W.  Rogers.  Hie- 
tory  of  Bahylonia  and  Aeeyria,  vol.  i..  New  York,  1000; 
A.  J.  Booth.  The  Dieeovery  and  Decipherment  of  the 
Trilingual  Cuneiform  IneeripHone,  London,  1002;  L. 
Messerschmidt,  Die  Bnteifferung  der  Keilineekrift,  Berlin. 
1003;  C.  Fossey.  Manuel  d*aeeyriologie,  vol.  i..  Paris,  1004. 
III.  The  most  important  literature  is  named  in  the  t«xt. 
A  most  useful  article  will  be  found  in  DCA,  i..  841-^802, 
which  includes  a  list  of  Uie  abbreviations  oceurrinc  mos« 
frequently  in  the  inscriptions  and  the  way  they  are  to  be 
read.  Further  consult:  E.  le  Blant,  Manuel  d*ipigrapkie 
ekrUienne  d'aprie  lee  marhree  de  la  Oaule,  Paris.  1800: 
idem,  UBpigrapkie  ckrHienne  en  Oaule  et  dane  VAfrigue 
romaine,  ib.  1800;  J.  McCaul,  Ckrietian  Bpigraphe  of  tke 
Fvrel  Six  Centuriee,  London,  1800;  G.  Petrie.  Ckrietian 
IneeripHone  in  tke  Iriek  Language,  ed.  M.  Stokes.  Dublin. 
1870  sqq.;  J.  A.  Martigny,  DicHiOnnawe  dee  anlHqmi^ 
dvrUiennee,  pp.  367  sqq^  Paris,  1877;  F.  X.  Kraus,  Roma 
eoUerranea,  pp.  431  sqq.,  Freiburg.  1870;  idem.  Real- 
Sneyklopddie  der  ekrietUdien  AUerlkitmer,  ii.  80  sqq.,  ib. 
1880;  V.  Schultse.  Die  Kaiakomben,  pp.  233  sqq..  Leipsie. 
1882;  H.  Otte.  Handbuck  der  kirdUicken  Kune^ArckO- 
ologie  dee  deuteeken  MiUeiaUere,  i..  806  sqq..  Sb.  1883; 
J.  R.  Allen,  CkrieHan  Syndtoliem  in  Oreat  Briknn  ami 
Ireland  before  tke  l$th  Century,  London.  1888;  E.  HObner. 
IrteeripHonee  Hiepartiae  CkrieHanae,  2  vols.,  Berlin*  lOOO; 
Haddan  and  Stubbs.  Courteile  (for  inscriptions  in  Great 
Britain)  and  the  literature  under  CncxmmM.  partico- 
larly  that  on  the  Catacombs  given  there. 

INSPIRATIOll. 

Jewish  Doctrine  <|  1). 

Early  Christian  Doctrine  (|  2). 

The  Scholastic  Period  (|  3). 

The  Reformation  (I  4). 

Post-Reformation  Development  (I  6). 

Modem  Development  (|  0). 

The  Bible  and  Inspiration  (|  7). 

Nature  and  Method  of  Inspiration  (I  8). 

The  Theory  of  Plenary  Inspiration  (|  0). 

The  Theory  of  Partial  Inspiration  <i  10). 

Criteria  of  Inspiration  (111). 

Modem  Tendencies  and  Development  (|  12). 

In  theological  language,  inspiration  signifies  the 
operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit  upon  the  writers  of 
the  Bible,  by  which  the  Bible  becomes  the  ex- 
pression of  the  will  of  God  binding  upon  us,  or  the 
Word  of  God.  The  term  originated  from  the  Vulgate 
version  of  II  Tim.  iii.  16,  Omnia  acriptura  diviniluB 
inapiraia.  The  Greek  word  theopneuatoa—ot  which 
it  is  at  least  doubtful  whether  divinitua  inapiraia 
is  an  accurate  translation — belongs  only  to  Hellen- 
istic and  Christian  Greek,  and  may  have  been  coined 
by  Paul.  Other  post-classical  uses  of  it  show  that 
it  signifies  '*  fiUed  with  the  Spirit  of  God"  or 
''  breathing  out  the  Spirit  of  God/'  from  which  it 
follows  that  the  Scripture  so  designated  has  oome 
into  being  under  the  operation  of  the  Spirit.  The 
preference  of  the  Greek  commentators  for  the  mean- 
ing expressed  by  dirnniiua  inapiraia  would  have 
less  importance  if  it  were  not  explicable  by  the 
prevalent  view,  for  which  the  corresponding  term 
was  thought  to  be  found  in  II  Tim.  iii.  16,  which  was 
more  or  less  an  inheritance  from  Alexandrian  Juda- 
ism or  from  paganism. 


18 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


XnsoriptioBB 
Zhapinkticm 


The  church  doctrine— or  rather  the  oldest  views 
held  in  the  Church,  since  it  is  inaccurate  to  speak 
of  any  distinct  church  doctrine  on  the 
z.  Jewish  point,  either  before  or  since  the  Refor- 
Doctrine.  mation,  outside  of  the  single  statement 
that  the  Scripture  is  inspired,  without 
saying  how  it  is  inspired — ^is  much  closer  to  the 
Alexandrian  or  pagan  view  than  to  that  of  Jewish 
theology.  Both  Talmudic  and  Alexandrian  Juda- 
ism agreed  in  attributing  unique  authority  to  the 
Old  Testament.  The  Talmud  claims  an  immediate 
divine  origin  for  the  "  Law,"  asserting  that  God 
wrote  it  with  his  own  hand,  or  dictated  it  to  Moses 
as  his  amanuensis.  A  secondary  revelation  is  con- 
tained in  the  ''  Prophets  "  (from  Joshua  on,  includ- 
ing Psalms,  Cantides,  Job,  Ecclesiastes,  Ezra),  as 
fCahbalah,  or  tradition  as  distinguished  from  the 
Law.  In  the  case  of  the  prophets,  their  personality 
is  not  so  absorbed  by  the  Spirit  of  God  as  to  render 
them  mere  unconscious  organs.  The  medieval 
Jewish  theologians  were  the  first  to  attribute  a 
special  kind  of  inspiration  to  the  Hagiographa,  as 
written  by  the  spirit  of  holiness,  while  the  prophet- 
ical books  were  written  by  the  spirit  of  prophecy. 
Jewish  antiquity  knows  nothing  of  such  a  distinc- 
tion; and  Matt.  xxii.  43  shows  that  the  origin  of 
these  books  too  was  referred  to  the  Spirit  of  God. 
That  the  personality  of  the  authors  was  still  more 
prominent  in  them  than  in  the  prophets  may  be 
inferred  from  their  place  in  the  canon,  as  well  as 
from  various  expressions  which  put  them,  in  rela- 
tion to  the  Law,  in  the  lowest  place.  Alexandrian 
Judaism  took  a  different  view.  It  is  true  that 
Josephus  maintains  that  the  Spirit  was  absent  from 
the  second  Temple,  and  designates  the  reign  of 
Artaxerxes  Longimanus  as  the  end  of  canonical 
authorship;  but  he,  as  well  as  PhUo  and  the  author 
of  Wisdom  (vii.  27),  believes  none  the  less  in  a 
continuance  and  diffusion  of  the  prophetic  gift. 
Upon  this  theory  rest  the  legend  of  the  origin  of 
the  Septuagint  and  the  acceptance  of  the  Apoc- 
rypha. Thus,  while  apparently  broader  and  freer 
than  Talmudic  Judainn,  the  Alexandrian  school 
represents  a  doctrine  of  inspiration  which  is  really 
much  more  strict.  All  the  Old-Testament  writers 
are  prophets;  but  with  the  prophetic  illumination 
human  consciousness  ceases.  The  prophet  is  merely 
an  organ  of  God,  who  speaks  through  him;  he 
knows  nothing  of  what  he  is  doing,  and  has  no  will 
of  his  own.  He  is  in  a  state  of  ecstasy,  even  when 
he  writes  down  what  he  has  been  commissioned  to 
reveal.  This  condition  Philo  believes  that  he  can 
describe  from  his  own  experience.  There  is  an 
ecstasy  mentioned  in  the  Bible,  but  it  is  not  this 
kind  of  ecstasy,  nor  is  it  the  normal  vehicle  of 
inspiration,  but  something  extraordinary;  and  the 
communication  of  the  message  to  others  does  not 
take  place  in  this  state,  with  the  possible  exception 
of  an  involuntary  prophecy  like  that  of  Balaam 
[but  cf.  II  Kings  iii.  15-19,  and  see  Egbtabt].  The 
Biblical  conception  of  ecstasy  is  that  of  a  state  in 
which  supernatural  revelations  are  imparted  to  men 
who,  in  their  natural  state,  are  incapable  of  perceiv- 
ing them — either  by  divinely  exhibited  symbols,  as 
in  Acts  X.  10;  Jer.  i.  11,  13,  or  by  the  communi- 
cation of  supernatural  realities  and  images  of  future 


events,  as  in  Num.  xxiv.  3,  4,  xxiL  31;  11  Kings  vi. 
17;  cf .  II  Cor.  xii.  1  sqq.;  Rev.  i.  10.  In  this  state  the 
percipient  is  either  "  in  the  Spirit,"  i.e.,  the  limita- 
tions of  his  ordinary  sensuous  perceptions  fall  away 
altogether,  or  they  are  momentarily  removed  with- 
out the  cessation  of  sensuous  perception,  and  super- 
natural appearances  present  themselves  in  conjimo- 
tion  with  those  of  ordinary  life,  as  in  Luke  i.  11. 
In  no  case  does  the  state  seem  to  be  one  of  which 
no  memory  is  afterward  preserved;  the  ecstasy  is 
not  (according  to  Augustine  on  Ps.  Ixvii.)  a  "  mental 
alienation,"  but  a  "  mental  separation  from  physical 
sensation  so  that  whatever  is  revealed  is  revealed 
to  the  spirit."  The  theory  of  Philo,  or  the  Hellen- 
istic theory,  thus  originated  neither  in  the  Old  Tee- 
tament  nor  in'strictly  Jewish  theology  outside  of  it, 
but  much  more  directly  in  paganism.  Philo's  con- 
ception can  not  be  put  down  wholly  to  the  account 
of  his  Platonizing  tendency,  but  contains  other 
elements,  possibly  borrowed  from  Oriental  religions. 
Still,  it  is  in  the  main  the  general  Greek  conception 
of  enUumauumoSf  of  the  mania  of  the  marUeia 
("  prophet "  or  "  diviner  "),  akin  to  the  Platonic 
view  of  the  source  of  artistic  production  and  of 
prophecy. 

The  same  pagan  conception  is  encountered  once 
more  in  the  first  definite  expressions  from  Christian 
writers  as  to  the  nature  and  method 
2.  Early  of  inspiration.  In  the  Apostolic 
Christian  Fathers  is  found  merely  a  simple  ex- 
Doctrine,  pression  of  the  fact  of  inspiration  in 
the  way  in  which  they  dte  the  Old 
Testament.  But  the  second-century  apologists 
emphasize  the  divine  origin  of  the  knowledge  con- 
tained in  Holy  Scripture,  and  unquestionably  teach 
an  inspiration  which  is  not  merely  mecham'cal, 
but  mantle.  In  order  to  understand  this,  it  must 
be  remembered  that  these  men,  brought  up  in 
paganism,  got  at  the  same  time  their  first  im- 
pression of  Christian  truth  and  of  the  divine  origin 
of  the  primary  revelation  and  so  of  the  Scriptures. 
The  more  Christianity  claimed  to  be  not  the  result 
of  a  logical  process  of  thought,  but  a  revelation 
made  under  the  operation  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  the 
easier  it  was  for  them  to  apply  to  it  the  Greek  con- 
ception of  the  origin  of  such  knowledge;  and  the 
process  was  further  facilitated  by  the  respect  paid 
to  the  Sibylline  prophecies  (see  Sibtlline  Books). 
If  this  last  fact  be  taken  in  connection  with  the 
prominent  place  which  prophecy  holds  in  Scripture, 
the  importance  which  the  apologists  attached  to 
prophecy  can  be  understood,  and  that  it  was  natural 
for  them  to  refer  all  ancient  prophecy  to  the  working 
of  the  Spirit  of  God.  There  was  no  need  of  an 
acquaintance  with  Philo  (of  whom  Justin  speaks 
with  great  respect)  to  lead  to  this  view,  which 
finally  found  its  most  definite  representation  in 
Montanism.  The  opposition  of  the  Church  to 
Montanism  was  responsible  for  the  fact  that  the 
doctrine  of  ecstasy  as  the  form  of  inspiration  found 
no  continued  recognition  in  the  Church.  Clement 
of  Alexandria  placed  ecstasy  among  the  marks  of 
false  prophets,  and,  from  Origen  on,  the  doctors  of 
the  Church  rejected  the  conception  of  prophecy 
which  originated  in  paganism.  In  direct  opposition 
to   Montanism,    the    unconscious   action    of    the 


XnsplzmtloB 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


14 


prophet  was  denied.  This  led  to  the  other  extreme; 
it  placed  the  revelation  of  the  Old  Testament  on 
the  same  level  with  that  of  the  New,  and  so  finally 
resulted  in  the  not  indeed  mantic,  but  mechanical, 
doctrine  of  inspiration  held  by  the  older  Protestant 
theologians.  The  attempts  at  a  truer  theory  found 
in  Irenaeus'  distinction  between  prophetic  and  apos- 
tolic inspiration  (III.,  xi.  4),  and  his  notion  of  a 
development  in  the  history  of  God's  redeeming  work 
(IV.,  ix.  3),  bore  no  fruit.  The  doctrine  of  the 
Fathers  recognised  both  the  unrestricted  opera- 
tion of  the  Holy  Ghost  upon  the  minds  and  wills 
of  Scriptural  authors  and  at  the  same  time  their 
own  independent  activity,  to  which  more  than  mere 
form  and  style  was  attributed;  but  they  seem  to 
have  made  no  attempt  to  frame  a  tld^ry  as  to  the 
manner  in  which  these  two  were  combined.  Thus, 
e.g.,  Augustine,  who  says  in  one  place  that  the 
Evangelists  wrote  "  as  each  remembered,  in  accord- 
ance with  his  native  powers,  either  briefly  or  at 
greater  length  "  (De  consensu  evangdistarum,  ii.  12), 
in  another  compares  the  apostlai  to  hands  that 
wrote  down  what  the  head,  Christ,  dictated  (ib., 
i.  35).  Among  the  Fathers  Origen  went  most 
deeply  Into  the  question.  What  he  says  about  it 
agrees  closely  with  his  theory  that  inspiration  is 
an  elevation  of  the  mind  and  an  opening  of  the 
inner  ear  to  the  truth — a  higher  degree  of  the 
illumination  bestowed  upon  all  pious  believers. 
That  so  little  use  was  made  of  Origen's  suggestions 
was  not  a  consequence  of  their  connection  with 
other  parts  of  his  system,  or  of  the  suspicion  which 
was  cast  upon  his  orthodoxy,  but  rather  of  the  fact 
that  (when  the  epoch  of  the  apolpgists  was  past 
and  Montanism  was  conquered)  t^re  was  Uttle 
practical  interest  in  these  questions.  In  the  con- 
troversies which  distracted  the  Church  the  authority 
and  the  divine  origin  of  the  Scriptures  were  not 
called  in  question.  With  the  issue  of  these  conflicts 
and  the  strengthening  of  the  Church's  organization, 
the  Church  took  its  place  by  the  side  of  the  Scrip- 
tures as  a  coordinate  authority,  and  even  at  times 
more  than  that,  so  that  Augustine  oould  say  (Adv, 
ManichcBos,  v.),  "  1  would  not  believe  the  Gospel 
against  the  authority  of  the  Catholic  Church." 
The  acceptance  of  a  continuous  inspiration,  ex- 
pressed especially  in  the  decisions  of  coimcils,  gave 
rise  to  the  theory  of  a  twofold  source  of  knowledge, 
as  to  which  only  a  standard  of  judgment  in  matters 
of  fact  was  required,  not  a  dedsion  as  to  the  manner 
of  inspiration.  The  emphasis  laid  by  the  school  of 
Antioch  on  the  human  side  of  the  Scriptures  was 
not  important  enough,  in  view  of  the  simultaneous 
recognition  of  their  authority,  to  call  forth  much 
discussion  as  to  inspiraticm  itself.  Even  the  bold 
assertions  of  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  that  the  Book 
of  Job  was  a  poem  originating  on  heathen  soil, 
that  Canticles  contained  a  tedious  epithalamium, 
that  Solomon  (in  Proverbs  and  Ecdesiastes)  had 
the  logos  gnOseOs,  **  the  gift  of  wisdom,"  but  not  the 
logos  Sophias,  **  the  prophetic  gift,"  did  not  touch 
the  general  theory  of  inspiration,  but  only  raised 
the  question  whether  all  parts  of  the  S<»iptures 
had  the  same  measure  of  (prophetic)  inspiration; 
and  the  only  result  was  the  condenmation  of  these 
propositions  by  the  Ck>uncil  of  Constantinople. 


By  a  natural  process,  the  operation  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  occupied  an  increasingly  prominent  place,        j 
and  the  independent  personality  of  the  writers  was       | 
less  and  less  considered.    When  Agobard  of  Lyons 
dwelt  upon  the  external  signs  of  tlHs  independence,        I 
and  remarked  that  the  sacred  writers  had  not  al- 
ways observed  the  strict  rules  of  granunar,  the 
Abbot  Fridugis  of  Tours  (q.v.)  went  so  far  as  to 
assert  that  the  Holy  Spirit  had  formed  "even 
the  very  verbal  expressions  in  the  mouth  of  the 
Apostles."    And  Agobard  did  not  think  of  limiting 
the  operation  of  the  Spirit;    he  preferred  to  ex- 
plain the  phenomenon  by  a  condescension  on  the 
part  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  human  weakness. 

No  deeper  interest  in  the  question  was  displayed 

by  scholasticism,  which  discussed  it,  indeed,  with 

its  accustomed  minuteness  in  oonneo- 

3.  The     tion  with  the  rest  of  the  system,  but 

Scholastic  showed  no  sense  of  its  importance  in 

Period,     relation  to  revelation.    Here  and  there, 
as  from  Ansehn  and  Thomas  Aquinas, 
it  received  more  serious  consideration.    The  latter 
treats  the  subject  under  the  head  of  groHae  gratis 
datae,  or  charismata,  distinguishing  between  the 
gift  of  knowledge  and  the  gift  of  the  word,  without 
which  the  gift  of  knowledge  would  be  useless  to 
others.    To  express  the  right  word,  the  Holy  Ghost 
makes  use  of  the  tongue  of  men  "  as  of  an  instru- 
ment, but  he  himself  perfects  the  inner  working." 
The  blessing  is  sometimes  diminished  by  the  fault 
of  the  hearer,  sometimes  by  that  of  the  speaker. 
The  operation  of  the  Holy  Ghost  thus  does  no 
violence  to  the  independence  of  the  agent.     The 
authority  of  the  Scriptures  was  not  questioned, 
but  the  unpulse  to  use  and  to  investigate  them 
was  not  yet  awakened.     Mysticism  bad  a  deep 
feeling  for  the  divine  power  of  the  Word  and  a  cleai 
understanding  of  the  operation  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
A  belief  in  the  continuance  of  the  gift  left  the  Scrip 
tural  inspiration  not  so  radically  different,  in  spit 
of  its  admitted  precedence,  from  experiences  whic 
were  possible  to  others;    and  so,  even  while   i1 
authority  was  firmly  maintained,  there  was  a  oe 
tain  indifference  to  its  unique  character.      Tl 
assertion  of  Abelard,  based  upon  Gal.  ii.  11  sqc 
that  the  prophets  and  apostles  were  not  infallibi 
was  employed  with  some  hesitation  by  him;    b 
when  Renaissance  scholarship  pointed   to  defe< 
in  detail  as  results  of  the  human  limitations  of  t 
Scriptural  writers,  neither  the  Church  nor  schob 
thought  of  the  authority  of  the  Bible  bb  any  i 
assured. 

Never  since  the  apostolic  age  had  so  admira 
a  use  been  made  of  its  pages,  and  never  had 
authority  been  so  decidedly  upheld 

4.  The      in  the  Reformation  period;    but  for  t 
Reforma-  very  reason  there  was  little  specula! 
tion.       on  the  way  in  which  it  had  oome  to 
No  one  disputed  its  authority;   the  c 
question  was  as  to  the  manner  of  its   uae«      T 
explains  the  fact  that  among  the  Reformers 
their  inmiediate  successors  the  old  oonoeptioi 
inspiration  is  still  found  without  any  further 
cussion  of  the  mutual  relations  of  the  t^wo  fax 
in  the  formation  of  the  Scriptures,  and  ^witbout 
attempt  to  define  the  limits  within  wbicb   ins] 


15 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


XnaxkiratloB 


Uon  18  attributed  to  them.  Ab  to  the  relation 
between  the  divine  and  human  factors,  Luther  is 
equally  certain  that  the  Holy  Ghost  is  the  original 
author,  and  that  the  writers  are  to  be  known  by 
their  human  characteristics  and  have  put  their  own 
hearts  into  their  work.  Theoretically  his  teaching 
on  this  point  is  not  to  be  distinguished  from  the 
traditioniBkl  conception.  For  Calvin,  too,  the  Bible 
is  to  be  reverenced;  the  Holy  Ghost  is  its  author, 
though  sometimes  *^  he  uses  a  rough  and  unpolished 
style."  But  this  does  not  prevent  Calvin  from 
recognising  inaccuracies  and  seeing,  with  Luther, 
the  expression  of  the  human  minds  of  the  writers. 
Chemnitz  is  the  first  Lutheran  theologian  to  attempt 
a  systematic  doctrine  on  the  subject;  but  he  is 
arguing  against  those  who  equally  acknowledge  the 
authority  of  the  Bible,  and  the  question  of  the 
nature  and  method  of  inspiration  is  not  for  him  an 
urgent  one.  Selnecker  includes  inspiration  imder 
the  head  of  revelation,  and  defines  it  as  "  a  secret 
inbreathing  by  which  the  holy  patriarchs  and 
prophets  were  divinely  taught  many  things '';  but 
he  places  this  process  in  unmistakable  analogy  with 
the  indwelling  and  operation  of  the  Spirit  in  other 
believers.  Gerhard's  full  discussion  of  Scripture 
in  general  contains  no  more  precise  definition.  But 
the  more  earnest  these  authors  become  in  attempt- 
ing to  confirm  the  authority  of  the  Bible,  the  less 
often  are  met  concessions  like  those  of  Bugenhagen, 
that  the  Evangelists  wrote  "  what  to  them  seemed 
best,"  and  that  errors  of  the  Septuagint  passed 
over  into  the  text  of  the  New  Testament. 

When  it  became  necessary  to  argue  not  only 

against  Rome,  but  against  syncretism,  and  Calixtus, 

in  approximation  to  Roman  Catholic 

5.  Post-  theologians,  distinguished  between  in- 
Ref onnation  spiration  in  the  strict  sense,  in  regard 

Develop-  to  the  essential  truths  of  salvation, 
ment.  and  a  diredio  divina  in  regard  to  those 
things  "  which  came  by  sensation  or 
were  otherwise  known  "  for  which  no  revelation  but 
only  guidance  was  needed,  the  time  had  come  for 
a  more  rigid  definition,  for  an  assurance  against  the 
dangers  which  seemed  to  threaten  the  Bible  among 
the  very  men  who  claimed  to  deduce  their  belief 
from  it.  Calovius  was  the  founder  of  the  new  doc- 
trine intended  to  serve  this  purpose.  According  to 
him,  inspiration  is  the  form  of  revelation.  Nothing 
can  be  in  the  Scriptures  **  which  was  not  to  the 
writers  divinely  suggested  and  inspired."  The  doc- 
trine was  pushed  to  its  extreme  consequences  by 
the  Buxtorfs,  who  asserted  the  inspiration  of  even 
the  Hebrew  vowels,  and  by  Voet,  who  made  the 
same  claim  for  the  punctuation.  All  this  was 
absolutely  new.  If  the  idea  of  ecstasy  had  been 
included,  it  might  have  seemed  a  revival  of  the 
mantle  theory  of  Philo  and  the  old  apologists; 
but  the  lack  of  this  conception  made  the  process 
purely  mechanical,  not  only  without  analogy,  but 
in  direct  contradiction  to  the  other  operations  of 
the  Holy  Spirit.  The  self-preparation  of  the  writers, 
required  on  the  ecstatic  theory,  was  no  longer 
necessary;  nor  was  there  any  place  for  the  personal 
witness  which  the  apostles  claim  to  give.  The 
logical  consequences  of  the  doctrine  were  not, 
indeed,  drawn  by  its  supporters,  but  they  are  none 


the  less  inevitable.  Against  this  hard  and  fast 
theory  the  freer  view  of  the  Roman  Catholic  theo- 
logians (such  as  Bellarmine,  Canus,  and  Simon)  was 
less  effective  than  it  might  have  been  on  account  of 
their  tendency  to  subordinate  Scripture  to  the 
Church;  and  little  more  followed  the  maintenance 
of  a  less  rigid  theory  by  the  Arminians  and  some 
French  and  German  Calvinists.  The  first  marked 
influence  was  exerted  by  Pietism,  with  its  personal 
experience  of  the  workings  of  the  Spirit,  in  which 
it  was  joined  by  some  kindred  souls  among  the 
English  dissenters,  such  as  Baxter  and  Doddridge. 
By  degrees  the  official  theology  of  Protestantism 
took  a  freer  attitude,  and  the  human  factor  in 
inspiration  assumed  a  new  prominence. 

The  modem  development  of  the  doctrine  may  be 
traced  partly  from  Schleiermacher  and  partly  from 
the  school  of  Bengel.  The  former 
6.  Modem  emphasised  the  special  spirit  of  the 
Develop-  Scriptures,  of  which  rationalism  had 
ment  altogether  lost  sight;  but  this  spirit 
was  to  him  not  the  Spirit  of  God,  in- 
dependent of  humanity,  but  his  own  conception  of 
the  term  **  Holy  Spirit  " — the  common  spirit  of  the 
Christian  Church,  the  source  of  all  its  spiritual  gifts 
and  good  works,  as  of  all  its  processes  of  thought. 
Even  the  apociyphal  writings  are  inspired,  in  so 
far  as  they  show  any  trace  of  connection  with  the 
life  of  this  spirit.  The  Old  Testament,  on  the  other 
hand,  as  the  product  not  of  the  Christian  but  of 
the  Jewish  spirit,  shares  neither  the  dignity  nor  the 
inspiration  of  the  New.  The  main  emphasis  is  laid 
upon  the  human  writers,  who,  by  reason  of  their 
relation  to  Christ,  are  tl^  authorized  original  wit- 
nesses to  Christian  tmth.  Schleiermacher's  doctrine 
of  inspiration  is  thus  both  formally  and  materially 
the  exact  opposite  of  the  doctrine  developed  by 
the  seventeenth-century  theologians.  It  represents, 
however,  a  distinct  and  permanent  progress,  in  the 
qualification  of  inspiration  according  to  the  period 
of  history  in  which  it  appears,  in  the  value  placed 
upon  the  human  factor  for  the  attestation  and  comr 
munication  of  divine  tmth,  in  the  proper  placing 
of  inspiration  in  the  uniform  and  yet  manifold 
working  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  of  the  literary  work 
produced  under  its  influence  in  the  total  of  the 
authors'  official  activity.  The  first  of  these  points, 
the  relation  of  inspiration  to  history,  is  the  one  in 
which  Schleiermacher's  services  were  the  most  im- 
portant. This  is  a  point  of  departure  for  the  modem 
development  of  the  doctrine  of  inspiraticm,  as 
represented  by  Rothe  and  Hofmann — ^though  the 
connection  is  not  always  directly  with  Schleier^ 
macher,  but  partially  through  the  school  of  Bengel, 
whose  most  useful  result  is  that  formulated  in  1793 
by  Menken  in  these  words:  "  The  Bible  is  no  dog- 
matic treatise  ...  it  is  much  rather  a  historical, 
harmonious  whole.  All  that  it  teaches,  it  teaches 
either  inunediately  in  history,  or  upon  a  basis  of 
history,  with  its  foundation  and  its  interpretation 
in  history."  Space  forbids  to  trace  here  the  gradual 
development  through  the  writings  of  individual 
modem  authors  who  have  handled  this  subject. 
As  a  rule  they  have  renounced  the  theory  of  the 
direct  operation  oi  the  Holy  Spirit  on  the  creation 
of  the  Scriptural  books.    They  have  replaced  the 


Inspinktioii 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


16 


old  idea  of  inspiration,  on  the  ground  of  its  mantic 
content,  apparently  derived  from  a  pagan  source, 
by  one  which  treats  the  Scriptures  as  venerable 
primitive  documents;  their  value  is  decided  by  a 
historical  judgment,  which  requires  scientific  in- 
vestigation for  its  full  validity.  This  limitation  ia 
balanced  in  some  degree  by  the  position  given  to  the 
substance  of  the  Bible,  to  the  revelation  of  which 
it  constitutes  documentary  evidence.  Faith  in  this 
revelation  is  required  in  order  to  form  a  complete 
and  perfect  judgment  of  the  Bible.  The  revelation 
works  through  the  written  word,  though  not  as  if 
this  word  were  a  direct  product  of  the  spirit  of 
revelation.  The  written  word  is  influenced  by  the 
ideas  of  the  various  periods,  by  defective  concep- 
tions, and  by  limited  intelligence.  It  is  the  province 
of  theolQgiod  investigation  to  decide  how  far  these 
influences  have  extended,  in  order  to  be  able  to 
designate  the  authoritative  content  or  the  per- 
manent constituents  of  the  revelation.  It  may  not 
unnaturally  be  asked  whether  a  purely  documentary 
value  will  sufficiently  explain  the  peculiar  power 
and  significance  of  the  Scriptures  in  the  history  of 
the  Church.  From  this  point  of  view,  Lipsius  felt 
obliged  to  distinguish  between  the  documentary 
character  of  the  Bible,  as  the  collection,  officially 
made  by  the  historical  judgment  of  the  Christian 
Church,  of  the  reconis  of  its  primitive  spirit,  and 
its  religious  significance  resting  on  inspiration. 
According  to  this  view,  the  Scripture  is  inspired 
because  it  is  the  historic  record  of  the  revelation  in 
Christ,  and  at  the  same  time  the  original  witness 
of  the  salutary  working  of  that  revelation  in  the 
hearts  of  the  first  disciples,  in  which  regard  it  is  a 
product  of  the  spirit  of  that  revelation.  That  which 
is  a  permanent  standard  in  it  is  not  its  outer  form, 
on  accoimt  of  changing  theological  conceptions, 
but  its  inner  content — ^that  which  remains  after 
these  outworn  conceptions  have  been  subtracted, 
as  well  as  what  may  be  referred  to  the  personal 
limitations  of  its  writers.  It  is  imperative  to  sepa- 
rate the  form  from  the  content. 

The  attempt  to  explain  the  peculiar  character 
of  the  Bible  leads  sooner  or  later  to  inspiration — i.e., 
to  the  belief  that  it  owes  this  peculiar 
7.  The      character  to  the  operation  of  .the  Spirit 
Bible  and   of  God  upon  its  origin.    It  would  be 
Inspixatton.  easy,  but  unjustifiable,  to  deny  in- 
spiration on  the  assumption  that  this 
must  necessarily  mean  mantic  inspiration.   In  order 
to  understand  the  manner  of  the  operation  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  it  must  be  known  what  Scripture  says 
of  this  operation  on  its  own  origin;  and  to  under- 
stand this  again,  the  meaning  of  Paul's  question  in 
Gal.  iii.  2  must  be  apprehended.    There  is  nothing 
to  justify  drawing  a  sharp  dividing-line  between  the 
indwelling  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  his  special  opersr 
tion  upon  the  origin  of  Scripture.   And  some  other 
answer  to  the  question  as  to  the  true  nature  of  the 
Bible  than  that  it  is  merely  a  record  of  revelation 
is  obligatory.     From  this  point  K&hler  proceeds, 
and  makes  possible  a  successful  attempt  to  answer 
the  question  as  to  the  nature  and  value  of  the  Bible 
and  the  nature  and  manner  of  inspiration.    Accord- 
ing to  him,  the  Bible  (primarily  the  New  Testament, 
the  Old  only  in  conjunction  with  it)  is  the  record 


of  the  fundamental  Gospel  of  Christ  and  of  salva- 
tion in  him.  In  it  exists  the  memorial  of  the 
primitive  Christian  assurance  of  salvation,  intended 
to  promote  the  salvation  of  the  reader  or  hearer. 
This  definition  includes  both  the  purpose  and  the 
content  t>f  the  Bible,  whereas  that  which  regards 
it  as  merely  a  record  of  revelation  neglects  its  im- 
mediate purpose,  and  moreover  requires  the  forma- 
tion of  a  historical  judgment,  for  which  not  every 
one  is  competent.  No  such  equipment  is  required 
in  order  to  know  that  the  New  Testament  is  pri- 
marily the  record  of  the  fundamental  Gospel  of 
Christ,  or  that  it  bears  the  same  witness  of  Idm  as 
that  with  which  Christianity  began  its  conquering 
progress  through  the  world.  Whether  men  are 
willkig  to  accept  this  salvation,  so  attested,  is  an- 
other questicm;  but  this  Gospel  is  the  Christian 
proclamation,  in  r^;ard  to  which  man  must  take 
one  side  or  the  other.  This  is  the  point  so  strongly 
insisted  on  by  Frank,  that  every  witness  of  Christ 
and  of  God's  redeeming  will  is  credible  only  in  the 
measure  in  which  it  is  in  harmony  with  or  con- 
firmed by  the  Scriptures.  These  have  the  power 
in  a  special  way  to  create  obligation  and  to  make 
him  guilty  before  God  who  rejects  their  message. 
This  power,  this  authority,  is  independent  of  the 
recognition  of  them,  and  through  it  they  show 
themselves  to  be  in  a  unique  measure  filled  with 
the  Spirit  of  God.  It  is  this  connection  between  the 
Holy  Ghost  and  the  witness  of  the  Bible  to  which 
(in  harmony  with  the  Scriptural  expressions  them- 
selves) is  given  the  name  of  inspiration.  It  is  this 
operation  of  the  Spirit  that  Paul  means  when  he  says 
(I  Cor.  ii.  13)  that  he  speaks  "  not  in  the  words 
which  man's  wisdom  teadieth,  but  which  the  Holy 
Ghost  teacheth,"  and  to  which  Christ  himself  refers 
when  he  tells  his  disciples  (John  xvi.  13)  of  the 
Spirit  of  truth  that  shall  guide  them  '*  into  all 
truth  " — an  operation  which  does  not  exclude,  bat 
empowers,  the  action  of  those  who  are  to  be  the 
witnesses  of  the  truth. 

If  the  fact  of  inspiration  is  admitted  in  the  sense 
of  a  special  operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit  on  the 

origin  of  the  Scriptures,  on  the  ground 

8.  Nature   of  their  unique  significance  as  the  pri- 

and        mary  record  of  the  fundamental  preach- 

Method  of  ing  of  Christ,  and  their  unique  power 

Insplratton.  to  impose  obligation,  the  next  question 

which  arises  concerns  the  nature  and 
method  of  this  inspiration.  To  answer  this,  the  first 
thing  to  notice  is  what  this  message  telUn-the  re- 
deeming acts  of  God  in  behalf  of  man,  summed  up 
and  reidised  in  Ctaist  before  the  eye.  It  is  with 
this  that  the  entire  Bible  has  to  do.  Its  content 
is  a  history  ef  the  relations  which  have  existed, 
or  are  to  exirt,  between  God  and  man,  of  the  origin 
and  execution  of  the  plan  of  salvation.  From  ^his 
special  connection  between  the  Bible  and  the  revela- 
tion of  the  redemption,  faith  easily  perceives  that 
its  writers  stand  themselves  in  a  spe^al  relation  to 
the  Holy  Spirit.  But  of  what  nature  this  relation 
is  can  be  detennined  only  from  the  course  of  the 
history  contained  in  their  works,  since  it  is  a  his- 
torical relation.  Now,  the  relation  varies  with  the 
period  of  history.  The  distinction  between  the  Old- 
and   New-Testament    revelation  is  that  between 


17 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


XnspiratloB 


distance  from  God  and  neamon  to  him.  In  the 
earlier  part,  even  when  God  enters  into  cdations 
with  those  whom  he  ohooees  as  witnesses  of  his 
redeeming  purpose,  he  still  speaks  from  without 
the  world  that  they  know.  Thus  in  the  Old  Testa*> 
ment  an  ezpressioa  is  found  whicdi  is  foreign  to 
the  New»  to  designate  his  oommunieations  with  his 
witnesses.  This  nommwniflatiftn  with  the  prophets 
is  constantly  designated  by  the  expression  "the 
word  of  Yahweh  was  upon/'  and  the  reception  of 
this  word  by  '' he  saw(Heb.  AosnA)  the  word  of 
Yahweh"  (Isa.  iL  1;  Mic.  L  1;  Amos  i.  1).  This 
distance  between  God  jmd  man  is  only  rardiy 
bridged,  at  special  moments,  and  the  immediate 
subjective  perception  of  the  word  of  God  can  only 
take  place  in  an  extraordinary  manner.  In  the 
New  Testament,  on  the  other  hand,  the  word  of  God, 
the  expression  of  his  saving  will,  has  entered  the 
work!  in  Christ  (Ronux.  5-^;  Titus  i.  3;  Acts  x.  36, 
xiii.  26).  To  perceive  and  acknowledge  the  revela- 
tion now  made,  there  is  no  need  of  special  endow- 
ment, as  in  the  case  of  the  prophets;  aU  that  is 
required  is  the  believing  attitude  toward  Christ 
(Matt.  xL  25,  xvi.  17).  Those  who  are  first  called 
to  look  into  the  mystery  of  the  love  of  God  revealed 
in  Christ  are  therewith  called  and  quidified  to  be 
witnesses  to  him  (Matt.  x«  27;  John  xv.  15).  This 
witness  is  oonditioned  by  the  objective  revelation 
and  redonption,  taking  place  in  Christ  and  entering 
the  persoud  life  by  the  indwelling  of  the  Spirit. 
But  it  ia  not  the  same  thing  to  participate  in  this 
salvation  and  to  be  called  to  witness  it.  The  latter 
is  a  special  mission,  though  not  one  confined  to  the 
apostles  who  were  choMB  as  the  first  witnesses. 
Their  assistants  and  the  generation  to  whom  they 
testified  were  also  witnesses;  and  as  such,  from 
the  speeial  importance  of  their  position  in  regard 
to  all  snbsequent  generations,  they  needed  speeial 
assistance  of  the  Spirit  (I  Cor.  ii.  10  sqq.).  The  pre- 
requisite is  their  own  expeiiBnce  of  salvation — ^the 
first  experience  of  salvation  ever  given  to  man;  but 
inspiration,  in  addition  to  tlus^  is  the  special  prep- 
aration for  the  bearing  of  testimony  of  a  funda^ 
mental  kind.  It  is  their  grace  ol  office,  their 
charitma,  which  empowers  them,  irrespective  of 
their  individual  imperfeetions,  to  testify  for  all 
generations  of  the  facts  of  salvation  and  their  sig- 
nificance. In  contrast  with  this  condition,  the 
inspiration  of  the  Oki.  Testament  was  temporarily, 
one  might  almost  say  accidentaUy,  connected  with 
the  personality  of  those  who  received  it,  and  not 
always  given  to  those  whose  moral  and  religu>us 
nature  qualified  them  lor  its  reception  (Num.  xxiL- 
xxiv.;  Jonah;  cf.  John  xi.  49-52).  Compared  with 
the  New  Testament,  it  is  less  free.  The  apostolic 
witnesses  have  the  Spirit  of  God  (dr  the  spirit  of 
their  own  personal  lives,  which  makes  it  possible 
for  them  to  be  independent  witnesses,  not  mere 
organs  of  God's  activity.  Another  thing  follows 
from  the  pecoKar  character  of  their  inspiration  as  a 
permanent  qualification.  When  Paul  makes  a 
distinction  bcrtween  what  he  says  by  commandment 
and  his  own  opinion  (see  0)nbiua  Evakobuca), 
he  does  not  mean  to  make  a  distinction  between 
inspired  and  uninspired  words;  and  accordingly 
he  commends  what  he  says  with  perfect  confidence 
VI.— 2 


to  the  judgment  of  his  readers  (lOor.  x»  15,  xi.  13; 
II  Cor.  iv.  2).  And  the  inspiration  of  the  witnesses 
being  permanent,  they  can  speak  ol  things  which 
do  not  pertain  to  salvation  (as  in  II  Tim.  iv.  13) 
without  the  inspiration  ceasing. 

One  more  duuracterisUe  point  of  the  manner  of 
inspiration  must  be  mentioned.  The  qualification 
of  witnesses  includes  the  presentation  of  historical 
events;  but  that  which  the  Spirit  of  (jod  here 
eflfects,  whether  in  the  Oki  or  in  the  New  Testament, 
is  the  understanding  of  history,  not  the  knowledge 
of  it.  The  latter  is  to  be  obtahied  in  the  ordinary 
way  of  life,  by  the  witnessing  of  events  or  their 
collection  from  written  or  oral  tradition.  This  ex- 
plains certain  phenomena  in  sacred  history  .^hich 
reseml^  those  of  all  other  historical  writing — 
discrepancies  in  minor  detaila  or  in  dironological 
order. and  the  like.  The  question  is  not  how  such 
erron  are  possible  in  the  inspired  word  ef  (jod, 
but  how  far  the  equipment  named  inspiration  is 
meant  to  extend.  The  knoindedge  of  and  witness 
to  the  purest  eternal  truth  is  not  only  not  incon- 
sistent with  human  limitations,  but  stands  out  all 
the  more  strikingly  when  they  are  admitted.  In- 
spiration is  not  the  abolition  of  independent  human 
personality,  but  rather  a  reenforcement  of  it;  it  is 
not  condescension  to  human  weakness,  but  a  hallow- 
ing or  transf ormatioo  of  it^  that  tJbe  human  person- 
ality may  take  its  part  in  the  divine  work.  There 
is  nothing  in  it  foreign  to  (Christian  experience  or  to 
knowledge  of  the  other  operations  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  It  takes  its  own  place  in  the  ciyBtem  of  the 
charimnaUh  t^  gifts  of  grace  operative  in  the 
Cniurdi  of  God.  (H.  GsBicaRt.) 

Views  of  inspimtion  may  be  grouped  in  two 
general  clagscs  those  of  plenaiy  or  verbal  inspira- 
tion, and  those  of  partial  inspiration. 

9.  The  Advocates  of  plenary  inspiration  hold 
Theory  of  that  the  writers  of  Scripture  had  the 

Plenaiy  immediate  influence  of  the  Spirit  to 
Inspiration,  such  an  extent  that  they  could  not  err 
in  any  point;  every  statement  is  aocu- 
mte  and  infallible,  whether  "  religious,  scientific, 
historical,  or  geogmphical "  (diarlM  Hodge,  Theol- 
ogy,  i.  163;  d,  F.  L.  Patton,  Inapiratian,  p.  92). 
Bei^des  Hodge  and  Patton,  Gaussen,  Shedd,  Given, 
and  others  represent  this  view.  It  is  admitted, 
however,  that  there  may  be  errors  in  the  Scriptures 
as  we  now  possess  them  and  infallibility  is  asserted 
''  only  for  the  original  autographic  text "  (A.  A. 
Hodge  and.B.  B.  Warfield  in  the  Pretbyiman 
Review,  ii.,  1881,  p.  245).  This  class  of  views  has 
in  its  favor  (1)  the  difficulty  of  conceiving  how  the 
thought  could  have  been  suggested  by  the  Spirit 
without  the  language;  and  (2)  the  support  it  gives 
to  the  authority  of  the  Scriptures  as  a  system  of 
truth  and  a  guide  of  actM>n.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  following  objectkuis  are  uiged:  (1)  It  is  hard 
on  this  general  theory  to  account  for  the  individu^ 
peculiarities  of  the  writers.  The  s^le  of  Hoaaa 
differs  from  that  of  Isaiah,  that  of  John  from  that, 
of  Paul,  although  the  same  Spirit  suggested  the 
language  of  each.  It  is  uiged,  however,  that  the 
Spirit  accommodated  himsdf  to  the  peculiarities  of 
the  writers.  (2)  There  are  differences  of  statement 
in  the  Scriptures  concerning  the  same  facts  (cf. 


InspirattOB 
Inspired,  The 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


18 


Gen.  zzsdii.  18-19  with  Aets  vii.  16;  Num.  zxv.  9 
with  I  Cor.  X.  8).  (3)  The  theory  makes  it  hard 
to  explam  the  divergences  in  the  Gospels  (ef.  the 
four  forms  in  whieh  the  superscription  on  the  cross 
is  given  and  Matt.  viii.  25-27  with  Mark  iv.  39-41). 
(4)  It  is  difficult  on  this  theory  to  understand  why 
the  New-Testament  writers  usually  quote  the  Sep- 
tuagint  translation,  and  not  the  original  Hebrew  of 
the  Old  Testament.  In  many  cases  the  divergence 
from  the  Hebrew  text  is  great  (cf.  Acts  xv.  16-17, 
other  passages  of  the  Acts,  and  many  passages  of 
the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  which  always  quotes 
from  the  Septuagint).  (5)  The  autographs  of  the 
sacred  writers  are  lost,  and  the  variations  in  the 
copies  which  have  been  preserved  seem  to  be  in- 
consistent with  this  theory;  for,  if  a  literal  inspira- 
tion were  neceasary  for  the  Church,  God  (so  we 
should  expect)  would  have  provided  for  the  errors 
less  preservation  of  the  original  text.  Moreover, 
the  great  mass  of  Christians  has  to  depend  upon 
translations  for  none  of  which  infaUible  accuracy  is 
claimed. 

The  theory  of  partial  inspiration  is,  that  the 
writers  of  Scripture  enjoyed  the  influence  of  the 

Spirit  to  such  an  extent,  that  it  is  the 

10.  The     Word,  and  contains  the  Will,  of  God 

Theory  of   (Luther,  Calvin,  Baxter,  DoddridgCi 

Partial      Wm.   Lowth,  Baimigarten,   Neander, 

Inspinitton.  Tholuck,  Stier,  Lange,  Hare,  Alford, 

Van  Oostersee,  Plumptre,  F.  W.  Farrar, 
Domer,  and  others).  It  admits  mistakes,  or  the 
possibility  of  mistakes,  in  historical  and  geographical 
statements,  but  denies  error  in  matters  of  faith  or 
morals.  In  favor  of  this  view  it  may  be  said:  (1) 
that  it  lays  stress  upon  the  sense  of  Scripture  as  a 
revelation  of  God's  will,  and  leaves  room  for  the 
full  play  of  human  agency  in  the  composition.  (2) 
It  helps  to  understand  the  divergences  in  the  ac- 
counts of  our  Lord's  life,  and  the  inconsistencies  in 
historical  statement  of  diflferent  parts  of  the  Bible. 
(3)  It  is  more  in  accord  with  the  method  of  the 
Spirit's  working  in  general.  The  apostles  were  not 
perfect  in  their  conduct  and  judgment  as  rulers 
and  teachers  of  the  Church  (Acts  xv.  39,  xxiii.  3; 
Gal.  ii.  12;  I  Cor.  xiii.  12;  PhU.  iii.  12).  (4)  It 
removes  a  hindrance  out  of  the  way  of  many  who 
would  gladly  believe  the  Bible  to  contain  the  word 
of  God,  if  it  were  not  necessary  to  give  their  assent 
to  all  its  historical  statements.  Many  can  believe 
the  discourses  of  our  Lord  in  Jolm  (xii.  sqq.) 
to  be  divine  who  can  not  so  regard  the  list  of  the 
dukes  of  Edom  (Gen.  xxxvi.  15-43),  or  all  the 
tables  of  the  Books  of  Chronicles.  (5)  This  view 
makes  the  absence  of  an  absolutely  pure  text 
intelligible. 

The  present  canon  does  not  necessarily  measure 
the  extent  of  inspiration.   Both  must  be  determined 

by  the  same  process,  upon  the  basis 

II.  Crite-    of  the  contents  of  the  books,  the  state- 

ria  of      ments  of  their  authors,  their  relation 

InspiratioiL  to  Cbnst  (in  the  New  Testament),  and 

the  judgment  of  the  Church.  A  book 
belonging  to  the  present  canon  may  not  be  inspired. 
Seven  books  of  the  New  Testament  were  disputed 
in  the  Church  of  the  first  four  centuries  (see  Canon 
OF  Scripture).    The  Roman  Catholic  canon  of  the 


Okl  Testament  mdudes  the  Apocrypha,  which  are 
rejected  by  Protestants.  Luther  doubted  the  in- 
spiration of  Esther  and  heki  an  unfavorable  view 
<rf  the  Epistle  of  James  and  the  Apocalypse.  Calvin 
expressed  doubts  about  II  Peter.  The  Bible  is  an 
organism;  and  the  inspiration  of  the  whole  is  not 
necessarily  affected  if  inspiration  be  denied  to  oa& 
part.  The  question  of  the  inspiration  of  the  Gospel 
of  John,  for  example,  may  be  mdependent  of  the 
proof  that  the  Books  of  Chronicles  are  inspired. 
The  sufficient  witness  of  the  heavenly  origin  of  the 
Scriptures  is  their  inherent  excellences,  as  in  the 
case  of  the  person  of  Christ.  The  unity  of  the  book, 
unfokiing  a  single  purpose;  its  elevated  tone;  the 
faultless  character  of  Christ;  the  nature  of  the  facts 
revealed  of  God,  the  soul,  and  the  future — all 
stamp  it  as  a  work  of  more  than  ordinary  human 
genius  or  insight.  This  testimony  b,  for  most 
minds,  the  strongest  of  all.  It  is  the  testimony  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  in  experience.         D.  S.  Schaff. 

The  history  of  the  doctrine  of  inspiration  in  Great 
Britain  and  America  has  followed  the  general  for- 
tunes of  the  same  doctrine  on  the  Con- 
13.  Modem  tinent,  as  indicated  above;  that  is,  it 
Tendencies  has  oscillated  between  an  interpreta- 
and  Develf-  tion  which  found  its  principle  in  a  pre- 
opmentk  ponderating  influence  of  the  Spirit  of 
God  and  a  recognition  in  the  human 
consciousness  of  a  larger  degree  of  free  ethical  action. 
In  Great  Britain  ar^  An^ca  the  (}alvinistic  in- 
terest has  declared  for  the  first  of  the  views  r^erred 
to.  In  more  recent  times  attention  and  interest 
have  shifted  to  other  aspects  of  this  question.  A 
distinction  between  Revelation  (q.v.)  and  inq>iration 
has  been  made,  in  which  revelation  stands  for  the 
objective  side  or  content  of  the  divine  will  or  truth, 
inspiration  for  the  subjective  condition  in  which 
that  will  becomes  known.  Evolution  has  made 
men  familiar  with  a  law  of  development  according 
to  which  the  consciousness  is  in  part  determined 
by  previous  stages  of  thought  and  wilL  Compara- 
tive Religion  (q.v.)  has  revealed  phenomena  of  a 
similar  character  to  Hebrew  and  Christian  in^ira- 
tion  in  the  ethnic  faiths,  and  a  study  of  these  has 
aided  in  a  better  apprehension  of  this  fact.  The 
history  of  the  Christian  religion  with  its  earlier  roots 
in  the  Hebrew  religious  life  has  made  possible  a 
truly  historical  interpretation  of  the  rise  and  prog- 
ress of  the  apprehension  of  God  as  revealed  in  Jesus 
Christ.  The  new  study  of  psychology  has  shown 
the  nature  and  place  of  inspiration  in  the  conscious- 
ness of  the  sacred  writers  and  speakers  «an  ultimate 
certainty  and  enthusiasm  which  gave  to  their 
message  much  of  its  authority  and  power.  Biblical 
criticism  has  provided  a  broad  basis  of  incontestable 
facts  which  have  had  to  be  reckoned  with,  and  have 
thus  forced  here  and  there  a  fresh  investigation  of 
the  whole  question  from  an  inductive  point  of  view. 
Inspiration  is  seen  to  be  an  essential  affair  of  per- 
sonality and  is  therefore  ethical,  with  conditions  of 
its  appearance  which  lie  deep  in  character  as  weU 
as  in  native  endowment.  Finally,  the  tests  of 
inspiration  are  moral  and  spiritual — ^the  degree  to 
which  the  message  of  the  speaker  or  writer  answers 
to  the  ethical  and  religious  needs  of  advancing 
human  life.  C.  A.  Bbckwith. 


19 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


ZnspiratioB 
Xnapired,  The 


BnuooBAnrr:  On  the  history  of  the  doetrine  oonmilt:  G. 
F.  N.  Sonntact  Doetrina  irupirationiUt  mutque  ntiOt  Am- 
foria  §t  utut  pojnUarU,  Heidelberg,  1809;  G.  F.  N.  Credner. 
D9  Hbronun  N,  T.  ifMinrofume  q^id  tUiiu§ritU  Ckriatiani 
ante  9ataUum  UrHum  medium,  rol.  i.,  Jena,  1828;  idem, 
B&Urdot  nor  EinUUuno  in  die  hiUiedien  Schriftm,  I  1-91. 
Halle,  1832;  A.  G.  Rudelbach,  in  ZnUckrififUr  lutheneehe 
Tkeohgie  und  Kirdu,  L  1-60.  il  1-66,  iv.  1-40;  F.  A. 
Tholuek,  in  Deuteefte  Ztiiaeknfi  fikr  ekrittUehe  TTOwfi- 
ecAa/C  18M).  pp.  16-18. 42-44;  J.  DeUtuch.  De  inepiraHom 
eeriptomm  <iuid  wUUuerini  pairtt  ajtottolici,  Leipaie,  1872; 
K.  F.  A.  Kahnia.  DogmaUk,  I  268.  Leipide.  1874;  K.  R. 
Hacenbaeh,  History  of  ChriaUan  Doctrine,  L  75,  116,  ii. 
14.  20.  166.  iit.  56.  62,  314,  Edinbursh.  1880-81;  B.  F. 
Westoott,  Introduction  to  tKe  Study  cf  Ike  Ooepele,  London, 
1888;  W.  Rohnert,  Woe  l^rt  Luther  von  der  Jnepiration 
der  HeUigen  Sehriftf  Leipeie.  1890;  A.  261%,  Die  In^ 
•piraHoneUkre  dee  Orioene,  Freibuis,  1902;  and  in  general 
the  works  on  the  History  of  Dogma. 

FhKn  the  standpoint  of  dogmatics  the  subject  is  dis- 
cussed in  all  the  great  treatises  on  that  subject.  The 
following  may  be  taken  as  representative  of  the  treatment 
in  the  "  Systems  of  Theology":  F.  D.  E.  Schleieimacber, 
Si  128-132.  Berlin,  1821;  A.  D.  C.  Twesten.  L.  |  23. 
Hamburg.  1826;  G.  L  Nitssch,  ||  37  sqq.,  Bonn,  1844, 
Eng.  transL.  Edinburgh.  1849;  T.  Dwight.  New  York, 
1846;  C.  G.  Finney,  ib.  1861;  R.  Rothe,  pp.  121  sqq., 
Gotha.  1863;  H.  Martensen.  Edinburgh,  1866;  J.  T.  Beck, 
II  88-101.  Stuttgart.  1870;  F.  H.  R.  Frank.  Syetem  der 
cAmtfidbm  OewieeheU,  ii..  ||  43-49.  Erlangen,  1873; 
idem.  Syetem  dor  dinettichen  Wahrheit,  u.,  fi  43.  ib.  1886; 
C.  Hodge.  3  vols..  New  York,  1873;  H.  Voigt,  Fundament 
taUoamatik,  |  21.  Gotha.  1874;  J.  J.  van  Oostersee.  2 
Tols..  London.  1876;  L  A.  Domer,  OlaubenOehre,  ||  67- 
59.  Berlin,  1879.  Eng.  transl..  4  toIs..  Edinburgh,  1880-82; 
W.  B.  Pope.  New  York.  1880;  F.  A.  PhiUppi,  L  204  sqq.. 
Gaterstoh,  1881;  A.  E.  Biedermann,  If  179  sqq..  Berlin. 
1884-86;  A.  H.  Strong.  Rochester.  1886;  W.  Q.  T.  Shedd. 
New  York.  1888-94;  S.  Buell.  ib.  1890;  E.  V.  Qerhart. 
Inetitutee  cf  the  Chrietian  Religion,  ib.  1891;  H.  B.  Smith, 
ib..  1890;  J.  Miley.  London.  1892;  M.  A.  KAhler.  Wieeen- 
ediaftderehrietlichenJjehre,  pp.  446  sqq..  Leipsie.  1893;  R. 
A.  Upflius,  II 196  sqq.,  Brunswick,  1893;  L.  F.  Steams,  New 
York.  1893;  J.  Bovon,  2  vols..  Lausanne,  1896-96;  H. 
Bawink.  4  vols..  Kampe.  1896-1901;  R.  V.  Forster.  Nssh- 
vine.  1808;  N.  Burwash.  2  vols.,  London,  1900;  A.  Bou- 
vier.  Paris.  1903;  H.  E.  Jacobs,  Summary  cf  the  Chrietian 
FotA,  Philadelphia,  1906;  A.  H.  Strong.  Syetomatie  Tho- 
otogy,  i.  196-242.  Philadelphia,  1907;  F.  J.  HaU.  Dog- 
Moiu:  Theology,  vol.  ii..  New  York.  1908. 

Special  treatises  on  the  subject  are:  R.  Baxter,  CotocAi- 
stna  «/  FamUiee,  London.  1 683;  R.  Simon.  TraiU  do  Vinopir 
ration  dee  livree  eaerie,  Paris.  1687;  W.  Lowth,  Vindieation 
e/AeOldand  New  TeetamenU,  Oxford,  1692;  P.  Dodd- 
ridge.  The  Inepiration  of  the  New  Teetament,  in  vol.  iv. 
of  his  Worke,  Leeds.  1802;  J.  J.  Griesbach,  Sirieturarum 
in  locum  do  ihoopneuetia  lihrorum  eaerorum,  parts  L-v.. 
Jena,  1784-^;  J.  D.  Mozell.  PhU.  qf  Raigion,  chaps. 
T.,  vi.  New  York,  1849;  E.  Henderson,  Divine  InepiraHon, 
London.  1862;  F.  de  Rougemont.  Chriet  et  eee  timoine: 
.  .  .  rivHation  et  inepiration,  2  vols..  Paris.  1866;  C.  A. 
Row.  The  Nature  and  Extent  ef  Divine  Inepiration,  London. 
1854;  L.  Gaussen,  Thiopneuetie,  Paris,  1862,  Eng.  transl., 
London,  1888;  C.  Wordsworth,  On  the  InepiraHon  of  Holy 
Scripture,  ib.  1867;  F.  L.  Fatten,  The  InepiraHon  <^  the 
Scripturee,  Philadelphia.  1869;  E.  ElUott.  Inepiration  of 
the  Holy  Senpturee,  Edinburgh,  1877;  W.  £.  Atwell. 
7*As  Pauline  Theory  qf  Inepiration,  London,  1878;  H. 
Schults,  Die  SteUung  dee  durietlidten  Olaubene  eur  heiKgen 
Sdkrift,  Braunsberg.  1877;  E.  M.  Goulbum,  On  the  In^ 
opiraHon  .  .  .  of  the  Holy  Seripturee,  London,  1878;  W. 
R.  Browne.  Inepiration  of  the  New  Teetament,  ib.  1880; 
J.  J.  Given,  Truth  ef  Scripture  in  connection  tsiA  Revelation, 
InepiraHon,  and  the  Canon,  Edinburgh.  1881;  J.  G.  W. 
Herrmann,  Die  Bedeutung  der  InepiraHonel^re,  Halle, 
1882;  G.  T.  Ladd.  The  Doctrine  qf  Holy  ScHpture,  New 
York,  1883;  F.  W.  Farrar.  J.  Cairns,  and  others,  /nsptro- 
tioft:  a  Clerical  Symposium,  London,  1884;  R.  Watts, 
The  Rule  of  Faith  and  the  Doctrine  ef  Inepiration,  ib.  1886; 
A.  Gbve,  The  Inepiration  of  the  Old  Testament,  ib.  1888; 
C.  A.  Briggs.  Whither,  New  York,  1889;  A.  Ritschl,  Lehre 
von  der  Rechtfertigung  und  Verefihnung,  ii.  9  sqq.,  Bonn, 
1889;  W.  KaUing.  Prolegomena  mr  I^ehre  von  der  Theo- 
pneuatie,  Brealau,  1890;   idem.  Die  Lehre  von  der  Theop- 


neueHe,  ib.  1891;  C.  A.  Briggs.  LL  J.  Evans.  H.  P. 
Smith,  Inepiration  and  Inerrancy,  Edinburgh,  1891;  E. 
Haupt,  Die  Bedeutung  der  heUigen  Schrift,  BielefsfcL 
1801;  W.  Sanday,  The  Oradee  of  Qod,  London,  1891; 
idem,  InepwoHAn,  ib.  1896;  F.  J.  Sharr,  The  Inepiration 
cf  Ms  Hciy  Senpturee,  London.  1891;  J.  Clifford,  The 
Inepiration  and  Authority  of  the  BibU,  ib.  1892;  W.  F. 
GesB,  Die  Inepiration  der  Helden  der  Bibel,  Basel.  1892; 
W.  Lee.  Inepiration  of  Holy  ScHpture,  New  York.  1892; 
J.  DeWitt.  What  ie  InepiraHon  f  ib.  1893;  J.  Denney, 
Studiee  in  Theology,  London.  1895;  M.  A.  KAhler.  Uneer 
StreU  um  die  Bibel,  Leipsie.  1896;  M.  von  Nathusius. 
C^s&er  die  Inepiration  der  heUigen  Schnft^  Stuttgart, 
1896;  H.  Cremer.  Olaube,  Schrift,  und  heUige  Oeeehiehte, 
Gatersloh,  1896;  G.  S.  Barrett.  The  BibU  and  ite  In^ 
epiroHon,  London,  1897;  P.  Gennrich,  Der  Kampf  um 
die  Sdurift  in  der  deutetJ^-evangelieAen  Kirehe  dee  19, 
Jahrhunderte,  Berlin,  1898  (contains  a  rich  bibliography 
of  the  German  literature  on  the  subject);  C.  Chauvin, 
Die  Inepiration  der  heiUgen  Sduift  nadi  der  Ldire  der 
Tradition,  Regensburg,  1899;  O.  P.  Zaneochia,  Divina 
inepiraHo  eaerorum  ecripturarum,  Rome,  1808;  M.  Arnold, 
Literature  and  Dogma,  London,  1902;  A.  Loisy,  L'^vangile 
et  Vigliee,  Paris,  1902,  Eng.  transl..  New  York.  1904;  H.  H. 
Kuyper,  Bvohttie  ov  revelaHe,  Amsterdam,  1903;  J.  E. 
McFadyen,  O.  T.  Critidem  and  the  ChrieHan  Church,  pp. 
268-312,  New  York.  1903;  J.  A.  Robinson,  5oiiis  ThoughU 
on  Inspiration,  London,  1906;  R.  F.  Horton.  Inepiration 
and  the  Bible,  ib.  1906;  C.  Fssch.  De  inepiratione  eaerae 
eeriplurae,  Freiburg.  1906;  J.  M.  Gibson.  /fupiro<»on  and 
AuthorUy  cf  Holy  Scripture,  London,  1908;  DB,  i.  296- 
299.  il  476-476;  DCQ,  i.  831-«36;  Farrar,  in  Biblical 
Educator,  vols.  L-ii. 

INSPIRBD,  THE:  The  name  given  to  a  sect  which 
originated  in  Germany  about  1700.  It  was  formed 
from  the  large  nmnber  of  Separatists  who  already 
existed  there,  and  was  animated  by  the  impulse 
given  by  the  new  prophets  of  the  Camisards  (q.v.) 
in  the  C^vennes.  The  sectaries  took  their  name 
from  the  fact  that  they  recognised  a  continuous 
divine  inspiration  in  certain  individuals,  whom 
they  regarded  as  instruments  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
to  whose  teachings  they  professed  obedience  as  to 
inspiration. 

After  the  forcible  suppression  of  the  Protestants 

in  the  C^vennes,  some  of  the  principal  leaders  and 

prophets,  such  as  £lje  Marion,  Durande 

Appearance  Fage,  Jean  Cavalier,  and  Jean  Allut, 

in  England  fled  to  England  and  Scotland  in  1706 

and        (see  French  Proprbtb),  which  they 

Gennany.  soon  left  for  the  Netherlands,  uttering 
in  both  countries  impassioned  denun- 
ciations of  France  and  the  papacy.  When  their 
prophecies  were  not  fulfilled,  they  were  excluded 
from  the  French  Reformed  community  in  London 
and  from  the  Church  of  England  as  well,  so  that 
they  had  no  recourse  but  to  found  a  sect  of  their 
own.  Allut  and  Marion  accordingly  went,  in  1711, 
to  the  Netherlands  and  Germany,  seeking  support 
primarily  among  the  numerous  colonies  of  French 
Protestants  there,  from  whom,  however,  they  gained 
little  sympathy.  They  had  more  success  with  the 
Pietists  and  Separatists  of  northwestern  Germany, 
to  whose  craving  for  apocalyptic  revelations  and 
fanatical  enthusiasm  they  were  able  to  appeal. 
They  laid  their  first  foundattons  at  Halle  in  1713 
and  at  Berlin  in  1714,  and  held  a  love-feast  at  Halle 
in  the  latter  year.  At  first  they  found  some  support 
among  the  cleigy,  but  when  the  gift  of  inspiration 
began  to  spread  among  the  "  awakened  "  of  Qer^ 
man  birth,  including  in  HaUe  the  eighteen-year-old 
daughter  of  a  servant  of  Francke,  and  in  Berlin 


Inspired,  The 
Interim 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


ao 


a  tailor  who  later  became- inume,  the  -whole  moin»- 
ment  was  regarded  with  suspicion,  if  not  with  con- 
tempt. Three  brothers  niuned  Pott,  until  then 
students  at  Halle,  who  had  become  ''  awaken^," 
migrated  with  their  fanatical  mothei^  to  the  Wet- 
terau  in  17 14,  and  there  built  up  an  inspirational 
community,  chiefly  composed  of  Swabians  and 
Franconians.  As  in  the  case  of  the  prophets  of  the 
C^vennes,  so  here  inspired  utterances  were  preceded 
by  remarkable  physical  phenomena,  such  as  a 
burning  around  the  heart,  shortness  of  breath,  and 
various  convulsive  movements  of  the  head  and  limbs. 
These  conditions  were  followed  by  a  state  of  un- 
conscious ecstasy,  and  during  this  time  the  message 
was  received.  This,  as  a  rule,  was  immediately 
given  out,  either  by  pantomimic  gestures  or,  more 
frequently,  in  brief  phrases  of  a  Scriptural  character, 
spoken  in  an  unnaturally  loud  voice.  The  content 
of  these  messages,  usually  delivered  in  the  first 
person  as  in  the  name  of  God,  resembled  the  warn- 
ings and  promises  of  the  Hebrew  prophets,  and 
dealt  with  the  necessity  of  repentance,  conversion, 
and  practical  Christianity,  frequently  being  remark- 
able revelations  of  the  lives  of  the  persons  to  whom 
they  were  addressed. 

Under  the  influence  of  these  phenomena  societies 
arose  which,  after  1716,  called  themselves  **  the  True 
Inspired,"  in  contrast  with  the  free  or 
German  false  inspired  who  rejected  all  organisa- 
Societies.  tion  and  discipline.  The  enthusiasm  of 
the  movement  spread  not  only  among 
the  Separatists  of  the  Wetterau  and  Wittgenstein, 
but  throughout  Western  Germany  (especially  WOrt- 
temberg,  the  Palatinate,  and  Alsace)  and  Switzer- 
land, and  even  extended  into  Northern  and  Eastern 
Germany,  as  far  as  Saxony  and  Bohemia.  The  call 
and  the  preparation  for  missionary  journeys  among 
the  unbelievers  were  given  in  solemn  love-feasts, 
prefaced  by  preliminary  exercises  for  days  before- 
hand, and  characterized  by  fervent  devotion.  It 
was  naturally  difficult  to  maintain  this  devotion 
at  such  a  high  level,  even  when  it  was  nourished 
by  trial  and  persecution;  and  many  of  the  **  ves- 
sels '*  quickly  ceased  to  give  forth  their  messages. 
Those  who  remained  true  formed  a  constitution  at 
Badlngen  in  1716,  according  to  which  ten  com- 
munities were  foimded  in  that  neighborhood,  some 
of  which  remained  in  existence  almost  until  the 
middle  of  the  nineteenth  century,  while  others 
grew  up  in  WUrttemberg,  Swabia,  and  Switzerland. 
Elach  commimity  had  a  president  and  two  associate 
elders,  who  regulated  all  its  affairs,  especially  the 
care  of  the  poor  and  the  maintenance  of  discipline, 
and  held  occasional  conferences  with  the  heads  of 
other  communities.  There  was  no  special  teaching 
office,  but  all  adults  were  expected  to  take  their 
part  in  free  public  prayer  at  the  meetings  (daily  or 
at  least  twice  on  Sunday),  at  which  many  hymns 
were  sung,  while  the  readings  were  chosen  either 
from  the  Bible  or  from  the  fifty  written  or  printed 
discourses  of  the  "  vessels,"  unless  a  ''  vessel "  was 
present  and  delivered  a  new  homily,  prepared 
especially  for  the  occasion.  The  dogmatic  belief  of 
the  Inspired  agreed  in  general  with  that  of  the 
Evangelical  Church  at  large,  though,  like  other 
Separatists,  they  rejected  all  communion  with  it 


(as  in  baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper).  Their  prao* 
tidal  principles  were  those  of  the  mystics  Schwendc- 
feld,  BOhme,  Weigel,  and  Hoburg.  They  regftrd«d 
marriage  with  special  disfavor,  though  they  tol- 
erated it  for  a  time. 

By  1719  all  the  ''  other  vessels  "  had  oeaeed  to 
testify,  and  Johann  Friedrich  Rock,  as  the  last  of 
them,  became,  with  f^rhard  Ludwig 
Johann     Gruber  (a  deigyman ;  b.  1665;  d.  1728) , 
Friedrich    the  head  of  the  communities.  Rock  was 
Rock.    '  bom  at  Oberwftlden,  near  GOppingen, 
Wttrttembei^,  in  1678.    He  came  of  a 
family  of  preachers  and  was  himself  a  hamessmaker 
by  trade.    He  had  an  inclination  to  mysticiem,  was 
seized  with  "  inspiration  "  about  1707,  and  there- 
after worked  for  the  cause  with  self-sacrificing  zeal 
until  his  death  in  1749.     He  had  some  gifts  of 
preaching   and   riming,  and  seems  to  have  been  a 
man  of  true  piety  notwithstanding  his  aberrations. 
With  the  emigration  of  many  Separatists  to  Ger- 
mantown,  Pa.,  after  1725,  and  with  the  rise  of  the 
Hermhut  movement  after  1730,  his  task  became 
increasingly  difficult.    Particularly  painful  to  him 
were  his  controversies  with  Count  Zinzendorf ,  who 
had  originally  stood  in  close  relations  with  Rock 
and  his  colleagues,  but  had  gradually  approached 
more  nearly  to  the  Established  Church  after  1732, 
and  two  years  later  had  definitely  broken  with 
Rock  on  the  ground  of  his  rejection  of  the  sacra- 
ments.   Between  1740  and  1748  Rock  was  engaged 
in  bitter  controversy  with  another  former  friend, 
Johann    Kaiser,  a   follower   of   Bdhme,    Molinos, 
and   Mme.    Guyon,    who    had    founded   a  phila- 
delphian  society  at   Stuttgart  in  1710,  and  after 
its  decay  had  established  an  inspirational    oom- 
munity    in    1717.      This    controversy    forms  the 
source  of  the  clearest  and  most  important    state- 
ments regarding  the   nature   of   the  inspirational 
movement. 

The  death  of  Rock  marked  the  beginning  of  a 
period  of  steady  decline,  so  that  it  is  surprising  to 
find  a  recrudescence  of  these  societies, 
Revival     unvitalized  by  preaching  or  sacraments 
alter  iSao  (celebration  of  the  Lord's  Supper  seems 
and  Emi-    to  have  been  first  resumed  after  1820) , 
gration  to   after  a  complete  quiescence  of  sixty  or 
America,    seventy  years.     With  the   revival    of 
devotion  in  the  established  Churches, 
however,  the  gift  of  inspiration  appeared  once  more 
among  the  "  awakened  "  Separatists,  and  (according 
to  the  testimony  of  eye-witnesses)   in   the    same 
manner  as  among  the  Ce^nisards  or  in  the  Wetterau. 
Under   the   infiuence   of  three   new   "  vessels  " — 
Michael  Krausert  of  Strasburg;  Barbara  Heineiiia.nn 
(after  marriage,   Barbara  Landmann)    of    Lieilers- 
weiler  in  Alsace,  a  peasant  girl,  unable  to  read  or 
write;  and  Christian  Mets,  a  joiner — ^the   commu- 
nities in  Alsace,  the  Palatinate,  and  the  Wetterau, 
which  were  almost  extinct,  were  reorganised    be- 
tween 1816  and  1821  on  the  old  constitution    of: 
Gruber,  but  the  repressive  measures  of  the  Prussian 
and  Hessian  govenmients  caused  tiiem  to  exxusn^tri 
in  1842-46,  about  800  strong,  to  Ebeneser,    nea 
Buffalo,  N.  Y.,  where  they  soon  had  a  flourisliiiij  ; 
communistic  settlement  numbering  between    1,50  I 
and  2,000  souls.    In  1854  part  of  this  oommimit 


81 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Inspired,  The 
TntorJTn 


migrated    to   Amana,    Iowa.      See   Communism, 

II.,    3.  (A.  HBOLBRf.)  K.  HOLL. 

Buuoobapbt:  A  yery  oomprehenaivv  treatment  of  the  sub- 
ject hM  been  given  by  M.  OSbel,  in  ZHT,  1S54. 1855. 1857, 
upon  which  tubeequent  diiwumrione  are  based.  Consult 
further:  M.  Qdbel,  Ot^chichJU  deM  chriUUehen  LAena,  iii. 
126  sqq.,  Coblens,  1860;  A.  Ritschl.  GeadiidUe  det  PietiB- 
mu9,  ii  366  sqq..  iii.  265  sqq..  Bonn.  1880-86;  K.  Knorts. 
IHe  u>akr€  InapinUionagemeinde  in  Iowa,  Ijeipric,  1896; 
W.  Hadom.  Die  ItupiritrUn  dea  18.  JahrhundnrU,  in 
Sdiweittriaehe  thtologiBche  ZtHuhrift,  1900.  pp.  184  sqq.; 
and  the  literature  under  Communism.  II.,  3.  On  Rock, 
conjiult  ADB,  xxxviii  735. 

IRSTALLATIOll:  Generally,  the  ceremonial  act 
by  which  a  person  ordained  and  appointed  is  form- 
ally put  into  poeseasion  of  an  ecclesiastical  dignity 
or  benefice.  In  the  English  Church  the  term  is 
applied  specially  to  the  office  of  a  canon  or  preb- 
endary (i.e.,  the  act  of  placing  him  in  his  stall)  or 
to  the  enthronixation  of  a  bishop. 

INSTITUTE  OF  THE  BLESSED  VIROIR..  See 
English  Ladies. 

ntSTITUTIOll:  In  canon  law,  the  final  act  by 
which  a  person  elected  by  the  chapter,  or  nominated 
by  the  government,  is  appointed  by  the  proper 
authority  to  an  ecclesiastical  benefice,  more  espe- 
cially a  bishopric. 

INTBIITIOII.    See  Sacbamxnt,  §  4. 

HITERCESSIGll.    See  Mediator. 

INTERDICT:  The  prohibition  of  public  worship 
and  of  the  administration  of  the  sacraments  {inter- 
didtum  officicTum  dimnorum),  as  an  ecclesiastical 
penalty.  An  tnterdictum  locale  applies  to  a  definite 
place  or  district,  an  interdictum  personate  to  definite 
persons.  The  former  is  the  more  frequent,  especially 
the  interdiettan  generaUf  which  the  medieval  popes 
pronounced  against  whole  countries  in  their  con- 
flicts with  secular  rulers.  Instances  of  the  use  of 
the  interdict  may  be  found  as  early  as  the  time  of 
Gr^ory  of  Tours;  but  not  till  the  eleventh  century 
did  it  become  a  regular  part  of  ecclesiastical  law, 
and  only  gradually  did  it  assume  the  character  of 
a  definite  institution  with  fixed  limitations  which  it 
bears  in  the  Corpus  juris  canonici.  The  total  inter- 
dict forbade  public  worship,  the  administration  of 
the  sacraments,  and  Christian  burial.  Mitigations 
gradually  came  in;  in  1173  Alexander  III.  allowed 
the  baptism  of  infants  and  the  absolution  of  the 
dying;  in  1208  Innocent  III.  added  confirmation 
and  preaching,  absolution  under  certain  conditions, 
the  private  burial  of  clerics,  the  recitation  of  the 
canonical  hours,  and  low  masses  in  convents  of 
regulars,  extending  this  last  privilege  a  year  later  to 
bidiops.  These  concessions  were  granted  on  con- 
dition that  no  excommunicated  or  personally  inter- 
dicted persons  be  present,  that  the  doors  be  dosed, 
and  that  no  bells  be  rung.  Boniface  VIII.,  who 
also  allowed  baptism  and  confirmation  of  adults, 
permitted  public  worship  with  open  doors  and  ring- 
ing of  bells  at  Christmas,  Easter,  Pentecost,  and  the 
AflBumptio&;  Martin  V.  and  Eugenius  IV.  extended 
this  privil^e  to  the  whole  octave  of  Corpus  Christi, 
and  Leo  X.  to  that  of  the  Conception.  Special 
exemptions  were  granted  ta  the  Franciscans  and 
other  religious  orders;  btit  Clement  V.  and  the 
Coundl  of  Trent  insisted  on  their  observance  of  the 


mterdict.  A  local  interdict  was  last  proclaimed 
by  Paul  V.  in  1606,  against  the  republic  of  Venice. 
It  is  no  longer  considered  a  praotiotl  part  of  church 
discipline,  but  the  right  to  impose  it  is  theoretically 
maintained.  Both  personal  and  local  interdicts 
may  occur  as  "  censures  of  broad  application."  The 
right  to  impose  them  is  held  to  be  inherent  in 
the  pope,  councils,  bishops  (regularly  with  their 
chapters,  sometimes  without  them),  and  in  special 
cases  the  chapters  themselves;  monastic  superiors 
may  also  impose  personal  interdicts  upon  their  sub- 
jects. Inteniicts  may  terminate  of  themselves  if 
a  condition  has  been  expressed;  otherwise  they  are 
removed  by  the  person  who  imposed  them,  his 
successor,  delegate,  or  superior.  Only  a  bishop 
can  absolve  from  a  local  interdict  "of  broad 
application "  ;  but  any  approved  confessor  may 
remove  a  particular  personal  interdict.  This  form 
of  penalty  does  not  occur  in  Protestant  ecclesias- 
tical law.  (C.  T.  G.  VON  SCHEUBLf.) 

Bibliography:  Binffham.  Ori^ifies,  XVI.,  ill  7;  L.  Ferraris, 
Prompta  hUMotheea  oanomco.  a  v.  **  Inderdictum,"  11  vole., 
Venice.  1782-04;  A.  L.  Riehter,  Uhrbuck  dee  .  .  .  XircA- 
enrtthU,  ed.  W.  Kafal.  pp.  788  aqq..  Leipnc.  1886;  E. 
Friedberg,  LehHmdi  dee  .  .  .  Kirdienrechie,  pp.  274  aqq., 
ib.  1895;  P.  Hineehitu,  Dae  Kirdienrechi  .  .  .  in  Deuieeh- 
land,  T.  19  sqq..  Berlin.  1896;  Neander.  Chrietian  Churdi, 
iii.  355-356,  454.  iv.  161  eft  passim;  E.  B.  Krehbiel,  The 
Interdict,  He  Hietory  and  He  OjMrolum,  Washington,  1909. 

INTERIM:  The  name  of  three  provisional  and 
temporary  arrangements  between  the  Protestants 
of  Qermany  and  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  in  the 
time  of  the  Reformation,  intended  to  be  valid  only 
for  the  interval  pending  a  final  settlement  of  re- 
ligious differences  by  a  general  council  (whence 
the  name,  from  Lat.  interim^  "  meanwhile  "). 

!•  The  Regensbttrg  Interim:  The  outcome  of  the 
Conference  of  Regensburg  in  1541.    See  Rbqens- 

BXJRG,  CONrSRENCB  OF. 

3.  The  Aogsbttrg  Interim:  Adopted  at  the  diet 
at  Augsburg  June  30,  1548.  After  the  Schmalkald 
War,  Charles  V.  thought  of  reestablishing  religious 
unity  in  Germany;  and  at  the  diet  in  session  in 
Augsburg  in  1547  it  was  agreed  that  a  provisional 
arrangement  should  be  made  until  the  Council  of 
Trent  had  completed  its  work.  In  Feb.,  1548, 
Charles  chose  a  commission  from  both  communions 
to  devise  an  arrangement;  this  commission  could 
not  reach  an  agreement,  and  several  states  pro- 
posed that  the  matter  be  turned  over  to  the  theo- 
logians. Consequently,  at  the  command  of  the 
emperor,  Jtdius  Pflug,  bishop  of  Naumbuig, 
Michael  Helding,  suffragan  bishop  of  Mainz,  and 
Johann  AgricoU,  court  preacher  to  the  elector 
of  Brandenburg,  prepared  a  draft,  which  was  then 
revised  by  certain  Spanish  monks  and  was  secretly 
submitted  by  the  emperor  to  the  Protestant  elec- 
tors and  prominent  Roman  Catholics  of  the  em- 
pire. In  twenty-six  articles  it  treated  of  man 
before  and  after  the  fall  (i.-ii.),  of  redemption 
through  ChnBt  (iii.),  of  justification  (iv.-vi.),  of 
love  and  good  works  (vii.),  of  forgiveness  of 
sins  (viii.),  of  the  Church  (ix.-xii.),  of  bishops 
(xiiL),  of  the  sacramente  (xiv.-xxi.),  of  the  sacri- 
fice of  tha  mass  (xxii.),  of  the  eaints  (xxiii.),  of 
the  commemoration  of  the  dead  (xxiv.),  of  the 
communion  at  the  mass  (xxv.),  and  of  the  cere- 


In  trim 
XhWrpolations 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


29 


monies  of  the  sacraments  (xxvi.).  Although  the 
views  of  the  Protestants  were  taken  into  account 
in  a  general  way,  the  document  revealed  the  old 
Churdh  with  its  faith  and  worship.  In  the  belief 
that  the  Interim  applied  to  all  imperial  estates, 
the  electors  of  Brandenburg  and  the  Palatinate 
approved  it.  After  a  long  opposition  Elector 
Maurice  of  Saxony  and  Maigrave  Hans  of  KOstrin 
promised  not  to  protest  openly  if  all  imperial 
estates  should  approve  and  accept  it.  The  Roman 
Catholics,  however,  were  not  willing  to  make  any 
concessions.  On  May  15,  1548,  Charles  assembled 
the  imperial  estates  and  demanded  their  submission. 
He  admonished  the  Protestants  to  return  to  the 
old  faith  or  to  live  in  accordance  with  the  Interim, 
while  the  Roman  Gathdics  were  to  remain  faithful 
to  the  ordinances  of  their  Church.  Elector  Maurice, 
Margrave  Hans,  and  their  adherents  were  greatly 
angered  because  only  the  Protestants  were  to  be 
compelled  to  accept  the  Interim,  but  in  accordance 
with  their  promise  they  did  not  protest.  On  June  30, 
1548,  the  Interim  became  imperial  law.  In  South 
Germany  the  emperor  succeeded  in  introducing  it 
in  some  cities  and  territories  by  force,  but  in  the 
rest  of  Germany  his  orders  were  not  carried  out. 
In  the  Palatinate,  Brandenbuig,  Saxony,  Weimar, 
Hesse,  Mecklenburg,  Pomerania,  and  other  states, 
as  well  as  in  the  North  German  cities,  there  arose 
vehement  opposition,  of  which  Magdebuig  became 
the  center,  headed  by  men  like  Flacius,  Amsdorf, 
and  Gallus,  while  Agricola  and  Melanchthon  were 
inclined  to  compromise. 

^  The  Leipiic  Interim:  Adopted  by  the  Saxon 
diet  at  Leipsic  Dec,  1548.  After  his  return  from 
the  diet  at  Augsburg,  Maurice  of  Saxony  assem- 
bled his  prominent  councilors  and  theologians  at 
Meissen  to  discuss  the  imperial  Interim.  He  was 
resolutely  bent  upon  adhering  to  the  Evangelical 
doctrine,  but  was  anxious  to  have  a  frank  and 
definite  statement  of  what  might  be  accepted  and 
what  must  be  rejected  on  the  ground  of  Scripture. 
After  a  careful  and  conscientious  examination,  the 
theologians  flatly  rejected  the  entire  Augsburg  docu- 
ment. After  a  royal  and  imperial  admoniticm  to 
introduce  it  in  Saxony,  a  new  discussion  took  place 
in  Torgau  Oct.  18,  1548.  The  electoral  councilors 
laid  before  the  theologians  a  list  of  the  points  which 
in  their  estimation  were  acceptable  and  might  lead 
to  a  new  church  order.  Melanchthon  agreed  with 
most  of  the  points.  Deliberations  were  continued 
in  Altsella  Nov.  10-22,  and,  under  stress  of  the  news 
of  the  emperor's  fordble  measures  in  South  Ger- 
many, an  interim  was  drawn  up  which,  in  the  doc- 
trine of  justification  and  in  other  points,  upheld  the 
Protestant  doctrine,  while  it  conceded  as  *^  Adiaph- 
ora  "  (q.v.)  such  things  as  extreme  unction,  the 
mass,  lights,  vestments,  vessels,  images,  fasts  and 
festivals,  and  the  like.  Maurice  and  Joachim  of 
Brandenburg  came  to  an  agreement  and  put  in 
writing  what  they  would  accept.  The  Saxon  diet 
met  in  Leipsic  on  Dec.  21  and  accepted  the  Altsella 
resolutions;  the  bishops  of  Naumburg  and  Meissen, 
however,  refused  to  concur,  because  in  their  opinion 
it  was  reserved  to  the  emperor  alone  to  make 
changes  in  the  (Augsburg)  Interim.  The  ultimate 
outcome  was  that  things  remained  as  before. 


At  the  diet  at  Augsburg  in  1550-51  the  majority 
of  the  estates  advocated  the  continuation  of  the 
Council  of  Trent  and  urged  the  emperor  to  compel 
Protestants  to  accept  the  Interim.  When  the  im- 
perial invitation  to  the  council  arrived  in  Dresden, 
Maurice  began  negotiations  with  the  Protestant 
estates  concerning  a  general  agreement.  In  Dessau 
Melanchthon  with  Prince  George  of  Anhalt  drew  up 
the  so-called  Saxon  Confession,  which  was  approved 
by  Maurice,  Hans  of  KOstrin,  the  dukes  of  Mecklen- 
burg and  Pomerania,  and  others.  It  was  proposed 
that  certain  Saxon  theologians  should  go  to  Trent 
under  safe  protection  and  defend  the  pure  doctrine. 
In  Jan.,  1552,  Melanchthon,  with  two  others,  started 
on  the  journey  and  got  as  far  as  Augsbuig;  but  in 
March  they  were  called  back  because  the  war  against 
the  emperor  began.  The  expedition  of  Maurice  to 
South  Germany  occasioned  the  suspension  of  the 
Council  of  Trent.  The  Treaty  of  Passau  annihilated 
the  Interim  and  led  to  the  Religious  Peace  of  Augs- 
burg (q.v.).  (S.  Ibsleib.) 

Bibuooraprt:  O.  Beutel.  Ueber  dm  Unprung  dm  Auo»- 
hurger  Interinu,  DrMden,  1888;  G.  P.  Fiaher,  Tim  tUfar- 
maH4»n,  pp.  186-214,  New  York,  1873;  A.  Ton  Druffel. 
BrUf€  ufyi  Akten  aur  OuthiehU  dm  16.  JeJurhunderU,  iii. 
42  M]q.,  Munieh,  1882;  C.  Beard,  Th*  ReformaHon,  pp. 
109.  243.  210.  London.  1883;  F.  von  Beiold,  OtHihiehU 
der  deui9dten  RtfomuUion,  pp.  805-808,  BerUn,  1890;  8. 
Isflleib,  in  NevM  Arthiv  fitr  §adttUdte  Cfe9chichU,  jail  188 
•qq.,  XV.  193  aqq.,  Dreeden,  1892-94;  idem,  MoriU  wm 
Saehten,  pp.  189-213.  Leipeio.  1907;  W.  Walker,  The  Rtfar- 
maiion,  pp.  207-206.  218.  New  York,  1900;  J.  Babington, 
The  Reformation,  pp.  113-114,  London,  1901;  Cambridge 
Modem  Hietary,  The  Reformation,  pp.  264-266.  New  York, 
1904. 

INTBRMBDIATS  STATE:  A  term  designating 
both  the  period  and  the  condition  of  the  soul 
between  death  and  the  final  judgment.    Theintei^ 
mediate  state  is  an  aspect  of  the  doctrine  of  Hades 
(q.v.).    It  has  assumed  many  forms.    (1)  The  early 
doctrine,  which  in  general  has  continued  to  be  the 
common  view,  that  the  dead  remain  in  a  condition 
of  privati(m  until  the  resurrection — ^the  righteous 
happier  (martyrs  going  at  once  to  Paradise),  the 
wicked  more  miserable,  than  while  on  earth  (Ire- 
nsus,  Haer.  v.  31;  Tertullian,  ''  On  the  Soul,"  Iv.). 
(2)  Purgatory,  the  condition  of  those  who  depart 
this  life  in  faith,  yet  are  still  liable  to  punitive 
sufferings  for  venial  sins  and  who  are  purged  before 
their  entrance  into  heaven;  such  may  be  "  helped  " 
by  the  suffrages  of  the  faithful,  but  principaUy  by 
the  acceptable  sacrifice  of  the  altar  "  (Council  of 
Trent,  Sobs,  xxv.;  see  Purgatort).    (3)  The  limbo 
of  the  Fathers  is  the  abode  of  Old-Testament  saints 
to  whom  after  his  death  Christ  preached  the  Gospel 
(Thomas  Aquinas,  Summa,  qu.  60,  art.  4;    Dante, 
Divine  Comedy,  Ir^emo,  Canto  iv.;    W.  E.  Addis 
and  T.  Arnold,  Catholic  Dictionary,  pp.  564-565, 
London,  1003).     (4)  The  limbo  of  infants  is  the 
region  to  which  unbaptised  infants  are  consigned 
after  death,  to  remain  forever  in  a  state  of  priva- 
tion, without  suffering  and  also  without  happiness, 
a  doctrine  based   on   the  universal   necessity    of 
baptism  for  the  remission  of  the  guilt  of  original 
sin   (Thomas  Aquinas,   ut  sup.,   qu.   60,   art.    6; 
see  Infant  Salvation;  Limbus).    (5)  The  sleep  of 
soub,  based  on  such  passages  as  Acts  vii.  60,  xiii.  36 ; 
I  Cor.  XV.  6, 18,  20,  61;  I  Thess.  iv.  13-15.   Between 


d8 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Interim 
Interpolations 


death  and  the  second  ooming  of  Christ  all  souls 
are  in  a  dreamless  sleep  (thus  oblivious  of  the  lapse 
of  time  and  without  moral  change)  from  which  they 
are  simultaneously  awakened  for  the  judgment. 
This  view  was  opposed  in  the  early  Church  (cf. 
Eusebius,  HiH.  eed,  VI.,  zzxvii.).  Calvin  wrote  in 
refutation  of  it  Paychopannyckia  (1534),  directed 
against  the  Anabaptists.  Richard  Whately  pre- 
sented it  with  great  force  and  sympathy  as  an 
alternative  belief,  in  his  work  On  the  Ftdure  State 
(London,  1820).  It  is  an  article  of  faith  among 
the  several  branches  of  Adventists  (q.v.).  (6) 
Pkeservation  of  the  spiritual  element  of  both  the 
saved  and  the  unsaved  during  the  middle  state, 
when  by  a  creative  act  of  Qod  soul  and  body  are 
reunited  before  the  judgment.  This  element  of  the 
personality  exists  in  various  degrees  of  conscious- 
ness, knowledge,  and  enjoyment,  some  sleeping, 
some  learning,  some  as  demons  on  earth,  some 
imprisoned  in  the  abyss  or  suffering  in  Hades  for 
life's  sins,  some  being  evangelised.  In  the  interval 
between  death  and  the  resurrection  the  Gospel  may 
be  accepted  or  finally  refused  by  those  who  have 
not  known  it  here  below  (Edward  White,  Ltfe  in 
Chriet,  chap,  zxi.,  London,  1878).  (7)  A  relatively 
bodiless  condition  in  which  the  pious  dead  are  in  a 
state  of  privation,  to  be  described  as  inwardness  and 
spirituality  and  progressive  development^  of  deepest 
retirement,  and  of  withdrawal  into  self,  and  at  the 
same  time  of  oonmiunion  with  Christ  (cf.  H.  L. 
Martensen,  Chrietian  Dogmatics,  §  276,  Edinbuigh, 
1866;  J.  J.  van  Oostersee,  Christian  DogmaHes, 
I  Gdii.,  London,  1870;  I.  A.  Domer,  System  t^ 
Christian  Doctrine,  iv.  212,  Edinbuigh,  1880-82). 
(8)  As  to  the  unbelieving  dc^,  who  have  not  de- 
cisively rejected  the  Ckispel,  the  mtermediate  state 
opens  the  door  of  repentance  and  spiritual  life 
(see  Eschatologt;   Pbobation,  Futube). 

C.  A.  Bbckwith. 
Bibuoosapht:  The  literatura  of  the  aubjeot  is  weU  covered 
under  EecBATOLooT;  HADie;  and  PbobatioNp  Futubb 
(qq.T.).  Oonralt  further:  V.  U.  Maywhalen,  The  Inter- 
nudiaU  State,  London.  1866;  H.  M.  Luckook.  The  Inter- 
mmUaieStaU  between  Death  and  Judgment,  ih.,  1890;  T.  H. 
StoekweU,  editor,  Our  Dead:  Where  are  Theyf  A  Sym- 
Voeiwn,  ib..  1890;  A.  Williamson,  The  Intermediate  StaU, 
ib..  1891;  O.  S.  Barrett,  The  Intermediate  State;  the  Laat 
Thinge,  ib.,  1896;  C.  H.  H.  Wri«ht,  IniermediaU  State  and 
Frayere  far  the  Dead,  ib.  1900;  O.  T.  Feehner,  lAiOe  Book 
of  lAfe  after  Death,  Boston.  1904;  8.  C.  Qayford,  Life  after 
Deatk,  ebape.  iL-IU^  MUwaukee,  1909. 

IRTBRPOLATIOIIS  IN  THB  HEW  TESTA- 
MENT: In  its  rigorous  sense,  an  interpolation  is 
an  insertion  in  a  text  or  document  with  the  object 
of  obtaining  backing  or  authority  for  the  interpo- 
lator's opinion  or  project.  This  is  the  ordinary 
dictionary  sense  of  the  group  of  words,  "inters 

polation,  interpolate,  interpolator." 
Definition*  This  is  iJso  the  meaning  assigned  to  the 

word  by  legal  usage,  according  to  which 
an  inteii)olation  is  an  insertion  within  a  wiU  or  deed, 
or  a  molding  of  its  text  to  an  end  distinct  from  the 
original  end  and  aim  of  the  text  itself.  The  same 
sense  is  assigned  to  the  word  by  diplomacy,  where 
an  interpolation  is  a  tampering  with  the  text  of  a 
public  document  by  one  party  to  it,  in  order  to  gain 
an  advantage  over  the  other  party.  Thus  "  inter- 
polation '*  seems  to  imply,  fint,  a  fixed  text  and, 


secondly,  a  conscious  or  deliberate  purpose  to  alter 
or  twist  the  meaning  and  intention  of  a  text,  the 
interpolator's  aim  being  to  sh'p  his  meaning  under 
cover  of  a  mind  having  greater  authority  or  higher 
standing  than  his  own,  so  securing  for  his  own 
opinion  or  judgment  a  market-value  above  its  in- 
trinsic worth.  For  example,  a  CHiristian  student 
of  the  second  century  inserted  in  the  text  of  Jose- 
phus  (Ant.  XVIII.,  iii.  3)  the  well-known  passage 
regarding  Jesus.  His  object  was  to  make  Josephus 
a  witness  to  Christ.  This  is  an  interpolation  in  the 
rigorous  sense. 

It  is  doubtful,  however,  whether  the  word  in  this 
sense  can  be  safely  and  correctly  applied  to  any 
part  of  the  field  of  text-variation  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament.   At  least,  if  used  at  all,  it 
Strict  Sense  must  be  used  with  caution.    The  con- 

Inapplic^  ditions  of  thought  have  materially  al- 
able  to  New  tered  since  the  word  came  into  use. 
Testament.  In  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth 
centuries,  when  for  the  first  time 
Christians  began  to  be  seriously  disturbed  by  text- 
variation  (the  life  and  work  of  Brian  Walton  and 
of  Johann  Albrecht  Bengel  [q.v.]  yield  examples), 
the  standing  view  of  the  New  Testament  has 
regarded  it  as  an  inerrant  book  or  collection  of 
books  written  by  inspired  individuals.  This  con- 
ception seemed  to  involve  a  belief  that  the  text, 
once  for  all  delivered  in  apostolic  autographs, 
should  have  been  closed  against  change.  It  was 
this  conception  which  gave  rise  to  the  furious  con- 
troversies in  England  (nineteenth  century)  over  the 
"  three  witnesses  "  passage  (I  John  v.  7).  Both 
the  conservative  and  the  anticonservative  forces  of 
Christendom  gave  the  idea  of  interpolation  great 
vqgue.  The  currency  of  the  idea  depended  there- 
fore on  a  body  of  related  ideas.  But  those  ideas 
have  been  modified  in  order  to  bring  them  into 
agreement  with  widening  and  deepening  knowledge 
of  the  apostolic  age.  Neither  of  the  two  condi- 
tions presupposed  by  the  rigorous  definition  of  the 
term  interpolation  can  be  placed  within  the  period 
when  the  New-Testament  literature  was  coming 
to  the  light.  The  conception  of  the  inspired  text 
as  an  apostolic  autograph,  finished,  like  a  modem 
book,  at  the  time  of  publication,  has  broken  down 
under  the  pressiue  of  historical  truth.  Regarding 
the  Gospels,  it  is  known  (see  Qospblb)  that  the 
author  of  a  single  Gospel  was  quite  as  much  cor^ 
porate  as  individual.  The  text  remained  plastic 
for  a  considerable  period.  The  "  Gospel  "  was  not 
thought  of  as  a  book,  but  as  a  living  word,  a  spir- 
itual climax,  a  majestic  conviction.  So  long  as 
this  conception  had  sway,  the  gospel-text  lay  open 
to  the  formative  and  molding  forces  of  the  Chris- 
tian consciousness.  It  was  not  till  deep  in  the  sec- 
ond century  that  this  situation  altogether  passed 
away.  When  that  happened,  when  the  Gospel 
came  to  be  thought  of  as  a  book,  the  text  became 
fixed  and  rigid.  The  Church's  theory  of  inspira- 
tion and  the  seal  of  scholars  and  theologians  en- 
dowed the  text  with  powers  of  resistance  sufiicient 
to  withstand  the  ceaseless  tendency  to  moki  it  by 
interpretation. 

So  then  the  possibility  of  text-molding  continued 
deep  into  the  second  century.    The  last  twelve 


Intorpolatlons 
InTeatltnre 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


94 


verses  of  St.  Mark's  Gospel  are  a  case  in  point. 
The  conclusion  of  the  Gospel  somehow  fell  into  con- 
fusion, was  torn  off,  or  lost.  A  rever- 
Bmnples  ent  scholar,  probably  in  the  first  half 
from  the  of  the  second  century,  wrote  in  the 
Oospels.  present  conclusion,  taking  his  mate- 
rials from  Matthew  and  Luke.  The 
doxology  to  the  Lord's  Prayer  in  one  form  of  the 
Matthean  text  (Matt.  v.  13)  is  another  example. 
The  Prayer  was  soon  taken  into  the  corporate  wor- 
ship of  Jewish  Christians.  Designed  by  Jesus  not 
so  much  for  a  specific  prayer  as  to  show  the  frame- 
work and  perspective  of  prayer,  it  needed  the  as- 
cription to  qualify  it  for  lituzgical  uses.  The  Chris- 
tiana who  made  the  addition  had  no  thought  of 
doing  injury  to  Christ's  authority  or  tampering 
with  his  meaning.  They  rather  supposed  that  they 
were  asserting  his  authority  and  publishing  his 
mind.  Consequently,  the  second  of  the  conditions 
stated  above,  a  deliberate  purpose  to  alter  the 
text,  is  wholly  lacking.  Both  conditions  therefore 
being  absent,  doubt  regarding  the  correctness  and 
propriety  of  the  term  in  the  New-Testament  field 
appears  to  be  well  founded,  so  far  as  the  Gospels  are 
concerned.  The  phenomena  of  interpolation,  under 
the  pressure  of  recent  discoveries,  are  converted  in 
large  measure  into  one  element  of  a  much  larger 
and  more  vital  problem,  namely  the  part  played 
by  Christian  interpretation  of  t^  person  of  Christ 
in  bringing  the  Logia,  the  saving  words  of  Jesus, 
into  their  present  text.  One  example  will  serve, 
the  text  of  our  Lord's  teaching  about  divorce  (Matt. 
V.  32,  xix.  9;  Mark  x.  9  sqq.;  Luke  xvi.  18).  A 
strong,  if  not  a  decisive,  body  of  scholarly  opinion, 
renders  it  probable  that  the  permission  of  divorce 
on  the  ground  of  fornication  or  adultery  was  no 
part  of  our  Lord's  teaching.  Mark  and  Luke  are 
silent.  Furthermore,  this  exception  to  his  pro- 
hibition of  divorce  seems  to  run  counter  to  his 
methods  as  an  inspirer  of  constructive  morality. 
Except  in  this  one  instance,  he  deals  with  the  su- 
preme ideals  in  their  perfection  of  spiritual  and 
moral  beauty.  Therefore  it  seems  probable  that 
the  Matthean  text  is  a  molded  form  of  the  origioal 
logion,  and  that  the  change  took  place  as  the  re- 
sult of  debates  between  Jewish  Christians  and  Jews 
over  the  interpretation  of  Deut.  xxiv.  1.  But  no 
scholar  would  think  of  applying  the  word  "  inter- 
polation "  to  the  process. 

The  same  process  goes  on  in  the  New-Testament 

text  outside  the  Gospels.    Hamack  and  others  have 

recently  affirmed  that  "things  strangled"  (Acts 

XV.  29)  was  never  a  part  of  the  original  Lucan  text, 

but  was  read  in  by  later  Christians. 

Further     This  is  problematical.    But  there  is 

Examples,  little  that  is  problematical  regarding 

the  present  text  of  Eph.  iii.  5.    St. 

Paul  wrote  the  letter  to  the  Ephesians  (see  Paul). 

He  did  not  write  and  could  not  have  written  "  as 

it  was  revealed  to  his  holy  apostles."    These  words 

show  the  handiwork  of  the  Paulinist  editor  of  the 

Pauline  letters.    It  is,  however,  quite  a  different 

affair  to  say  that  the  editor  was  an  interpolator. 

Indeed,  the  use  of  the  term  seems  to  involve  a  view 

of  the  origin  and  growth  of  the  New-Testament 

Scriptures  which  is  decisively  contradicted  by  a 


large  and  growing  body  of  facts.  It  would  be,  for 
example,  a  serious  misnomer  to  call  John  viii.  53- 
ix.  11  (the  woman  taken  in  adultery)  an  interpola^ 
tion.  That  it  is  no  part  of  the  Jolaumiue  text  is 
now  agreed  on  all  hands.  Yet  there  are  strong 
grounds  for  believing  the  story  to  be  a  piece  of  gen- 
uine and  trustwort^  tradition.  -  Some  day,  when 
the  Churches  have  recovered  their  self-possession, 
this  fragment  may  find  itself  printed  along  with 
other  extra-canonical  sa3rings  of  Jesus  as  an  appen- 
dix to  the  New  Testament.  Again,  John  v.  3-4 
(the  account  of  the  angel  stirring  the  waters)  can 
not  justly  be  called  an  interpolation.  No  con- 
scious, detiberate  intention  to  tamper  with  the  text 
is  here  in  question.  The  variant  is  found  within  a 
class  of  phenomena  which  belong  to'  ^be  history  of 
the  conflict  between  the  text  and  the  maigin.  How 
natural,  how  irresistible  even  the  conflict  is,  may 
be  illustrated  by  the  history  of  the  greatMi  hymna 
and  their  use  in  the  churches  (ef .  Julian,  Hymnal" 
offy,  S.V.  "  Rodt  of  Ages  "  or  "  Nearer^  my  God,  to 
Thee  ").  When  once  a  noble  hymn  has  been  taken 
to  the  heart  of  the  living  Chiirch  it  begins  to  pay 
taxes  for  its  right  to  rule.  Similariy,  sane  histor- 
ical views  of  the  sacred  text  help  to  realise  the  im- 
mense pressure  brought  to  bear  on  a  book  like  the 
Bible  incessantly  employed  and  appealed  to  by 
canonist  and  theologian,  by  the  preacher  and  the 
pastor  and  the  saint,  and  to  prevent  wonder  at  the 
irrepressible  conflict,  under  certain  conditions,  be- 
tween the  text  and  the  maigin.  The  case  which 
seems  to  come  nearest  to  the  requirements  of  rig- 
orous definition  is  I  John  vii.  6-8a  (the  ''three 
heavenly  witnesses  ").  The  authority  against  it  is 
overwhelming,  and  its  entrance  into  the  Greek 
text  is  illuminating.  ^EraBmus  omitted  it  in  the 
first  edition  of  his  Greek  Testament  (1516).  A 
great  outcry  was  raised,  and  Erasmus  offered  to 
insert  the  reading  if  a  single  Greek  manuscript  con- 
taining it  could  be  found.  One  was  foimd,  later 
study  of  which  made  probable  that  its  text  for 
I  John  had  been  achieved  by  a  translation,  at  a 
very  late  period,  out  of  Latin  into  Greek.  But 
Erasmus  kept  his  word,  and  the  reading  appeared 
in  his  second  edition.  It  became  a  part  of  the 
commercial  text  of  the  New  Testament  and  passed 
into  the  so-called  textu8  receptus  of  1633. 

Hekry  S.  Nash. 
Bxbuoorapht:  The  subject  u  seneraUy  dealt  with  in  works 
on  the  textual  oriticimn  of  the  N.  T.,  and  mueh  of  the 
literature  named  under  Biblb  Txxt  (ii.  11^113  of  this 
work)  oontains  matter  upon  it,  particularly  the  works  of 
Copinger  and  Kenyon  named  there;  works  on  the  general 
introduction  to  the  N.  T.  also  discuss  the  eobjeot  (see 
Biblical  IirrBODUcrioN).  Special  mention  may  be 
made  of  B.  F.  Westcott  and  F.  J.  A.  Hort,  N.  T,  in  ike 
Orioinal  Gnek,  I  671  sqq..  ii.  326  sqq.,  New  York.  1882; 
P.  Schaff,  Companion  to  the  Ondt  Ttokment  and  the  Bno- 
liah  V0r»i4m»,  pp.  188  sqq.,  430  sqq.,  ib.  1888;  F.  H.  A. 
SeriTener,  Plain  /nfrstfuceion  to  ffce  CriHeiam  of  Ou  New 
rsstemsnt.  I  7-9,  ii  240,  321  sqq.,  London,  1804;  C.  A. 
Bricgs,  Ooneral  Introduction  to  (Ko  Study  ef  Holy  Scrip- 
tun,  chap.  X,  New  lYork.  1800;  G.  R.  Orsgoty,  CoMon, 
and  Text  tf  the  N.  7*..  pp.  608  sqq.,  lb.  1007. 

BfTERSTITIA:  The  intervals  supposed  to  elapse, 
according  to  Roman  Catholic  canon  law,  between 
the  times  of  a  man's  receiving  the  different  ordere. 
The  principle  that  there  should  be  such  intervals 
is  expressly  laid  down  in  the  thirteenth  canon  of 


96 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Interpolation* 
Investitiire 


the  Council  of  &rdica  (343).  It  was  observed  in 
regard  to  the  minor  orders  as  long  as  they  had  dis- 
tinct functions,  but  this  ceased  when  they  became 
mem  formal  steps  to  the  higher.  The  Council  of 
Trent  endeavored  to  restore  their  fonner  actual 
significance,,  and  prescribed  the  observance  of  the 
intentUia  for  them,  unless  the  bishop  should  judge 
it  better  to  proceed  otherwise.  At  the  present  day 
it  is  customary  in  many  places  to  confer  the  tonsure 
and  all  the  minor  orders  on  the  same  day.  It  was 
also  decreed  at  Trent  that  a  year  should  elapse 
between  the  minor  and  major  orders,  and  between 
each  of  the  latter,  unless  necessity  or  the  general 
good  required  the  time  to  be  shortened,  aiul  that 
two  major  orders  should  never  be  conferred  on  the 
same  day.  In  reference  to  the  bishop's  dispensing 
power,  mofeover,  the  Congregation  of  the  Council 
has  positively  forbidden  the  conferring  of  the  minor 
orders  and  the  subdiaoonate  at  the  same  time. 

(F.  W.  H.  WASSERBCHLBBENt.) 
Bibuookafht:  L.  ThomaMin,  Vatoa  et  ruva  eeeUai4B  dis- 
HpHna,  L.  iL  85-36;  P.  Hiiuehiufl.  Dm  Kirchenreeht 
.  .  .  i»  DmOaekland,  I  112-113,  Berfin,  1809;  O.  PhiUps. 
Kirehtnrechl,  i  648  sqq.,  ReKOiubuis.  1881;  A.  L.  Richter. 
ed.  W.  Kahl,  Lehrhudi  dM  .  .  .  KirchenreehU,  p.  364. 
Lsipaio.  1886;  E.  Friedbeif,  Ldurhueh  det  KirdienrechU, 
p.  ia9.  ib.  1805. 

mTIHCXlOn.    See  Easterk  Chttbch,  III.,  §  5. 

niTRODUCTIOll  TO  THE  BIBLE.  See  Biblical 
Introduction. 

niTROIT:  The  name  given  in  the  Latin  Church 
to  the  anthem  at  the  beginning  of  the  commimion 
service.  It  usually  consists  of  an  antiphon,  a  verse 
(or  more)  from  a  psalm  or  other  portion  of  Scripture, 
and  the  Gloria  Patri  (see  LrniRGics,  III.,  §  2). 
It  differs  considerably  in  the  different  rites  in  name, 
contents,  and  the  time  of  its  performance.  Numer- 
ous forms  exist,  the  Pian  Missal  alone  containing 
159.  The  origin  is  debated,  some  ascribing  it  to 
Pope  Celestine  (423  a.d.;  cf.  Liber  pontific^,  ed. 
Moramsen  in  MOH,  Gest.  porU.  Rom,,  i.  04,  1808), 
and  others  to  Gregory  the  Great. 

Bzbuographt:  L.  Duchesne,  Chriatian  Worahip,  pp.  116- 
117,  163,  igo,  489,  London,  1004;   DCA,  I  866-867. 

IHVENTION  OJP  THE  CROSS.  See  Cross,  In- 
vention (oB  Finding)  of  the. 

HfVESTirURE:    In  ecclesiastical  language,  the 
ceremony  of  inducting  an  abbot  or  bishop  into  his 
office.    The  subject  ia  interesting  mainly  in  connec- 
tion with  a  long  controversy  between 
The        the  papacy  and  secular  rulers  over  the 
Barlier     right  of  investiture,  which  constitutes 
Pxactise.    an  important  chapter  of  medieval  his- 
tory.    Even   before  the   fall   of  the 
Roman  Empire  there  are  evidences  of  imperial  in- 
fluence upon  the  nomination  of  bishops,  going  in 
some  cases  as  far  as  direct  ncHnination.     In  the 
Fnnkish  kingdoms  both  the  Merovingian  and  Caro- 
lingian  rulers  repeatedly  named  the  bishops  in  their 
territories;  and  even  when  the  election  was  made 
by  the  deigy  and  people,  they  either  designated 
the  acceptable  candidate  beforehand,  or  daimed 
the  right  to  confirm  the  election.    The  influence  of 
the  secular  power  was  still  more  distinctly  felt  in 
the  case  of  abbeys  erected  after  the  Roman  period; 


the  idea  of  the  jurisdiction  of  »  landowner,  raised 
to  a  higher  power  in  the  case  of  abbeys  on  royal 
land,  brought  it  to  pass  that  royal  nomination  of 
the  abbots  was  the  rule,  election  by  the  chapter  the 
exception.  To  these  powers  the  Othos  and  the 
Franconian  dynasty  held  fast.  The  acquisition  by 
bishops  and  abbots  of  laige  territories  and  extensive 
political  rights,  which  reached  its  height  in  the 
tenth  and  eleventh  centuries,  created  a  spiritual 
aristocracy  not  less  important  than  the  secular, 
which  it  was  necessary  for  the  kings  to  keep  in  hand 
by  retaining  the  decisive  voice  in  the  filling  of  the 
offices — a  claim  which  was  not  then  felt  to  involve 
any  invasion  of  the  essential  rights  of  the  Church. 
In  older  times  the  nomination  and  confinnation  had 
been  made  by  a  royal  edict;  but  under  the  later 
Carolingians,  whether  an  election  had  taken  place 
or  not,  the  actual  installation  was  made  by  a  solemn 
and  formal  ceremony,  includiog  the  giving  of  the 
sovereign's  hand  and  the  taking  of  an  oath  by  the 
candidate.  After  Otho  I.  the  most  usual  fonn  was 
the  giving  to  the  new  bishc^  or  abbot  of  his  pre- 
decessor's pastoral  staff,  to  which  Henry  III.  added 
the  delivery  of  the  episcopal  ring.  The  whole 
ceremony  resembled  the  investiture  of  a  temporal 
vassal;  and  since  it  conveyed  not  only  spiritual, 
but  temporal,  jurisdiction,  it  b^^  in  the  eleventh 
century  to  be  designated  by  the  term  investUura. 
The  first  determined  opposition,  to  the  system 
came  from  the  ecclesiastical  reformers  of  the  elev- 
enth century.  It  was  directed  prima- 
The  rify  against  simoniacal  bargains,  but 
Contest  in  soon  went  further.  Cardinal  Humbert, 
Germany,  in  his  treatise  Advertua  nmaniacoa 
(1057-58),  came  out  decisively  against 
lay  investiture.  In  1059  and  1063  two  Roman 
synods  condonned  the  bestowal  of  the  minor 
ecclesiastical  offices  by  laymen;  in  1060  synods  at 
Vieime  and  Tours  took  the  same  position  in  regard 
to  bishoprics  and  abbeys;  and  in  1068  the  filling 
of  the  see  of  Milan  gave  occasion  for  these  principles 
to  be  put  into  practise.  But  the  first  actual  clash 
came  when  Gregory  VII.,  in  the  Lent  synod  of 
1075,  directly  denied  the  right  of  the  German  king 
to  grant  investiture,  and  enforced  his  denial  so 
vigorously  that  Henry  IV.  was  obliged  to  take  up 
the  challenge  by  the  attempt  to  depose  Qi^gory 
at  the  Synod  of  Worms  in  1076,  thus  opening  a 
struggle  which  lasted  for  forty-six  years.  Gregory 
and  his  successors  maintained  their  position.  The 
Roman  synod  of  1080  laid  down  positive  regula- 
tions, based  upon  primitive  Christian  practise,  for 
the  election  of  bishops  by  the  clergy  and  people, 
giving  the  pope  a  deciding  voice  as  to  the  validity 
of  the  election.  Victor  III.,  Urban  II.,  and  Paschal 
II.  reiterated  the  same  views,  but  had  no  better 
success  than  Gr^ory  in  enforciog  them  against 
Henry  IV.  and  V.  The  ultimate  solution  of  the 
difficulty  was  prepared  rather  by  the  literary  dis- 
cussions, in  which  a  gradual  perception  appeared 
of  the  distinction  between  the  spiritual  office  and 
the  secular  rights.  This  opened  the  way  to  attempts 
at  accommodation.  After  some  failures,  efforts  led 
in  1122  to  the  Concordat  of  Worms  between  Henry 
V.  and  Calixtus  II.,  which  ended  the  struggle  and 
formed  the  basis  of  the  later  practise  until  the 


ZnvMtit 
Iraland 


.turtt 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZCX5 


26 


downiaU  of  the  German  empire  (for  proviaioos  see 

CONCOBDATB   AND   DBUMmNG   BULLS,    !.)•      Epi»- 

eopal  and  abbatial  eleotiona  were  to  be  conducted 
in  Italy  and  Burgundy  without  any  royal  interfer- 
ence, in  Germany  in  the  presence  of  the  king,  and 
with  provision  for  his  advisory  assistance  in  con- 
tested elections.  Tlie  agreement  was  not  an  un- 
qualified victory  for  either  side,  but  the  papacy  in 
the  end  profited  most  by  it.  After  the  contested 
imperial  election  of  1198  (see  Innocent  III.),  the 
influence  of  the  emperor  on  elections  rapidly  de- 
clined, while  that  of  the  popes,  especially  under 
the  sldlfid  management  of  Innocent  III.,  increased 
in  the  same  proportion. 

In  France  during  the  eleventh  century  mUch  the 
same  conditions  existed  as  in  Germany;  but  when 
the  conflict  arose  it  was  not  made  so 
France,  much  a  question  of  principle  or  con- 
ducted with  so  much  bitterness.  The 
French  bishops  had  not  so  much  secular  power, 
nor  did  they  to  the  same  extent  constitute  a  spiritual 
aristocracy.  Again,  the  king  claimed  to  invest 
only  a  part  of  the  bishops  and  abbots,  while  the 
majority  were  nominated  and  installed  by  the  great 
vassals.  Speaking  generally,  the  right  of  nomina- 
tion was  abolished  by  the  beginning  of  the  twelfth 
century,  and  free  election  became  the  rule;  but 
until  the  end  of  the  century,  and  even  longer,  the 
kings  and  some  of  the  local  magnates  still  main- 
tained the  right  of  permittiog  and  of  confirming 
the  election,  and  the  kings  and  some  great  nobles 
still  conferred  secular  ri^ts  and  claimed  the  rev- 
enues of  these  temporalities  during  a  vacancy. 

The  reforming  iMuty  had  less  success  in  England. 
Under  the  Angk>Saxon  and  Danish  kings  the  ap- 
pointment to  bishoprics  and  the  great 
Knglsnd.  abbeys  was  in  the  king's  hands;  the 
Normans  introduced  investiture  and 
the  oath  of  allegiance.  The  prohibition  of  lay  in- 
vestiture by  Gregory  VII.  was  inoperative  here. 
It  was  not  until  Anselm,  in  1101,  came  back  to 
England  a  confirmed  Gregorian  and  refused  the 
oath  of  allegiance  that  there  was  any  real  investiture 
controversy  there.  It  ended  in  1107  by  the  king's 
renoundng  the  formality  of  investiture  with  ring 
and  staff,  but  retaining  the  oath  of  allegiance  and 
the  other  rights  of  his  predecessors.  In  spite  of 
Stephen's  promise  that  bishops  and  abbots  should 
be  canonically  elected,  the  assent  of  the  English 
kings  continued  the  decisive  factor.  The  English 
deigy  did  not  win  the  right  of  absolutely  free  elec- 
tion even  at  a  later  period,  while  Innocent  III.  (q.v.) 
forced  King  John  to  allow  the  papacy  to  share  the 
royal  influence.  (Sisofribd  Rietbchel.) 

Bibuoorapht:  For  Germany  consult:  F.  A.  Staiid«nmaier, 
OMchidiU  der  BUOu/BvahUn,  Mains.  1830;  H.  GerdM. 
Die  BUdufmoahlen  in  D€uiadUand,  GCttingen,  1878;  P. 
Hinschius,  KirdtgnredU,  ii  530  sqq.,  Berlin.  1878;  F. 
FraniiflB.  Der  dmUtehe  EpiMcopat  .  .  .  lOSBSe,  Recenii- 
burg.  1879-«);  R.  Reeee.  Die  ataaiarwMidu  StOMng  <kr 
Biaeh^e  Burounde  und  ItaUena  unier  Friedrieh  /..  GAtUnffen, 
1885;  C.  Mirbt.  DU  PtMinetUc  im  ZeilaUer  Oregon  Vli., 
pp.  463  sqq..  Leipnc.  1894;  E.  Friedberg.  KirckenredU^ 
pp.  312  sqq..  ib.  1805;  C.  Willing,  Zur  OeeehiAie  dee 
InoeaHiitreireite,  Liegnita.  1896;  A.  Hauek.  KD.  vol.  iii. 
For  Franoe:  A.  OauchSe.  La  QuereUe  dee  inveetUuree  dane 
lee  diodeee  de  IA/6oe  ed  de  Cambrai,  LouTain,  1890-91; 
P.  Imbart  de  la  Tour,  Lee  ^tecHtme  ifrieeopaUe  .  .  .  ix.- 
xii.  eOdee,  Paris.  1891;   A.  Luchaire.  UieL  dee  ineHtuUone 


monarehiquee  de  la  France  .  .  .  {fi87-1180\  iL  68  sqq.. 
ib.  1891;  P.  Viollet.  HieL  dee  inetitutione  poUHqum  ed 
adminiatraiiem  de  la  France^  vL  817  sqq..  Paris.  1896. 
For  England:  E.  A.  Freeman,  Reign  of  WittHam  R^ue, 
London,  1882;  M.  Bchmits.  Dor  tngUMtke  inveeHtunirmt, 
Innsbruck,  1884;  W.  Hunt.  The  BngUek  ChurA  .  .  . 
iS97-106e\  London,  1899;  W.  R.  W.  Stephens.  The 
Bnglieh  Church  .  .  .  (lOM-lfrf ).  pp.  119-131  et  pamim, 
lb.  1901;  J.  Drehmann.  Papet  Leo.  IX.  und  die  Bimome. 
BoUrag  zur  U^Ureuekung  der  Vorgeeehiehie  dee  twoeeHtur- 
eireiie,  Leipsie,  1908.  Consult  also  W.  E.  Addis,  CaOkoUe 
DicUonary,  pp.  497-498.  London,  1903;  XL.  vi.  844-^863; 
and  the  literature  imder  the  articles  on  the  popes  named 
in  the  text  and  under  AjfSBUi. 

lONA:  An  island  of  the  Inner  Hebrides,  off  the 
west  coast  of  Scotland,  separated  from  the  Ross  of 
Mull  by  lona  Sound.  It  forms  a  part  of  Ai^Ushire, 
and  lies  from  35  to  40  miles  to  the  westward  of 
Oban,  from  which  it  is  reached  by  steamer.  The 
name  should  be  loua,  the  form  with  n  having  arisen 
from  a  mistaken  reading  of  u.  In  Irish  it  occurs  as 
I-CotumeOle,  "  the  Island  of  Columba."  The  pop- 
ular name  at  present  is  Ee^uduun^cHle.  The  island 
is  about  three  and  a  half  miles  long  from  northeast 
to  southwest,  and  from  a  mOe  to  a  mUe  and  &  half 
in  breadth.  It  is  rocky  and  sandy,  with  boggy 
hollows  between  the  hHls,  the  highest  of  which 
rises  to  390  feet.  Its  area  is  estimated  at  from 
1,600  to  2,000  acres,  less  than  half  of  it  arable,  and 
not  more  than  a  third  actually  under  cultivaticm. 
The  pastures  on  the  sides  of  the  knolls  and  ravines 
support  a  few  hundred  sheep  and  a  smaller  number 
of  cattle.  The  population  in  1901  was  213,  engaged 
in  agriculture  and  fishing. 

lona  owes  its  fame  to  its  association  with  Columba 
and  the  monastery  founded  there  by  him  in  563. 
The  Irish  annals  state  that  the  island  was  given  to 
him  by  his  kinsman,  Gonall,  king  of  the  Dalriad 
Scots.  Bede,  however,  says  he  received  it  from  the 
Picts  as  a  result  of  his  successful  missionary  labor 
among  them.  Bede's  statement  is  the  more  prob- 
able, but  possibly  both  accounts  are  true,  as  lona 
was  debatable  ground  between  the  Scots  and  the 
Picts.  For  Columba's  work  there  and  the  eariier 
history  of  the  monastery,  see  the  articles  CoLUifBA; 
Celtic  Church  in  Britain  and  Irbland;  Adam- 
nan.  The  island  was  repeatedly  ravaged  by  the 
Danes  during  the  ninth  and  tenth  centuries;  on 
one  of  these  occasions  (806)  sixty-eight  monkB 
suffered  martyrdom.  The  ruined  buikUngs  were 
restored  again  and  again  with  remarkable  perti- 
nacity. Between  814  and  831  the  monastery  was 
rebuilt  with  stone  and  a  shrine  was  erected  to  St. 
Columba.  In  878  the  shrine  and  relics  were  taken 
to  Ireland.  Queen  Maigaret  rebuilt  the  monastery 
between  1059  and  1093.  A  Benedictine  abbey  and 
nunnery  were  established  in  the  island  in  1203.  The 
remains  still  existing  date  mostly  from  the  twelfth 
and  thirteenth  centuries,  although  the  chapel  of 
St.  Oran  {Odhrain)  may  be  of  the  time  of  Queen 
Maigaret.  It  is  of  red  granite,  and  has  as  its  west- 
em  doorway  a  Norman  arch  with  beak-headed  orna- 
ment, and  stands  in  the  ReUig  Odhrain,  the  ancient 
burial-place  of  the  monastery,  said  also  to  have 
been  the  burial-place  of  the  Scottish  and  Pictish 
kings  till  the  time  of  Malcohn  HI.  (d.  1093),  as  well 
as  of  certain  English,  Irish,  and  Norwegian  kings. 
North  of  this  cemetery  are  the  remains  of  the 
thirteenth-century  Benedictine  abbey.    In  oonnec- 


a? 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Znveatitiire 
Iraland 


tion  with  the  doisten  is  a  Nonnan  arcade  of  some- 
what older  date.  The  Church  of  St.  Mary,  com- 
monly called  the  Cathedral,  dates  probably  from  the 
thirteenth  century.  It  is  built  of  red  granite,  in 
cruciform  shape,  with  nave,  transept,  and  choir, 
and  has  a  central  tower  seventy-five  feet  in  height. 

Bibuookapht:  Beaides  the  autboritiM  mentioiied  under 
GoLUMBA,  CnLDUES,  eflpeeuJly  Reeres  (1867),  pp.  334- 
369.  413-433.  consult:  L.  Maclean.  A  HutoriaU  Account 
of  lona,  Edinbursh.  1833;  C.  A.  and  J.  C.  BuekleM.  TKb 
CaAeinl  or  Abboy  Ckurek  of  lona,  London.  1866  (drawinjra 
with  deecriptive  letteipieM  and  an  acoount  of  the  early 
Oeltio  Church  and  the  nuMion  of  St.  Columba  by  A.  Ewing. 
Biahop  of  lona  and  the  lalee);  the  Duke  of  Argyll,  lona, 
London,  1870;  J.  Drummond,  Scutphiroi  MonumenU  in 
lona  and  iko  WoH  HiohiantU,  Edinburgh.  1881;  J.  Healy. 
inmda  Sameioruw^  pp.  291-368.  Dublin.  1800;  W.  Bright. 
Ckaptan  of  Rarly  Bngliak  Ckurdk  Hittory,  paMfan,  Oxford. 
1897;  A.  Macmillan,  iona,  %t»  Hiatory  and  AnHquUiM, 
London,  1898. 

IRBLAHD. 
I.  The  Boman  Oatholie  Church, 
n.  The  Church  of  Ireland. 
IIL  Other  Proteetant  Bodieei 
IV.  History. 

Ireland,  a  large  island  west  of  Great  Britain,  and 
since  1801  an  integral  part  of  the  United  Kingdom, 
has  an  area  of  31,790  square  miles,  and  a  population 
(1901)  of  4,458,775.  It  is  divided  into  four  prov- 
inces: Ulster  in  the  north,  Leinster  in  the  east, 
Munster  in  the  south,  and  Connaught  in  the  west. 
The  oensus  report  of  1901  includes  statistics  of  309 
religious  professions,  the  most  important  of  which 
are  Roman  Catholics,  3,308,661;  Church  of  Ireland, 
581,089;  Presbyterians,  443,276;  Methodists,  62,- 
006;  Congregationalists  or  Independents,  10,142; 
Unitarians,  8,094;  Baptists,  7,062;  Reformed  Pres- 
byterians,  6,532;  Jews,  3,898;  *'  Brethren,"  3,742; 
United  Free  Church  of  Scotland,  3,147;  Friends, 
2,731;  and  "  Christians,"  2,631. 

L  The  Roman  Catholic  Church:  The  organiiation 
of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  in  Ireland  is  as 
foUows:  archbishopric  of  Annagh  (corresponding 
to  Ulster;  founded  455),  with  the  suffragan  bishop- 
ries of  Ardagh  (before  458;  united  to  donmacnoise 
1729,  which  was  founded  before  549),  dogher  (506), 
Deny  (1158),  Down  (499;  united  to  Connor  1442, 
which  was  founded  1174),  Dromore  (c.  510),  Kil- 
more  (1136),  Meath  (520),  and  Raphoe  (885);  arch- 
bishopric of  Dublin  (corresponding  to  Leinster; 
before  618;  raised  to  archbiriiopric  1152;  united  to 
Glendalough  1215),  with  the  suffragan  bishoprics  of 
Ferns  (before  632),  Kildare  (before  519;  later  united 
to  Leighlin,  which  was  founded  626),  and  Ossory 
(538);  archbishopric  of  (^ashel  (corresponding  to 
Munster,  before  458;  raised  to  archbishopric  1152; 
united  to  Emly  1562,  which  was  founded  before 
527),  with  the  suffragan  bishoprics  of  Cloyne  (before 
604;  united  to  Roes  1430,  but  separated  from  it 
1849),  Cork  (606),  Kerry  and  Aghadoe  (before 
1075),  Killaloe  (c.  640),  Limerick  (1106);  Ross 
(before  1172),  Waterford  (1096;  united  to  Lismore 
1363,  which  was  founded  633) ;  and  archbishopric  of 
Tuam  (corresponding  to  Connaught,  540;  raised  to 
archbishopric  1152;  united  to  Enachdune  1484, 
which  was  founded  in  the  seventh  century;  united 
to  Majo  1578,  which  was  founded  665),  with  the 
suffragan  bishoprics  of  Achonry  (before  1152),  Clon- 
fert  (558).  Elphin  (c.  450),  Galway  (1831;    Uter 


united  to  Kilmaoduagh  and  Kilfenora,  which  were 
founded  before  620),  and  Killala  (sixth  century). 
The  above  dates  are  taken  from  P.  B.  Gams, 
iSsrtes  Epiacoporum  Ecdesiae  Catholtcae  (Regens- 
burg,  1872),  and  in  many  cases  are  too  early. 
Authorities  differ  considerably. 

The  Roman  Catholics  maintain  2,420  churches 
with  3,543  priests,  97  monasteries  and  270  nun- 
neries. The  elementary  schools  are  for  the  most 
part  entrusted  to  the  Christian  Brethren;  each 
diocese  has  a  seminary  for  boys;  there  are  besides 
colleges  at  Thurles,  Waterford,  Kilkenny,  and  Car- 
low.  At  Maynooth  is  situated  the  College  of  St. 
Patrick,  and  in  Dublin,  University  College.  The 
Catholic  University  of  Ireland  consists  at  present 
of  colleges  at  Dublhi,  Maynooth,  Blackrock,  Carlow, 
and  Clonliffe. 

n.  The  Church  of  Ireland:  This  body,  before  1871 
the  established  church  in  Ireland,  has  two  arch- 
bishoprics, Armagh,  corresponding  in  a  rough  way 
to  Ulster  and  Connaught,  and  DubHn,  correspond- 
ing to  Leinster  and  Munster.  There  are  thirteen 
bishoprics,  including  the  archbishoprics.  At  the 
census  of  1901  there  were  1,617  deigy.  The  head 
university  for  the  Church  of  Ireland  is  Trinity  Col- 
lege, Dublin  (founded  1591);  there  is  also  Queen's 
University  (founded  1850),  with  three  colleges  at 
Belfast,  Cork,  and  Galway,  which  are  each  under 
the  government  of  a  dean.  These  colleges  also  have 
foundations  for  the  Presbyterians  and  the  Wesleyan 
Methodists.  The  property  of  the  church  is  admin- 
istered by  the  representative  body,  consisting  of 
the  archbishops  and  bishops,  thirteen  clerical  and 
twenty-six  lay  representatives,  also  thirteen  co- 
optated  members,  who  can  be  either  deigy  or  lay- 
men. In  their  care  are  all  the  churches,  together 
with  the  churchyards,  and  also  the  schoolhouses. 
They  also  take  charge  of  the  payment  of  all  the 
officials  and  servants  of  the  church.  The  govern- 
ment of  the  church  is  entrusted  to  the  general 
synod,  which  is  composed  of  three  classes,  the 
bishops,  the  deigy,  and  the  laity,  which  form  two 
houses,  the  house  of  bishops,  thirteen  in  number, 
and  the  house  of  representatives,  with  208  clerical 
and  416  lay  members.  The  representatives  are 
chosen  every  three  years.  The  synod  meets  yearly 
in  Dublin,  but  extraordinary  meetings  may  be 
sunmioned.  Each  diocese  has  also  its  own  synod, 
which  meets  at  least  once  a  year.  These  synods 
are  also  chosen  every  three  years.  The  church  is 
divided  into  parishes,  every  church  with  a  clergy- 
man and  registered  vestrymen  counting  as  a  parish. 
Every  diocesan  synod  chooses  two  clergymen  and 
one  layman,  who,  with  the  bishop,  form  a  commit- 
tee of  patronage.  Each  parish  on  its  side  names 
every  three  years  three  parochial  nominators. 
When  a  vacancy  occurs  in  a  pastorate  the  two 
aforesaid  bodies  meet  together  and  form  a  board  of 
nominators,  who  elect  the  new  incumbent.  When 
a  bishopric  becomes  vacant  the  archbishop  of  the 
province  calls  together  the  synod  of  the  diocese, 
who  vote  by  baUot  for  a  successor.  The  bishop  of 
the  diocese  appoints  the  dean,  the  canons,  the 
deacons,  and  the  other  officers  of  the  cathedral. 
The  collegiate  and  cathedral  church  of  St.  Patrick 
I  in  Dublin  was  made  the  national  cathedral  (May, 


Ir«buid 
Irenftsus 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF.HERZ(X3 


1872),  and  stands  in  the  same  relaticm  to  all  the 
dioceses.'  There  are  two  kinds  of  spiritual  courts  of 
justice,  the  diocesan  courts,  and  the  court  of  the 
general  synod.  A  diocesan  court  consists  of  the 
bishop,  the  chancellor,  who  is  appomted  for  life, 
and  two  members  of  the  synod,  one  from  the  clergy 
and  one  from  the  laity.  These  men  choose  for  Eve 
years  three  clerical  and  three  lay  co-members. 
The  court  of  the  general  synod  consists  of  one  of 
the  archbishops,  who  alternate  with  each  other, 
one  bishop,  and  three  lay  judges.  Three  additional 
members  are  chosen  from  the  general  synod.  The 
constitutions  and  canons  of  the  church  are  like  those 
of  the  Church  of  England. 

m.  Other  Protestant  Bodies:  The  Presbyterians 
are  foimd  chiefly  in  Ulster,  about  ninety-six  per 
cent,  of  them  being  in  that  province.  The  laigest 
body,  the  Presbyterian  Church  of  Ireland,  numbers 
36  presbyteries,  647  ministers,  and  569  congrega- 
tions with  106,342  communicants.  In  the  Sunday 
Schools  there  are  8,354  teachers  and  07,647  scholars. 
The  church  administers  two  theological  colleges, 
with  fourteen  professors.  The  Baptist  Union  of 
Ireland  numbered,  in  1908,  2,980  members,  and 
had  39  churches  and  40  chapels.  The  Wesleyan 
Methodist  Church  gave  as  the  number  of  their 
members  in  1907,  28,826;  they  had  133  stations 
in  ten  districts.  See  articles  on  the  separate  de- 
nominations. 

rV.  History:  For  the  eariy  history  of  the  church 
in  Ireland  see  Cisi/ric  Church  in  BarrAiN  anp  Ire- 
land. At  the  time  of  the  Reformation,  during  the 
reign  of  Henry  VIII.,  an  attempt  was  made  to 
correct  some  of  the  abuses  of  the  church  in  Ireland, 
but  the  Reformation  did  not  meet  with  much 
popular  favor,  owing  in  a  lai^  measure  to  fear 
that  only  the  English  language  could  be  used  in 
church.  Through  the  reigns  of  Henry  VIIL,  Ed- 
ward VI.,  and  Elizabeth  various  attempts  were 
made  to  introduce  the  English  liturgy,  and  the 
government  proceeded  with  great  severity  against 
the  Roman  Catholics.  Under  Mary  there  was  a 
reaction  in  favor  of  the  Roman  Catholics.  At  the 
accession  of  James  I.  the  Roman  Catholics,  think- 
ing that  he  favored  them,  tried  to  expel  the  Protes- 
tants from  the  island.  The  king,  however,  sup- 
pressed the  attempts,  confiscating  the  estates  of 
many  Roman  Catholics,  especially  in  Ulster,  and 
settling  Scotch  Presbyterians  in  their  place.  Dur- 
ing the  Civil  War  and  the  Commonwealth,  as  also 
during  the  reign  of  Charles  I.,  there  were  many 
rebellions  and  consequent  suppressions  of  the  Ro- 
man Catholics  in  Ireland.  At  the  Revolution  the 
Roman  Catholics  were  filled  with  hope,  and  many 
Protestants  had  to  flee  the  country.  William 
III.,  however,  finally  completed  the  conquest  of 
Ireland,  and  from  that  epoch  until  recent  times 
the  Roman  Catholics  were  discriminated  against  in 
many  ways.  Gradually,  however,  the  restrictions 
against  them  have  been  removed.  Just  as  the 
Roman  Catholics  were  discriminated  against,  so  the 
Protestant  Church,  as  the  state  church,  was  granted 
many  favors.  These  have  been  done  away  with 
from  time  to  time,  and  at  last,  July  26,  1869,  the 
Irish  Church  Act  was  passed,  taking  effect  Jan.  1, 
1871.    This  act  disestablished  the  church  and  dis- 


solved its  union  with  the  Church  of   England. 
Compensation  was  made  for  all  vested  interests, 
including  even  the  annual  grants  for  the  Roman 
Catholic  college  at   Maynooth  and   the   Regium 
Daman  granted  to  the  Presbyterians  by  James  I. 
Bibuoorafht:  For  the  early  history  flee  CETync  Cbitscb 
nr  fiBTTAnr  and  Ireland  and  the  Uterstiue  giveA  there. 
For  mcent  data  eonault  the  Iritk  Clergy  Liat  (anoual}; 
Tht  Iriah  Catfudie  Directory  (annual );  and  the  Year  Bookt 
of  the  EIngliiih  bodies  which  carry  on  work  in  Ireland. 
Gonmilt  further:  H.  fleddall.  The  Church  ef  Ireland,  Dub- 
lin, 1886;  J.  T.  BaU.  FinotU  and  Ua  ChurAee,  Dublin.  1888; 
idem,   The  Reformed  Church  of  Ireiand,   London,    1890; 
R.  WalsK  Fingcd  and  Ue  Chwrchee,  DubUn,  1888;  T.  Olden. 
The  Chwch  cf  Ireland,  London,  .1892;  M.  J.  F.  McCarthy. 
Aema  in  Ireland,  ib.  1904;   M.  O'Rioidan,  CaihoUdty  and 
Pnyreee  in  Ireland,  DubUn,  1906;    M.  J.  F.  McCarthy. 
FrieeU  and  PeopU  in  Ireland,  Londoii,  1908. 

nUSLAlID,  JOHN:  Church  of  England,  dean 
of  Westminster;  b.  at  Ashburton  (20  m.  n.e.  of 
Plymouth),  England,  Sept.  8,  1761;  d.  at  We8^ 
minster  Sept.  2,  1842.  He  studied  at  the  free 
grammar-school  of  Ashburton,  and  at  Oriel  Col- 
lege, Oxford  (B.A.,  1783;  M.A.,  1810;  B.  D.  and 
D.D.,  1810).  After  serving  a  small  curacy  near 
Ashburton  for  a  short  period,  he  traveled  on  the 
continent  ae  private  tutor;  was  vicar  of  Croydon, 
and  reader  and  chaplain  to  the  earl  of  Liverpool, 
1793-1816;  held  a  prebend  in  Westminster  Ab- 
bey, 1802;  became  subdran  as  well  as  theological 
lecturer,  1806;  and  dean,  1816.  He  was  rector  at 
Islip  in  Oxfordshire,  and  dean  of  the  Order  of  the 
Bath,  1816-35.  Acquiring  considerable  wealth,  he 
used  it  with  great  generosity,  founding  scholarships 
at  Oxford  and  prizes  at  Westminster  School,  and 
furthering  free  education.  He  held  the  crown  at 
the  coronations  of  George  IV.  and  William  IV.  He 
left  sums  for  a  new  church  at  Westminster,  and 
for  a  new  professorship  at  Oxford.  He  was  the 
author  of  Five  Diacouraes,  containing  certain  Argur 
menu  for  and  agaxntt  the  Reception  of  Christianity 
by  the  ancient  Jews  and  Oreeke  (London,  1796);  Pa^ 
ganism  and  Christianity  Compared,  in  a  Course  <4 
Lectures  to  the  King^e  Scholars  at  Westminster,  in 
the  Years  iSOS-OT-OS  (1809);  and  The  Plague  of 
MarseiUes  in  ,  .  .  1790  (1834). 

IREIIAEUS. 

Life  ((  1).  Hu  Theology    and    Potity 

Hie  Prinolnal  Literary  Work,        ((  4). 

"AfaioBt  Heresies  "  ((  2).    His  Position  as  a  Practical 
Other  Writings  ((  3).  Churchman  ((  5). 

Irenaeus,  bishop  of  Lyons,  is  the  most  important 
witness  to  ecclesiastical  tradition  before  Euaebius. 

He  came  originally  from  Asia  Minor, 
X.  Life,     which  was  connected  in   many  ways 

with  the  Church  of  Gaul,  and  died 
after  190.  Little  that  is  certain  is  known  about  him 
until  177,  in  which  year  the  imprisoned  oonfessoFs 
of  Lyons  chose  him  as  the  bearer  of  a  letter  to 
Eleutherus  of  Rome  concerning  the  Montanist  con- 
troversy. If  the  fact  that  the  confessors  call  him 
not  only  their  brother,  but  their  **  companion,"  is 
partly  a  reminisoense  of  Rev.  i.  9,  it  still  seems 
probable  that  he  did  not  wholly  escape  the  persecu- 
tion; and  it  may  have  been  a  design  to  save  his 
valuable  life  that  inspired  the  choice  of  him  to  go 
to  Rome.  He  had  probably  then  been  a  presbyter 
of  the  church  at  Lyons  for  several  years,    sinse 


M 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


immediately  after  his  return  he  was  chosen  bishop, 
to  succeed  Pothihus,  who  had  perished  in  the  per- 
secution. In  this  capacity  he  wrote  his  principal 
work  about  185,  and  sent  a  letter  about  190. to 
Victor  of  Rome,  who  had  broken  oflf  eonmiruiion 
with  the  churches  of  Asia  Minor  over  the  Quarto* 
deciman  controversy,  as  well  as  to  other  bishops. 
There  is  no  further  definite  knowledge  of  his  later 
years.  Jerome  is  the  first  to  mention  him  as  a 
martyr,  and  then  only  incidentally,  and  not  im> 
probably  on  the  basis  of  the  expression  quoted 
above  from  the  letter  of  the  confessors.  Hippolytus, 
Tertuiiiaa,  Euaebius,  and  other  writers  who  would 
have  been  likely  to  mention  the  fact  of  lus  martyr- 
dom, say  nothing  about  it.  There  has  been  a  pro^ 
longed  controversy,  which  is  still  unsettled,  as  to 
the  date  of  his  birth  and  the  length  of  his  life. 
While  Bodwell,  Qrabe,  and  more  recently  Zahn 
have  put  his  birth  near  the  b^;inning  of  the  second 
century,  Maasuet,  Lipdus,  Ziegler,  and  Hamack 
have  attem|rted  to  fix  it  near  the  middle.  It  must 
be  remembeied  that  the  date  of  the  death  of  Poly-^ 
carp  is  now  practically  settled  for  155.  The  prin- 
cipal data  may  be  briefiy  summariaed  as  follows: 
If  Irenaeus  became  bishop  in  177,  he  must  have 
been  at  least  forty,  and  was  therefore  probably  bom 
before  137  rather  than  after.  His  impUcation  (V., 
zzx.  3)  that  the  Apocalypse  was  written  "almost 
in  his  own  lifetime  "  is,  all  tilings  considered,  irre- 
conciiable  with  the  theory  that  he  was  bom  forty 
or  fifty  years  after  the  probable  date  of  its  com- 
position (before  the  death  of  Domitian  in  96). 
Again,  in  his  letter  to  Florinus  (Euaebius,  Hiat, 
ecd.,  v.,  xz.  5),  he  speaks  of  having  seen  him  at 
Smyrna  in  the  emperor's  train  when  he  himself  was 
still  but  a  boy.  Now,  for  various  reaaona,  this 
emperor  must  have  been  Hadrian,  who  visited  Asia 
Minor  in  123  and  129,  in  the  latter  of  which  yean 
the  meeting  must  have  taken  place.  All  that 
Irenaeua  tdla  of  his  recollections  of  Polycaip  at 
this  period  shows  tiiat  he  must  have  been  at  least 
twelve  or  fifteen,  and  thus  was  probably  bom  about 
115.  He  implies  distinctly  that  his  intercourse  with 
and  instruction  by  Polycarp  lasted  for  a  number  of 
yeare,  very  likely  from  about  129  to  150;  and  the 
same  conclusion  follows  from  what  he  tells  of  the 
teaching  received'  in  Asia  Minor  from  certain  dis- 
ciples of  the  apostles.  After  all  necessary  sifting 
has  been  applied  to  the  passages  referring  to  this, 
there  remain  two  (IV.,  xxvii.  1-^2  and  V.,  xxxiii.  3, 
4)  which  can  be  understood  only  as  asserting  that  he 
had  this  oral  instroction  from  more  than  one  of  such 
disdplea,  and  when  he  was  of  an  age  to  take  it  in 
and  be  deeply  impressed  by  it.  Neither  he  nor  any 
tradition  -  mentions  the  reaching  of  an  unusually 
great  age  by  any  member  of  this  group  exc^t 
Polycarp;  if  the  others  died  considerably  earlier, 
say  before  145,  he  must  before  that  date  have  been 
of  an  age  to  profit  by  their  teaching.  Finally,  in 
an  i^^pendix  to  the  Martyrium  Pdycarpi  (found  in 
a  manuscript  at  Moscow),  which  is  almost  certainly 
written  by  the  Pionius  (q.v.)  who  was  the  author  of 
a  Vita  Pdlycarpi  before  400,  the  statement  is  found, 
based  upon  Irenaeus's  own  works,  that  he  was 
teaching  in  Rome  at  the  time  of  the  death  of  Poly- 
carp, and  that  a  voice  like  a  trumpet  told  him, 


at  the  very  hour,  of  the  decease  of  his  master  in 
Smyrna.  Whatever  may  be  thought  of  this  last 
assertion,  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  the  general 
statement;  and'  the  account  which  he  himself 
gives  of  Polycarp^  visit  to  Rome  in  154  evidently 
comes  from  one  who  was  there  himself  at  the  time. 
The  chronological  residts  indicated  above  may  thus 
be  taken  as  &irly  estabtished. 

It  is  impossible  to  assign  all  of  Irenaeus's  multi- 
farious literary  activity  to  the  different  periods  of 
his  life  as  long  as  so  much  of  his  work 
a.  His  is  lost.  His  principal  work  is  the 
Principal  '*  Refutation  and  Subversion  of  knowl- 
Liteimxy  edge  Falsely  so  Called,''  generally  re- 
Work,  f erred  to  as  ''  Against  Heresies.''  It 
^  Agasost  consists  of  five  broke,  and  is  preserved 
Herestea."  in  its  entirety  only  in  a  Latin  version, 
the  date  of  which  requires  further  in- 
vestigation; there  is  sufficient  evidence  that  the 
original  was  still  extant  in  the  aixteenth  and  aeven* 
teenth  centuriea.  There  are,  however,  long  extracta 
in  the  original  Greek  in  Epiphanius,  numerous 
smaller  quotations  in  other  writers,  and  consider- 
able portions  incorporated  without  acknowledg- 
ment in  the  "Refutation"  of  Hippolytus.  The 
occasion  of  the  work  was  given  by  the  official  posi- 
tion of  Irenaeus  at  Lyons.  Some  disciples  of 
Marcus,  who  himself  belonged  to  the  school  of 
Valentinus,  had  come  into  the  Rhdne  country,  and 
the  Church  of  that  region  was  troubled  by  the  wri- 
tings of  Florinus,  the  Roman  presbyter  who  had  em- 
braced the  Valentinian  teachings.  The  immediate 
cause  of  the  work  was  the  request  of  a  friend  and 
colleague  at  a  distance  for  precise  informaticm  about 
these  same  teachings  and  help  in  refuting  them. 
The  work  was  not  originally  intended  to  be  so  large; 
but  it  grew  under  his  hand.  Even  in  its  present 
extent,  it  does  not  fully  carry  out  the  plan  promised; 
and  Grabe's  h3rpothesis  that  the  complete  work  is 
not  extant  is  not  without  foundation,  especially 
since  the  present  conclusion  of  v.  32  is  wanting  in 
some  Latin  manuscripts.  With  great  clearness  of 
thought  and  expression,  Irenaeus  takes  no  trouble 
in  the  main  outline  to  keep  within  the  narrow 
bounds  of  a  preconceived  plan,  but  allows  himself 
to  be  carried  swiftly  forward  by  the  current  of  hia 
thought.  There  is  no  attempt  at  literary  art;  the 
subject  is  eversrthing  to  him.  Although  he  is  pre- 
pared to  find  a  wide  cirde  of  readers,  he  writes  in 
the  first  instance  for  his  brother  in  the  faith.  The 
latter  was  chiefly  concerned  with  the  teachmg  of 
Valentinus,  and  it  is  this  which  accordingly  occupies 
the  leading  place,  both  in  the  exposition  and  the 
refutation.  Others,  however,  are  touched  on  and 
traced  back  to  their  sources,  as  far  aa  Simon  Magus; 
and  the  doctrines  of  Valentinus  cannot  be  contro- 
verted without  at  least  incidental  discussion  of  the 
contemporary  one  of  Marcion.  For  his  facts  he 
depends  not  only  upon  his  personal  intercourse  with 
disciples  of  Valentinus,  but  also  upon  their  writings, 
whidi  he  sometimes  quotes  verbally,  but  more  often 
summarizes  freely.  He  is  acquainted  with  the  older 
church  treatises  against  heresy,  but  is  dissatisfied 
with  their  insufficient  knowledge  of  the  Valentinian 
position;  in  his  treatment  of  other  heresies,  he  may 
have  borrowed  from  these  treatises  to  some  extent, 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


80 


M  he  quotes  lncideiit*Il]r  from  Justin's  tieatise 
flfftinst  Mardoo  uid  from  a  polemical  poem  diieetod 
•fftinst  Ifarous. 

Of  a  eoDsidetable  number  of  oilier  works  of  Im- 
naeus  what  is  known  is  gathered  from  scattered 
dtatkms  in  Euselnus  and  others.  They 
3*  Other  may  be  briefly  enumerated  as  folkms: 
WrMngs.  (1)  An  admonition  to  Fk>rinus  "On 
the  Divine  Sovereignty,  or  Qod  not  the 
Author  of  Evil/'  written  when  Fkmnus  was  still 
In  the  communion  of  the  Churoh,  for  he  is  warned 
that  his  teachings  are  irreconcilable  with  its  doctrine, 
and  that  "  not  even  heretics  outside  the  Church 
have  ventured  to  assert  such  things."  (2)  A  **  Trea- 
tise on  the  Ogdoad/'  occasioned  1^  Florinus,  but  not 
addressed  to  him.  The  toss  of  this  work  is  specially 
regrettable,  since  Irenaeus  seems  in  it  to  have  dwelt 
fai  detail  on  his  relation  to  the  first  post-apostolic 
generation.  (3)  An  epistle  to  a  certain  Blastus  in 
Rome  **  On  Schism."  According  to  the  pseudo- 
Tertullian  this  man  was  a  Quartodeciman,  according 
to  Pacian  a  Greek  by  birth  and  a  Montanist.  (4) 
Among,  or  connected  with,  the  letters  which  Ire- 
naeus wrote  to  various  bishops  at  the  time  of  the 
paschal  controversy  may  be  placed  that  which, 
according  to  a  Syriac  fragment,  **  he  wrote  to  an 
Alescandrian,  showing  that  it  was  right  to  celebrate 
the  feast  of  the  Resiurection  on  Sunday."  (5)  The 
letter  to  Victor  of  Rome  concerning  this  same  con- 
troversy. (6)  A  letter  **  On  Faith  "  to  Demetrius, 
a  deacon  of  Vienne.  (7)  According  to  Eusebius 
(v.  26),  an  apology,  addressed  to  the  Greeks,  ''  On 
Knowledge."  (8)  A  treatise,  mentioned  in  Euse- 
bius, Hiit,  ecd.,  V.  xxvi.,  dedicated  to  a  certain 
Marcianus,  possibly  the  author  of  the  Martyrium 
Palyearpi,  on  the  apostolic  preaching.  [This  work, 
which  is  of  the  nature  of  a  dogmatic  discussion  of 
the  apostolic  teaching,  and  is  quite  an  extensive 
work,  has  been  discovered  in  Armenian  translation 
in  the  Church  of  the  Mother  of  God  in  Eriwan,  and 
edited  with  German  transkition  by  Ter-Mekert- 
tschian  and  Tei^Bfinaanants  in  TU,  zzxi.  1  (1907). 
The  manuscript  dates  from  the  second  half  of  the 
thirteenth  century,  and  contains  about  two-thirds 
of  the  entire  work.  From  what  language  the 
translation  was  made  is  not  clear,  but  Syriac  is 
indicated.]    (9)   A    book    of    various    discourses. 

(10)  Oecumenius  gives  an  extract  from  a  work 
in  which  Irenaeus  is  supposed  to  relate  the  mar- 
tyrdom of  Sanctus  and  Blandina.  Allowing  for 
a  confusion  of  Blandina  and  Biblias,  this  agrees 
with  the  letter  of  the  chimsh  of  Lyons  on  the 
martyrdoms  of  177,  of  which  he  may  well  have 
been  the  author,  though  Eusebius  (V.,  xiv.-xix. 
25)  did  not  think  it  necessary  to  mention  the  fact. 

(11)  A  treatise  against  the  theory  that  matter  is 
eternal.  The  exposition  of  Canticles,  of  which  a 
Syriac  fragment  exists,  is  of  doubtful  authenticity, 
while  the  four  fragments  published  in  1715  by  Pfaff, 
chancellor  of  TObingen,  have  been  finally  shown 
by  Harnack  to  be  forgeries  of  Pfaff's.  It  is  not 
known  whether  Irenaeus  carried  out  his  intention 
(expressed  III.,  xii.  12)  of  writing  a  special  treatise 
against  Maroion. 

The  extent  and  variety  of  the  interests  of  which 
a  glimpse  has  been  given  renders  it  impossible  to 


attempt  here  a  complete  e]qKMEtkmof  the  theok^ 
and  ehurdi  polity  oi  Irenaeus.    It  is  unfortunate 

that,  outskle  of  scanty  frsgments,  only 

4*  His      a    single    polemical    work  of    his  is 

Tbeokigy   extant,  and  that  for   the   most  part 

and  Folilf  •  not  in  the  original     Hero  he  appears 

as  a  stout  defender  of  church  doctrine 
against  Gnosticism.  If  he  is  compared  with  the 
other  members  of  the  sdiool  to  which  he  belonged, 
with  Papias  or  with  Polycarp,  the  manner  appears 
striking  in  which  he  combines  with  firai  adhiesion 
to  the  faith  of  these  simple  men  a  remaikable 
accessibility  to  the  most  varied  elements  of  culture 
that  were  within  his  reach.  He  makes  no  parade 
of  secular  learning;  he  declines  to  be  a  teacher  of 
'*  barbaric  phiksophy  "  like  other  apologists  from 
Aristkies  to  Clement;  but  he  surpasses  them  all  in 
soundness  of  judgment,  acuteness  of  perception,  and 
clearness  of  exposition.  In  fact,  he  is  the  first  writer 
of  the  post-apiostolic  period  who  deserves  the  title 
of  a  theolqgian.  In  pure  theology  he  stands  far 
above  Athanasius  and  Qjrril,  and  can  be  compared 
only  with  Origen  and  Augustine.  The  balanced 
security  of  his  attitude  is  remarkable.  When  the 
Phrygian  peasants  disturbed  first  the  scene  of  his 
early  years,  and  then  the  whole  Chureh  with  their 
fanatical  prophecies  and  their  preaching  of  a  gloomy 
penance,  he  did  not  lose  his  head.  In  union  with 
the  Church  of  Lyons  and  its  imprisoned  confessors, 
he  warned  Eleutherus  of  Rome  not  to  condenm 
without  examination  a  religious  movement  which 
linked  itself  to  the  age  of  the  apostles  by  valuable 
inheritances.  When  the  Alpgi,  in  opposition  to 
Montanism,  attempted  to  banish  from  the  Church 
all  propheqr,  and  the  Apocalypse  with  it,  he  took 
a  firm  stand  against  them;  but  he  did  not  beccmie 
a  Montanist.  Again,  in  his  judgment  of  the  pagan 
polity,  he  did  not  desert  the  line  marked  out  by 
Christ  himself  and  by  Paul,  and  followed  (as  he 
points  out)  by  John  in  the  Apocalypse.  The  Ro- 
man Empire  is  to  him  no  more  Antichrist  than  the 
world  and  the  flesh  necessarily  belong  to  the  devil. 
As  a  practical  churchman  he  was  no  less  admirable 
than  as  a  theologian.    His  sermons  are  lost;   but 

that  a  collection  of  them  should  have 

5.  His      been  in  existence  150  years  after  hia 

Position    death  is  enough  to  show  that  he  de- 

as  a        serves  a  prominent  pkioe  in  the  history 

Practical    of  homiletics.     He  learned  Celtic  in 

Church-    order  to  speak  to  the  heathen  about 

man.       Lyons,  and  thus  has  a  place  also  in  the 

history  of  missionary  effort.  His  devo- 
tion to  the  inunediate  duties  of  his  restricted  and 
outlying  diocese  did  not  prevent  him  from  having 
mucdi  at  heart  the  welfare  of  the  Church  at  large, 
from  feeling  at  home  in  Rome  or  Ephesus.  His 
evident  love  for  the  ancient  Church  of  his  native 
home  did  not  blind  him  to  the  special  significance 
and  vocation  of  the  Church  at  Rome,  based  upon 
the  position  and  history  of  the  city.  In  the  paschal 
controversy  he  deserted  the  traditional  custom  of 
the  Church  of  his  boyhood,  because  he  saw  that 
the  Western  practise  was  more  appropriate  to  the 
essential  center-point  of  the  Easter  celebration; 
but  he  stood  out  firmly  against  over-emphasising 
such  differences,  and  against  the  combined  ignorance 


81 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


and  •asumptioD  of  Pope  Vietor.  The  unity  of  the 
Churehy  for  whose  a&ke  he  prises  the  tradition  car- 
ried on  by  the  episcopal  succession  in  the  great 
apostolic  churches,  is  according  to  him  perfectly 
consistent  with  large  freedom  and  diversity  in 
ecclesiastical  customs  and  with  mutual  independence 
of  the  autonomous  bodies  which  compose  the  imi- 
Tersal  Church.  After  the  perversion  of  doctrine 
by  the  Gnostics,  he  saw  the  greatest  peril  to  this 
unity  in  a  rigidity  that  strove  for  constrained  uni- 
formity, whether  it  manifested  itself  in  the  refusal 
of  the  Quartodedman  Blastus  to  yield  in  Rome  to 
the  prevalent  custom  in  regard  to  Easter,  or  in  the 
attitude  of  the  Roman  bishop,  with  whom  he  never- 
theless agreed.  Polemical  theologian  though  he  was, 
he  yet  verified  his  name  (Irenaeus,  "  Peaceful '')  by 
seeking  the  peace  of  the  Church  amid  all  his  con- 
troversies. His  actual  influence  upon  the  develop- 
ment of  the  Church  was  greater  than  that  of  perhaps 
any  other  teacher  of  tl^  first  three  centuries.  He 
did  much  to  protect  it,  first  against  the  dissolution 
threatened  by  the  Valentinian  speculations,  which 
came  in  largely  under  the  cover  of  external  con- 
formity; then  against  provincial  narrow-minded- 
ness and  ignorant  fanaticism;  and  finally  against 
the  ambition  of  the  Roman  see  to  grasp  at  a  despotic 
universal  monarchy.  (T.  Zahn.) 

Bibuoorafht:  TIm  beit  modern  edition  of  the  Works  of 
Irenvue  is  by  W.  Wigan  Harvey,  2  to!*.,  Ounbridce.  1877. 
and  perhepe  the  next  best  is  by  A.  Stieren,  2  yols.,  Leipsie, 
1863.  The  ^iitio  prinetpt  is  by  Erasmus,  Basel,  1620 
(often  reprinted,  eontains  the  Lat.  Tersion  of  the  Adv. 
Aosr.).  Sucoeeding  editions  were  by  N.  Qallasius,  Paris, 
1670  (the  first  edition  with  the  fracmenU  of  the  Oreek); 
F.  Feuardent,  Cologne,  1608  and  later;  J.  £.  Qrabe, 
Oxford,  1702  (one  of  the  best);  the  Benedictine  edition  of 
R.  Massoet,  Paris,  1712  and  Venioe,  1734  (also  exceed- 
ingly good).  VoL  iii  of  the  Oxyrhyntua  Papyri  by  Gnn- 
fcU  and  Hunt  issued  by  the  Ef^X  Exptoration  Fund  for 
1002-03  eontains  fragments,  on  which  ef.  E.  Nestle  in 
the  Munich  AOgemnns  Zmtung,  no.  240.  Note  also 
Bimpidtixin  iou  aposloloti  kiry4tmalto;  in  ormmnMcker 
Fsrsten  snidsdkl,  ed.  K.  Ter-Mekerttschian  and  E.  Ter- 
Umassiants,  in  717,  xxxi  (1007;  ef.  (  3,  no.  8  above). 

On  the  life  of  Irenaeus  and  various  phases  of  his  activities 
and  works  consult:  the  introductions  to  the  various  edi- 
tions of  his  works;  DCB,  iii  263-270  (eUborate  and  well 
worth  consulting);  H.  Dodwell,  DiattrtaHonm  in  Irenaeum, 
Oxford,  1880;  J.  Alexander.  The  FrimiHv  DodrinB  of 
Chritfe  Dimmiy,  London,  1727;  E.  Burton,  TttHmonif 
^  ffce  iiafs-^tMiM  FoMsrs  to  Ms  Divinity  cf  CkritA,  pp. 
€8-111.  Oxford,  1828;  J.  Beaven,  lAfe  onA  WriHnge  cf  8t. 
irxnatuB,  London,  1841;  L.  Dunoker,  Det  heilioen  IrmiAuM 
Ckriahlagis,  (SOttingen,  1843;  K.  Graul,  Di$  chriMUidu  Kir- 
elU  on  dsr  8ehwM$  ds9  innlkiBehen  ZeitaiUrt,  Leipsie,  1860; 
H.  Zie^er,  Det  IrenAua  Ukn  von  dm'  AuloriUU  dtr  Sthrift, 
der  TVwftlien  und  dor  Kir<M  Berlin,  1868;  idem,  irmiAua 
der  Biaekef  von  Lyon,  ib.  1871;  R.  A.  Lipsius,  Die  Zeit 
dM  /renStis  uimI  dit  EnUtdiung  der  aUkalOioliadUn  KirekB, 
Munich.  1872;  H.  L.  Mansel,  Qno&tie  Henaita,  London, 
1875;  J.  B.  Lightfoot,  in  Contemporary  Review,  Aug..  1876; 
A.  OiUoud,  S.  Ironte  el  eon  tempe,  Lyon,  1876;  C,  J.  H. 
Ropes,  in  Bitliotheea  Saara,  Apr.,  1877  (deals  with  the 
nationality  of  Irenaeus);  E.  Montet,  La  Ltgende  dlrente, 
Geneva,  1880;  G.  E.  Freppel,  S.  Irente  et  VUoquenee 
ekriHenne  dane  la  Gauie,  Paris,  1886;  F.  W.  Farrar.  Ltret 
^  As  Folhsrs,  i.  67-03,  New  York,  1880;  J.  Werner.  Der 
PauUmemue  dm  /rsfiAus,  in  TU,  vi.  2,  1880;  J.  Kunse, 
Die  (TottssMre  dm  /rmSiM.  Leipsie,  1801;  idem,  De  hia- 
lorios  gnoeHdemi  fontihue,  ib.  1804;  T.  Zahn,  Foreehungen 
ewr  OeeekidUe  dee  Kanane,  iv.  247-283,  ib.  1801;  A. 
Camarlynck,  S.  Irenie  «f  le  eanan  du  N.  T.,  Paris,  1806; 
A.  Harnaek,  Die  Pfafpadiie^  irenAue  FragmMU,  in  TU, 
XX.  3, 1000;  idem,  Litteraiur,  consult  the  Index  (very  full); 
idem.  Dogma,  passim,  consult  the  Index;  Oillier.  Auteure 
soor^i,  i  405-610.  ii.  537,  543-644;  Neander.  Ckrietian 
Ckurtk,  I  670-682  et  passfan;    Sehaff,  ChrieHan  Church, 


ii.  746  sqq.;    Moeller.  Chrielian  Church,  i.  106.  158,  100 
sqq.;   and  the  Church  histories  of  the  period. 

XREHAEUS,  CHRISTOPH:  Follower  of  Matthias 
Fladus  (q.v.);  b.  at  Schweidnits  (31  m.  s.w.  of 
Breslau),  Silesia,  c.  1522;  d.  probably  at  Buchenbach 
(between  Hall  and  Rothenburg-on-the-Tauber), 
WQrttembeig,  c.  1595.  From  May,  1544,  he  studied 
at  Wittenberg,  where  he  was  enrolled  as  Christ- 
offerus  Harem.  After  being  rector  of  schools  at 
Bemburg  (1545-^7)  and  Aschersleben,  he  became 
M.  A.  at  Wittenberg,  Feb.  14,  1549.  Late  in  1552 
he  became  deacon  and  was  ordained  by  Bugenhagen. 
In  1559  he  became  archdeacon,  and  began  his  very 
extensive  activity  as  theological  author  about  this 
time.  In  the  spring  of  1562  he  was  called  as  pastor 
to  Eisleben.  Here,  as  a  strict  Lutheran,  he  was 
highly  esteemed  by  the  coimts  of  Mansfeld  and  the 
congregation,  and  became  acquainted  with  the  fol- 
lowers of  Fladus.  In  1566  John  William  of  Saxony 
called  him  to  be  court  preacher,  first  in  Cobuig,  then 
in  Weimar.  Iren&us  utilized  this  appointment  to 
obtain  positions  for  the  Flacians  at  the  university, 
in  the  Church,  and  in  the  chancery,  and  advocated 
the  doctrine  of  Flacius  at  the  Altenbuig  Colloquy, 
Oct.  21,  156a-Mar.  9, 1569.  MOrlin,  Chenmits,  and 
Jakob  Andree  tried  in  vain  to  win  hhn  from  Flacius. 
When  the  Evangelical  princes  complained  of  the 
Flacians  in  1570,  Iren&us  was  transferred  as  super- 
intendent to  Neustadt-on-the-Orla,  but  persisted 
in  his  usual  way,  and  when  menaced  with  an  in- 
vestigation, escaped  to  Mansfeld  in  1572.  His  old 
friends  did  not  stand  by  him,  and  Archbishop 
Sigismund  of  Magdebuig  now  intervened.  Iren&us 
eluded  his  soldiers,  Dec.  31,  1574,  and  thenceforth 
traversed  Germany  as  an  "  exile  for  Christ." 
Though  seven  times  banished  before  1590,  he  con- 
tinued striving  with  unbroken  courage,  and  above 
all  opposed  the  Formula  of  Concord,  its  authors, 
subscribers,  and  defenders.  In  1575  he  was  expelled 
from  his  native  town,  whereupon  he  sojourned  in 
Hesse  and  along  the  Lower  Rhine.  In  1579  he  was 
at  Frankfort,  and  finally  foimd  refuge  with  Eberhard 
of  Stetten  at  Buchenbach.  Count  Wolfgang  of 
Hohenlohe  constrained  him  to  a  colloquy  with 
Andreft,  at  Langenburg,  Aug.  6,  1581,  and  then 
insisted  upon  his  withdrawal  from  Buchenbach.  At 
the  close  of  1582,  he  obtained  a  call  to  the  Lower 
Austrian  Church  at  Horn,  but  on  Aug.  12,  1585, 
the  Flacians  one  and  all  were  notified  of  their  dis- 
charge. Iren&us  returned  to  Buchenbach,  and 
occupied  himself  with  literary  work.  He  was  a 
noble,  talented,  and  learned  man,  but  a  classic 
example  of  the  rabiei  iheologcirum  which  converts  a 
single  article  of  Christian  faith  into  a  central  dogma, 
as  he  did  with  the  doctrine  of  Flacius  on  original  sin. 
His  best  strength  was  spent  in  vituperation  and 
railing,  and,  in  his  inequity  of  judgment  he  was 
even  carried  into  falsehood,  so  that  his  best  book, 
Der  Spiegd  des  ewigen  Leibena  (1572),  loses  thereby 
in  value.  G.  Bobsbbt. 

BnuooBAFHT:  B.  Raupaeh,  Bvangeiie^iee  OeeterreiA,  nebet 
FreebyUrolooia  Auetriaea,  pp.  09-73,  and  Nachtrao*  Zwie- 
faehe  Zugake,  p.  43.  3  vols..  Hnmbuii.  1741-^  (the  best 
biography,  containing  also  a  useful  bibliography);  J.  0. 
Leucfcfeld.  HuA.  SpangenbergeneU,  pp.  37-38,  Quedlinburg, 
1716;  W.  Prsger,  MaUhiae  Flaeiue  iUyrieue  und  eeine  Zait, 
2  yols..  Eriangen,  186»-ei;  ZHT,  xiz  (1860).  3  sqq..  218 
sqq.;  ADB,  ziv.  582. 


Zr«ae 
Irrinff 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


88 


IRENE:  Bysantine  empress;  b.  at  Athens  762; 
d.  in  Lesbos  Aug.  9,  803.  In  769  she  married  Leo, 
afterward  Leo  IV.,  and,  upon  his  death  in  780,  she 
became  regent  during  the  minority  of  Constantine 
VI.  The  first  years  cl  her  regency  were  marked  by 
disastrous  wars  against  the  Arabians,  to  whom  she 
was  forced  to  pay  annual  tribute.  In  the  icono- 
clastic controversies  of  the  time  (see  Imaoks  and 
Imags-Worship,  II.)  she  had  secretly  been  favorable 
to  images  even  during  Leo's  lifetime,  and  after  his 
death  she  set  herself  to  reverse  the  iconoclastic 
legislation  of  Constantine  V.  Accordingly,  having 
gained  control  of  the  Eastern  Church  by  judidoua 
appointments  to  bishoprics,  she  called  the  seventh 
ecumenical  coimcil  to  meet  at  Constantinople  in  786. 
Owing  to  the  ioonoclastie  seal  of  the  soldiers  here 
the  coimcil  was  transferred  to  Nicsea  in  787,  and 
image-worship  was  then  reestablished  without 
opposition  (see  Nicaa.,  CoimciLB  of).  In  790  the 
government  was  wrested  from  Irene  by  her  son, 
Constantine  VI.,  but  by  792  she  was  again  in  power, 
ruling  conjointly  with  Constantine.  After  five 
years  of  secret  warfare  between  mother  and  son, 
Irene  finally  gained  the  upper  hand  and  had  Con- 
stantine blkided  and  thrown  into  a  dungeon  in  797. 
Her  own  extravagant  reign  came  to  an  end  in  802, 
when  she  was  overthrown  by  Nicephorus  and- 
banished  to  the  Isle  of  Lesbos.  Here  she  earned  a 
meager  living  by  spinning.  At  the  time  of  her  fail 
she  was  negotiating  a  marriage  with  Charlemagne, 
with  a  view  to  uniting  the  Eastern  with  the  Western 
Empire.  Her  services  in  the  interest  of  image- 
worship  won  her  the  position  of  a  saint  in  the  Greek 
Church.    Her  day  is  Aug.  15. 

BiBLioaftArHT:  Gibbon,  Dedine  and  Fall,  y.  191-192;  KL, 
▼i.  873;  Knimbftoher,  Oetchiehie,  pp.  99,  964-905,  1074; 
CttlliM*.  AuUnrt  marit,  zil  18^186,  xlii.  «19,  688. 


IRION,  PAUL:  German  Evangelioal  Synod;  b. 
near  Marthasville,  Mo.,  Oct.  28,  I860.  He  was 
educated  at  Blackburn  University,  Carlinville,  111. 
(1873-75),  Washington  University,  St.  Louis,  Mo. 
(1875-76),  Ehnhurst  CoU^ge,  Eknhurst,  HI.  (A.B., 
1879),  and  Missouri  College,  near  Marthasville,  Mo. 
(1882).  In  1882  he  was  ordained  to  the  ministry, 
and  after  being  assistant  pastor  of  St.  John's  Evan- 
gelical Church,  Michigan  City,  Ind.,  from  March  to 
June,  1882,  and  of  Bethel  Evangelical  (church, 
Freedom  Township,  Mich.,  from  June  to  Nov.,  1882, 
then  full  pastor,  and  is  now  pastor  of  St.  John's, 
Michigan  Gty,  Ind.  From  1888  to  1895  he  was 
secretary  of  the  Michigan  district  of  his  denomina- 
tion, of  which  he  is,  theologically,  an  orthodox 
member,  and  in  1890  was  the  official  compiler  of 
the  census  for  the  Evangelical  Synod.  He  has  also 
been  president  of  the  Michigan  district  of  the  Ger- 
man Evangelical  Synod  since  1895. 

HUSH  ARTICLES:  The  Tliirty-nine  Artides  of 
the  Church  of  England  were  not  introduoed  in 
Ireland  till  the  time  of  Charles  I.  In  their  place  a 
shorter  collection  of  eleven  articles  was  published 
in  1566  by  authority  of  the  deputy  and  the  arch- 
bishops and  bishops.  At  the  first  convocation  of  the 
Irish  Episcopal  Church  (1613-15)  a  series  of  104 
articles  was  adopted  and  iq>proved  by  the  deputy 
in  1615,  which  was  probably  composed  by  James 


Ussher,  then  at  ibe  head  of  the  theological  faculty 
in  Dublin,  (afterward  arcfabishap  of  Armagh) .  They 
are  important  as  proving  the  decided  Calvinism 
of  the  Irish  CSiurdi  at  that  time,  and  still  mose 
so  as-  the  eonnecting  link  between  the  Thirtynnine 
Artides  and  the  Westminster  ConlearioB,  and  as 
the  chief  source  of  the  latter,  "  as  is  evidisnt  from 
the  general  ooder,  the  headings  of  diaptem  and  siib- 
divisions,  and  the  almost  literal  agreenoent  of 
language  in  the  statement  of  several  of  the  most 
important  doctrines."  By  a  decree  of  the  convoca- 
tion, the  teaching  of  any  doctrine  oontnuy  to  these 
articles  was  forl^idden.  But  the  Irish  convocation 
of  1635,  under  ihe  lead  of  the  Eari  of  Strafford, 
lord«lieutenant  of  Ireland,  and  his  chaplain,  John 
BramhaU,  formally  adopted  the  Thirty-oine  Artides, 
and  quietly  ignored  the  others.  Archbishop  Ussher 
requind  subscriptioB  to  both.  Eventually,  how* 
ever,  the  Irish  artides  were  lost  sight  of,  aM  no 
mention  was  made  of  them,  when,  in  the  beginning 
of  the  nineteenth  century,  the  United  Church  of 
England  and  Ireland  was  otganised. 

BtBuo«ntAPKT:  P.  Sdiaff,  CrteiU  tf  Chfi&t^ndam,  L  M2^666, 
iii.  526-644.  New  York,  1877;  T.  Oldan.  Th»  Ckurdi  tf 
Jrwlamk  328-824,  342^344,  8&2-«54.  London,  1802. 

'IRISH  SISTERS  OF  CHARITr.  See  Enolish 
Ladibs. 

IRRBCnJLARRYt  In  canon  law,  a  defect  or  im- 
pediment which  excludes  a  person  otherwise  quali- 
fied from  due  reception  or  eacerdse  of  holy  orders. 
Canomsts  divide  these  into  two  dasses,  irregular- 
ities through  defect  and  through  fault.  Under  the 
former  come  (1)  .  those  Uirough  natal-  defects, 
affecting  all  who  ace  not  bom  of  a  lc(gitimate  or  at 
least  a  putative  marriage,  and  femovable  by  Sub- 
sequent Intimation  or  by  taking  monastic  vows. 
(2)  Through  bodily  defects,  affecting  those  whom 
illness  or  mutilation  has  rsndered  incapable  of  per* 
forming  sacred  ftmctions,  or  of  perfonning  them 
without  lowering  the  dignity  of  the  office  or  giving 
offense  to  the  people.  (3)  Through  defects  in  age, 
when  the  canonical  age  (q.v.)  has  not  been  attained. 

(4)  Through  defects  in  knowledge,  when  the  requi- 
site knowledge  for  the  order  in  question  is  lackhig. 

(5)  Through  defects  of  faith,  affecting  neophytes 
and  those  not  yet  confirmed,  who  are  presumably 
insufficiently  established,  in  the  faith.  (6)  Through 
sacramental  defects,  arising  from  certain  oonditiona 
in  regard  to  a  previous  marriage  of  the  candidate. 
(7)  Ex  dtftdtu,  peifedM  lenUatii,  attadiing  to  those 
who  (though  in  a  lawful  way)  have  contributed 
to  the  death  or  maiming  of  a  fellow-man,  such  as 
soldiers,  criminal  judges,  prosecutors,  jurymen,  or 
witnesses,  but  not  phydciana  and  surgeons.  (8) 
Through  def eota  in  reputation.  (9)  Through  defeoto 
in  tiie  matter  of  liberty,  preventing  the  ordination 
of  davee  without  their  masters'  consent,  married 
men  without  that  of  theis  wives,  or  guardians  and 
trustees  before  release  from  their  obligs^ons.  Ir- 
regularity through  faults  occun  as  a  consequence 
of  criminal  acts  publidy  known  or  proved  before  a 
court,  or  oi  certain  misdeeds,  even  if  not  known; 
the  latter  indude  the  Idllkig  or  maiming  of  another 
person,  heresy,  apostasy,  abuse  of  the  sacraments 
of  baptism  or  orders;  and  the  same  effect  is  pro* 


38 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Itmne 
Xrving 


duoed  by  what  is  technically  known  as  constructive 
bigamy,  the  marriage  (if  consummated)  with  any 
wmnan  not  a  viigin,  which,  though  not  forbidden 
by  ordinary  law,  is  yet  considered  a  sufficient  de- 
clension from  the  ideal  of  marria^  (cf.  Lev.  xxi. 
13,  14)  to  disqualify  a  man  for  ordination.  In  case 
a  man  has  been  ordained  in  spite  of  his  irregularity, 
his  orders  are  valid,  but  he  is  not  permitted  to  exer- 
cise them.  Dispensation  from  irregularity  can  be 
granted  as  a  rule  by  the  pope  alone — only  in  some 
exceptional  cases  by  the  bidiop. 

(P.  HiNSCHinst.) 

Bduoobafht:  Binghsm,  Orioines^  IV.,  iii.-Tii.;  L.  Thomao- 
■m,  FtfliM  €t  nova  eecluiae  diteipUna,  II.,  I  62-e3,  3  Tola., 
Paris,  1728;  F.  E.  a  BoenninichauBen,  Traetaiu9  jundieo- 
amonietu  ds  irregularUatUnu,  part  iii,  Mflnster,  1867; 
P.  Hinsehius,  Daa  KirehenretM  .  .  .  in  DmUaehland,  i.  7 
aqq..  Berlin,  1809;  E.  Friedberg,  L^irhueh  dM  .  .  .  Kir- 
ekemwehU,  pp.  134  sqq.,  Leipne,  1895. 

ntvnf 6,  EDWARD:  Scotch  Presbyterian,  usually 
regarded  as  the  founder  of  the  Catholic  Apostolic 

Church    (q.v.),    whose    members   are 

Life  in      popularly  known  as  Irvingites;    b.  at 

Scotland.    Annan    (15   m.   e.8.e.    of   Dumfries), 

Dumfriesshire,  Aug.  4,  1792;  d.  in 
Glasgow  Dec.  7,  1834.  At  thirteen  he  was  sent  to 
the  University  of  Edinburgh,  and  at  seventeen  he 
became  a  teacher  of  math^natics  in  the  school  at 
Haddington.  A  year  later  he  took  charge  of  a  new 
academy  at  Kirkcaldy,  but  still  kept  up  his  theolog- 
ical studies  and  a  more  or  less  regular  attendance 
on  the  university  lectures.  It  was  at  this  period 
that  he  made  the  acquaintance  of  Thomas  Oarlyle 
(the  author,  to  be  distinguished  from  a  later  apostle 
of  the  same  name),  who  has  left  the  most  vivid 
picture  of  his  development.  In  1815  he  passed  his 
theological  examinations  and  received  a  license  to 
preach  from  the  presbytery  of  Kirkcaldy.  After 
three  years,  not  very  successful  as  a  preacher,  and 
weary  of  teaching,  he  went  back  to  Edinburgh  and 
occupied  himself  with  linguistic  and  scientific 
studies.  He  was  seriously  thinking  of  going  as  a 
missionary  to  Persia  when,  in  Oct.,  1819,  the  posi- 
tion was  offered  him  of  assistant  to  Dr.  Chal- 
mers at  St.  John's,  Glasgow.  Overshadowed  by 
Chalmers,  and  unpopular  with  the  majority  of  the 
congregation,  he  was  glad  to  exchange  this  position 
in  1822  for  that  of  minister  of  the  small  congrega- 
tion in  London  coimected  with  a  Scotch  asylum 
in  Hatton  Garden.  He  received  ordination  at  the 
hands  of  the  presbytery  of  Annan,  and  took  his 
leave  of  Glasgow  in  a  remarkable  sermon  which 
called  for  a  complete  revision  of  the  methods  of 
Christian  preaching. 

In  London  he  at  once  made  an  impression,  which 
was  partly  due  to  his  striking  appearance;  he  was 

over  six  feet  tall,  his  pale  face  framed 

SoccMi  in  in  dark  locks  which  fell  almost  to  his 

London,    shoulders.     No  one  could  hear  him 

without  being  conscious  of  a  powerful 
and  dominating  personality.  His  flowery,  rhetorical 
style  soon  attracted  a  large  circle  of  hearers,  for 
which  the  little  church  was  too  small.  A  new  one 
was  built  in  R^ent  Square,  and  for  a  time  he  was 
the  fashionable  preacher  of  London.  He  appealed 
especially  to  the  educated  classes;  and  it  was  to 
them  that  he  spoke  in  his  first  published  work, 
VI.— 3 


FortheOrade9o/Ood,FourOratuma,  For  Judgment 
to  Come,  an  Argument  in  Nine  Parte  (London,  1823). 
The  attention  attracted  by  his  writings  increased 
his  popularity,  and  at  the  same  time  heightened  his 
self-consciousness;  he  felt  himself  called  to  be  the 
prophet  of  his  people,  and  scornfully  rejected  the 
well-meant  warnings  of  many  members  of  the 
Evangelical  party. 

The  upheaval  of  the  French  Revolution  had 
aroused  in  England  a  strong  tendency  to  apocalyp- 
tic  and   millenarian   thought,    wlidch 
Joins       found  expression  in  numerous  writings. 
Drum-      Among  those  most  strongly  impressed 
mond's     by  this  thought  was  Henry  Drummond 
Circle.      (q.v.),  a  rich  banker  who  had  gathered 
around  him  a  circle  of  like-minded 
friends,  devoted  to  gaining  general  recognition  for 
their  apocaljrptic  views.  Irving  adopted  the  singular 
exegesis  and  the  whole  train  of  thought  of  Drum* 
mond's  circle,  which  opened  to  him  an  entirely  new 
field  as  a  preacher  of  repentance.    In  a  long  dis- 
course, later  printed  with  enlargements  (Btitylan 
and  Infidelity  Foredoomed  of  Ood,  Glasgow,  1826), 
preached  at  the  aimiversary  of  the  Continental 
Society  in  1825,  he  developed  these  thoughts  and . 
foretold  the  second  coming  of  the  Lord  for  the  year 
1864.    Next  he  published,  with  an  introduction  of 
200  pages,  a  recasting  of  a  work  published  pseu- 
donymously  in  1816  by  Lacunza,  a  Spanish  ex-Jesuit, 
tmder  the  title  The  Coming  of  Meeeiah  in  Glory  and 
Majeety    (London,    1827).     Meantime   a   regular 
"  school  of  the  prophets  '*  had  gathered  around  him, 
who,  from  the  end  of  1826,  met  annually  at  Drum- 
mond's  country-seat  of  Albury,  near  Guildford. 
From  1829  to  1833  they  published  a  periodical, 
The  Morning  Watch,  a  Journal  of  Prophecy. 

A  sectarian  tendency  soon  developed.  Irving  had 
been  saying  from  1824  on  that  since  the  fivefold 
office  of  apostles,  prophets,  evangelists, 
Rise  of  pastors,  and  teachers  had  disappeared 
Irvingites.  from  the  Church,  the  Holy  Ghost  had 
deserted  it.  Irving  thus  showed  an 
increasing  tendency  to  depart  from  the  principles 
of  Scotch  Presbyterianism.  He  now  denied  pre- 
destination; following  the  High-church  teaching  of 
Hooker,  he  felt  himself  a  priest  and  required  his 
people  so  to  regard  him;  and  to^n^urd  the  end  of  1827 
he  gave  utterance  to  Christological  views  which 
were  regarded  as  the  grossest  heresy,  speaking  of  the 
"sinful  substance"  of  the  body  of  Christ.  In 
defense  of  his  view,  he  wrote  a  long  rhetorical 
treatise  on  the  Incarnation  which  forms  the  third 
and  fourth  parts  of  his  Sermone,  Lecturee,  and  Ooca- 
eional  Dieooureee  (3  vols.,  London,  1828).  This 
attitude,  combined  with  his  apocalsrptic  vagaries, 
damaged  his  position  in  London.  About  this  time 
a  tmion  of  prayer  was  formed  to  beseech  a  new  out- 
pouring of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  Irving's  assistant, 
Alexander  Scott,  expressed  the  hope  that  the  special 
chariemata  of  the  primitive  Church  might  once  more 
be  bestowed  in  answer  to  these  supplications. 
Fresh  excitement  was  aroused  by  two  preaching- 
tours  of  Irving's  through  Scotland  in  1828  and  1829, 
and  in  Mar.,  1830,  occurred  the  phenomena  else- 
where detailed  (see  Catholic  Apostolic  Church), 
which  were  taken  as  a  fulfilment  of  these  hopes. 


trrinc 
Isaacs 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


84 


At  least  a  commiBsion  from  London,  of  which  the 
lawyer  Oardale  was  the  most  prominent  member, 
accepted  them  as  the  expected  renewal  of  the  prim- 
itive gifts,  and  a  confiimation  of  the  whole  trend 
of  apocaljrptic  preaching.  Similar  phenomena  now 
occurred  at  gatherings  in  Cardale's  house;  prophecy 
and  speaking  with  tongues  became  more  and  more 
frequent.  Irving  attempted  for  a  time  to  keep 
these  manifestations  separate  from  the  church  ser- 
vices proper,  while  he  welcomed  them  and  made 
use  of  the  messages  thus  delivered,  and  looked  to 
the  revival  of  the  offices  already  recognized  as 
essential.  But  revelation  succeeded  revelation,  and 
presently  Irving  could  no  longer  hold  back  the 
growing  enthusiasm.  In  Oct.,  1831,  it  took  posses- 
sion of  his  church,  amid  scenes  of  great  excitement. 
When  Irving  was  summoned,  in  1830,  before  the 
general  presbytery  of  the  Scotch  churches  in  London 
to  answer  for  his  Christological  views,  and  denied 
their  jurisdiction,  appealing  to  the  general  synod  in 
Scotland,  his  own  presbytery  had  stood  by  him. 
But  now  it  accused  him  of  violation  of  the  liturgical 
ordinances  in  allowing  women,  and  men  who  were 
not  properly  ordained  ministers,  to  speak  in  his 
church.  Sentence  of  deposition  was  pronoimoed 
on  May  2,  1832.  Four  days  later  Irving  began 
independent  services  in  a  hall  with  about  800  com- 
municants, and  in  October  he  removed  to  a  remod- 
eled studio  in  Newman  Street,  leaving  behind  him 
the  last  remnants  of  the  old  Presbyterian  order. 

Though  Irving  was  the  "  angel  "  of  the  Church, 
the  voices  of  the  prophets  left  him  little  hearing. 

Cardaie,  Dnunmond,  and  the  prophet 

Irving      Taplin  took  the  lead  of  the  movement, 

Superseded,  and   the  new  organization  proceeded 

rapidly.  New  fimctionaries  were  cre- 
ated as  the  Spirit  bade,  on  the  analogy  of  New- 
Testament  indications,  and  presently  there  were 
six  other  congregations  in  London,  forming,  with 
Irving's,  the  counterpart  of  the  seven  churches  of 
the  Ai>ocalypse.  Irving  accepted  the  whole  develop- 
ment in  faith,  although  he  had  conceived  the  apos- 
tolic office  as  something  different,  which  should  not 
interfere  with  the  independence  of  himself  as  the 
**  angel."  But  he  had  lost  control  of  the  move- 
ment, and  those  who  now  led  it  lost  no  opportunity 
of  humiliating  the  man  to  whose  personality  they 
had  owed  so  much.  When  the  sentence  of  deposi- 
tion was  confirmed  by  the  presbytery  of  Annan, 
and  then  by  the  Scottish  general  synod,  and  he 
returned  to  London  strong  in  the  consciousness  of 
his  call  by  God  to  the  office  of  angel  and  pastor  of 
the  church,  he  was  not  allowed  to  baptize  a  child, 
but  was  told  to  wait  imtil,  on  the  bidding  of  the 
prophets,  he  should  be  again  ordained  by  an  apostle. 
His  health  was  now  failing,  and  his  physician  or- 
dered him,  in  the  autumn  of  1834,  to  winter  in  the 
south.  He  went,  however,  to  Scotland,  where  the 
prophets  had  promised  him  great  success  in  the 
power  of  the  Spirit,  and  died  in  Glasgow,  where  he 
is  buried  in  the  crypt  of  the  cathednd. 

(T.  KOLDB.) 
Bibuoobafht:  Inring's  CoUeded  WriUnif9  were  edited  by 
hb  nephew,  G.  Carlyle,  5  toIb.,  London.  1864-65.  Beddea 
the  litenture  under  Catholio  Afostolic  Church,  ee- 
pedally  the  biography  by  Mrs.  Oliphsnt,  and  Carlyle's 
Remini»eenee$,  consult  D.  Brown,  Petaanal  RemintBotneeB 


of  Edward  Irvino,  in  Exponior,  1887;  C.  K.  Pftul.  in 
Biooraphieal  SkeidiM,  London,  1883;  W.  A.  Smith, 
"Sfuj^ierd"  Smith,   the   UniverBolUt,  London,  1802. 

IRVniGITES.   See  Catholic  Apostolic  Church; 
and  Ibving,  EnwABo. 

ISAAC  (Hebr.  yizhakf  more  rarely  yiehak,  ''the 
laugher  ";  LXX.  /sooib,  Vulg.  Isaac) :  the  son  of 
Abraham  and  Sarah,  who  served  as  an  object  for 
testing  his  father's  faith  and  obedience.    He  was 
bom  (according  to  P)  in  Abraham's  hundredth  year 
and  in  Sarah's  ninetieth.    Gen.  xxi.  6  (E?) — cf .  xvii. 
17  (P),  xviii.  12  sqq.  (J) — brings  the  name  into 
connection  with  liis  birth.     Abraham's  obedience 
was  shown  in  the  circumcision  of  the  boy  eight 
days  after  his  birth  (Gen.  xxi.  4,  P),  and  in  his 
readiness  to  sacrifice,  at  God's  command,  this  son 
for  whom  he  had  so  ardently  longed  (chap.  zxii.). 
Isaac  in  this  submitted  to  the  will  of  his  father, 
just  as  he  did  later  in  his  marriage  with  Rebekah, 
although  he  was  then  forty  years  old.    Few  details 
are  given  in  regard  to  the  remainder  of  Isaac's  life, 
and  he  appears  as  a  rather  weak  copy  of  his  father. 
He  manifested  a  lesser  fondness  for  journeying, 
since  his  travels  were  confined  to  the  southern 
portion  of  the  land,  the  N^geb,  and  the  neighboring 
territory.    In  this  desolate  r^on,  the  well  Lahai-roi 
(Gen.  xxiv.  62;   the  modem  Munailah),  Gerar,  the 
Philistine   city   (xxvi.  1;  the  modem  Jerar),    the 
valley  of  Gerar  (xxvi.  17),  Beersheba  (xxvi.  23), 
and  finally  Hebron  (xxxv.  27),  are  places  where  he 
sojoumed  for  a  time.    When  at  Gerar,  according  to 
Gen.  xxvi.  7  sqq.,  he  had  an  experience  with  King 
Abimelech  similar  to  his  father's  (Gen.  xx.  1  sqq., 
E,  xii.  10  sqq.,  J).     The  similarity  of  the  three 
accounts  does  not  necessarily  imply  that  they  are 
variations  of  the  same  incident;    but  borrowings 
and  substitutions  may  have  taken  place  in  onl 
tradition. 

Isaac  was  characterised,  as  contrasted  with  Abra- 
ham, by  a  certain  advance  in  civilization.    In  Gerar 
he  devoted  himself  both  to  the  raising  of  flocks  and 
herds  and  to  agriculture.    His  food  was  game  and 
his  drink  was  wine,  while  Abraham  obtained  the 
latter  only  from  some  other  prince.    Isaac  appeared 
always  as  pacifically  inclined,  yielding  to  his  envious 
neighbors  when  they  disputed  with  him  the  posses- 
sion of  wells,  and  yet  he  enjoyed  a  singular  respect 
on  the  part  of  strangers,  who  considered  it  desirable 
to  be  on  friendly  footing  with  the  "  blessed  of  the 
Lord  "  (Gen.  xxvi.  28  sqq.).     The  principal  sig- 
nificance of  Isaac  is  that  he  carried  over  the  divine 
blessing  of  the  covenant  from  Abraham  to  Jacob, 
the  ancestor  of  Israel.    After  his  wife  had  been  for 
a  long  time  barren  (Gen.  xxv.  21),  twin  children  of 
very  different  characters,  Esau  and  Jacob,   were 
granted  to  him  in  answer  to  his  prayer.    Although 
the  father  clung  to  the  elder,  when  oki  and  blind 
he  was  forced  by  the  stratagem  of  his  wife  to  bestow 
upon  his  younger  son,  Jacob,  the  blessing  which 
had  been  bequeathed  to  him  by  Abraham  (Gen. 
xxvi.  3  sqq.,  24).    Isaac  showed  little  independence 
either  at  home  or  abroad,  in  place  of  which  his  sub- 
mission to  the  decrees  of  the  Almighty  gave  him 
his  position  between  Abraham  the  faithful    and 
Jacob,  the  champion  of  the  faith.    In  this  trio  Isskac 


85 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Irrinff 


represents  that  pious  fidelity  which  guards  the 
inherited  blessing,  more  occupied  with  its  preserva- 
tion than  with  any  idea  of  further  gain.  For  later 
Jews  he  appears  as  "  the  chief  of  the  bound  and 
tortured  "  (Midrash  to  Esther),  that  is,  the  proto- 
type of  martyrs. 

The  story  of  Isaac  is  made  up  from  the  three 
Pentateuchal  soiu^oes,  which  agree  essentially  in 
their  narratives  and  guarantee  the  historical  charac- 
ter of  Isaac's  personality.  His  name  does  not  yield 
to  the  explanation  that  it  belonged  to  a  djvinity 
or  a  tribe,  the  significance  **  he  laughs  "  being  in- 
appropriate to  both. 

The  designation  of  God  as  ''  the  fear  of  Isaac  " 
(Gen.  xxxi.  42,  53)  is  peculiar.  Since  this  "  fear  " 
was  sworn  by,  it  must  mean  "  divinity,"  corre- 
sponding to  the  Greek  sebaa  in  the  sense  of  «e6a«ma, 
"  an  object  of  awe  or  reverence." 

(C.  voN  Orelli.) 

Bebuoqrapht:  A.  Bemfltein,  Urtpru^  der  Sagen  von 
Abraham,  i^aak  und  Jakob,  Berlin,  1871;  J.  Popper, 
Unpruna  tUa  MonotheitmuM,  pp.  261  aqq..  ib.  1879;  J.  B. 
Mosley,  Ruling  Idea»  in  Early  Agea,  chaps.  ii.-ui.,  New 
York.  1870;  E.  C.  A.  Riehm,  HandwOrterbueh  dea  biMMcAen 
AUertunu,  pp.  701-702.  Leipac,  1803;  Q.  B.  Gray,  StudieM 
in  U threw  Proper  Namea,  p.  214,  London,  1806;  G.  Man- 
pero.  Struggle  of  the  NoHona,  p.  68.  ib.  1806;  DB,  ii  483- 
485;  SB,  U.  2174-2170  (stimulating);  JB,  vi.  616-618. 
Consult  also  the  appropriate  sections  in  works  on  the 
history  of  Israel  and  the  commentaries  on  Genesis. 

ISAAC  OF  AUTIOCH:  The  name  of  a  writer 
(perhaps  of  several  writers)  of  the  early  Syrian 
Church.  Jacob  of  Edessa  (cf .  W.  Wright,  CaUUogtie 
of  the  Syriac  Manuacripts  in  the  BriHeh  Museum, 
ii.  603-604,  London,  1871)  distinguishes  three  of 
the  name,  two  whom  he  calls  orthodox  and  a  third 
whom  he  styles  a  Chaloedonian  heretic.  The  first 
was  a  disciple  of  Ephraem,  and  went  to  Rome  in 
the  time  of  Arcadius;  on  his  return  he  was  kept 
for  some  time  in  prison  in  Constantinople,  and  later 
became  presbyter  of  Amida.  The  second,  presbyter  of 
Edessa,  went  to  Antioch  in  the  time  of  the  Emperor 
Zeno  and  the  patriarch  Peter  the  Fuller  (see  Mono- 
PHTSiTBS,  SS  4  sqq.),  and  preached  against  the 
Nestorians,  taking  his  text  from  a  parrot  which  he 
had  heard  screech  the  trisagion  with  the  addition 
**  crucified  for  us."  The  third,  also  from  Edessa, 
was  orthodox  in  the  time  of  Bishop  Paul  (512  sqq.), 
but  Nestorian  under  Asclepius  (522  sqq.).  Genna- 
dius  knows  of  two  writers  of  the  name.  The  second 
(Ds  vir.  ill.,  Ixvi.),  presbyter  of  Antioch,  lived  to 
an  advanced  age  and  wrote  much,  including  an 
elegy  on  the  fall  of  Antioch  (459);  he  died  under 
Leo  and  Ma jorian  (between  459  and  46 1 ) .  Zacharias 
Rhetor  (ed.  K.  Ahrens  anr^  G.  KrOger,  Leipsic, 
1889,  p.  *20)  mentions ''  Isaau,  the  teacher  of  Syria," 
with  Dada  in  the  time  of  Arcadius  and  Theodosius. 
Dionysiusof  Tehnahre  knows  of  poems  by  Isaac  on 
the  capture  of  Rome  by  the  Goths  (410)  and  the 
secular  games  of  404.  Johannes  bar  Shushan  (d. 
1073),  who  collected  the  writings  of  Isaac,  calls  him 
a  disciple  of  Ephiaem's  disciple,  Zenobius.  There 
is  an  edition  of  his  works  (incomplete)  by  G.  Bickell 
(2  vols.,  Giessen,  1873-77);  thirty-seven  produc- 
tions out  of  about  two  htmdred  are  given,  including 
a  poem  of  not  less  than  2,136  lines  on  the  parrot 
and  the  trisagion,  and  another  of  1,928  lines  on 


repentance.    A  volume  of  Isaac's  homilies  has  been 
published  by  P.  Bedjan  (Paris,  1903). 

E.  Nestle. 

Bibuoobapht:  J.  S.  Assemani,  Bibliotheca  orientalia,  t  207- 
304.  Rome.  1710;  P.  Zingerle.  in  TQ,  lii  (1870),  02-114; 
G.  Cardahi,  Liber  theaauri  de  arte  poetica  Syrorwn,  pp.  21- 
25.  Rome.  1875;  W.  Wright.  Short  HiaL  of  Syriac  Litera- 
ture, pp.  61-64.  London.  1804;  R.  Duval.  LiUirature 
eyriaque,  pp.  340-341,  Paris.  1000;    DCB,  ill  206-206. 

nAAC  OF  NINEVEH:  Bishop  of  Nineveh  in  the 
seventh  century.  He  was  made  bishop  by  the 
patriarch  €reoi^  (660-680),  in  succession  to  Moses, 
but  retired  after  five  months,  and  died,  almost 
blind  from  much  study,  in  the  monastery  of  Rabban 
Shabor.  One  of  his  works  exists  in  Syriac,  Arabic, 
and  Ethiopic,  and  also  in  a  Greek  translation  by 
two  monks,  Patricius  and  Abraham,  of  the  mon- 
astery of  Mar  Saba,  southeast  of  Jerusalem,  and 
published  by  Nicephorus  (Leipsic,  1770;  in  AfPG, 
Ixxxvi.  799-888).  A  Latin  translation  under  the 
title  Isaac  Syrue,  liber  de  corUemptu  mundi  in  fifty- 
three  chapters  is  in  the  Bibliotheca  magna  (Cologne, 
1618,  VI.,  ii.  688;  Gallandi,  Bibliotheca,  zii.  3). 
Another  work  entitled  "  Letter  to  the  Holy  Father 
Simon  in  the  Wonderful  Mountain  "  is  published  in 
Greek  in  Mai's  Nova  Bibliotheca,  vol.  viii.,  part  3 
(Rome,  1871),  pp.  156-188;  it  is  interesting  for  its 
information  about  Malpat  of  Ekiessa,  the  originator 
of  the  Messalians,  and  the  knowledge  it  shows  of 
apocalyptic  literature.  E.  Nebtlb. 

Bibuoorapht:  The  earlier  literature,  vii.,  J.  S.  Aseemani. 
Bibliotheoa  orientalia,  I  44.  Rome.  1710;  W.  Wright. 
Short  HiaL  of  Syriae  Liieraiure,  London.  1804;  and  J.  B. 
Chabot.  De  S.  iaaaci  Ninivitae  vita,  acripUe  et  doctrina, 
Paria,  1802,  is  to  be  corrected  by  Jiauadenah,  Higue  de 
Bacrah,  le  livre  de  la  chaaUU,  ed.  J.  B.  Chabot.  Rome 
1806.  ef.  J.  B.  Chabot  in  Reoue  afmxHque,  1806.  p.  254. 
Consult  also:  DCB,  iil  201-202;  W.  Wright,  Catalogu/e 
of  Syriae  MSS.,  ii.  660-681.  London.  1870-72. 

ISAAC  BEN  SHESHET  BARFAT:  Spanish 
Jewish  talmudist;  b.  at  Valencia  in  1326;  d.  at 
Algiers  in  1408.  He  studied  at  Barcelona,  where 
he  also  b^^an  his  life-work,  early  gaining  a  reputa- 
tion as  a  talmudist  and  being  called  upon  for  legal 
opinions.  When  fifty  he  became  rabbi,  removed 
later  to  Saragossa,  and  thence  to  Valencia.  In  1391, 
in  consequence  of  persecution  of  the  Jews,  he  fled, 
going  to  Algiers,  where  he  was  made  rabbi.  He 
was  the  author  of  417  "  responsa  "  which  have  been 
highly  valued  by  competent  authorities,  published 
as  She  'eloi  u-Teehybot  (Constantinople,  1546-47); 
and  possibly  of  an  unpublished  commentary  on  the 
Pentateuch. 
Bibuoobapht:   /£,  vi.  631-632. 

ISAACS,  ABRAM  SAMUEL:  Jewish  rabbi;  b. 
in  New  York  City  Aug.  30,  1852.  He  was  educated 
at  New  York  University  (B.A.,  1871)  and  the 
University  of  Breslau  (1878),  and  since  1886  has 
been  connected  with  New  York  University,  where 
he  has  been  professor  of  Hebrew  (1886-94)  and 
German  (since  1887).  He  was  also  preacher  to  the 
East  86th  Street  Synagogue,  New  York  City,  in 
1886-87,  and  since  1896  has  been  rabbi  of  B'nai 
Jeshurun  Congregation,  Paterson,  N.  J.  He  was 
editor  of  The  Jewish  Messenger  from  1878  to  1903, 
and  has  written.  Life  and  Writings  of  Moses  Chaim 
Luzzaiio  (New  York,  1878)  and  /Stories  from  the 
Rabbis  (New  York,  1894). 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


86 


The  ProplMt  and  his  Tfm«. 
RtporU  ooneemiog  Isaiah  ((  1). 
Chronology  of  the  Period  ((  2). 
External  ErenU  (i  8). 
ReUtioo  of  Evento  to  Faith  ((  4). 
Ideals  Underiyinc  PkophMsiee  (10). 
Isaiah's  life  and  Gharaeter  (i  6). 
The  Book  of  Isaiah. 
lU  Plaee  in  the  Oanon. 
The  Text. 


ISAIAH. 

ItsConcUtion  ((  1). 

Gbttses  and  Kinds  of  Errors  ((  2). 

Attthoraliip. 

Prophetle  Authorship  in  Qeneral 

(ID. 
Interrelations    of    L-xxxv.    and 

xL-lxTi  («  2). 
Authorship  substantially  Isaianio 

(18). 
Isaianio   Authorship  of   xxriiL 
'  (»  4). 


Chapters  ii.-xU  («  S). 
Chapters  xiil-xxvii  (|  6). 
Results  of  the  InYestigmtton  (|  7). 

III.  The  Critical  View. 
The  Problem  (|  !)• 
Strueture  of  the  Book  (|2). 
Results  of  (Mtidsm  (i  3). 
Analysis  of  Isa.  i.-xxxix  ((  4). 
Analysis  of  Isa.  xmxvi  (|  5). 
Condusion  (I  6). 


I.  Tha  Prophet  and  His  TimM:  The  name  rendered 
''  Isaiah  "  in  English  has  in  the  Hebrew  two  forms, 
Yesha'ifah,  and  Yeaha^ffohUf  the  latter  in  his  book, 
II  Kings  zviii.-xxi.,  and  I  Chron.  zzv.  3,  15,  xzvi. 
25,  n  Chron.  xzvi.  22,  xxzii.  32,  the  former  in 
I  Chron.  iii.  21;  Neh.  zi.  7.  In  the  Septuagint  it 
varies  greatly,  taking  the  forms  lesuu,  leasioM, 
IdsMB,  HSaaiah,  Imia*,  OioiaM,  The  derivations 
and  meanings  given  are  quite  varied. 

Outside  the  book  called  by  his  name  and  II  Kings 
xviii.~xxi.,  Isaiah  the  prophet  is  mentioned  only 

twice  in  the  Bible.    II  Chron.  xzvi.  22 

J^^^JJJ2aL  "^^  ^^^  *^  *<^  ^^  Ussiah  of  Judah 

Ttiiifth       ^^^    written    down    by    Isaiah    the 

prophet,  the  son  of  Amoz.  The 
method  of  citation  here  deviates  from  the  usual 
formula,  so  that  either  incompleteness  or  defacement 
of  the  text  is  suspected,  while  the  Septuagint  lacks 
the  phrase  "  son  of  Amos  "  and  has  further  varia- 
tions. The  passage  adds  nothing  to  knowledge  of 
the  prophet  gained  elsewhere.  It  has  been  taJcen, 
in  connection  with  Isa.  i.  1,  as  ground  for  the  con- 
jecture that  the  prophet  lived  through  the  entire 
reigns  of  the  four  kings  mentioned,  and  that  Isa.  vi. 
teUs  of  a  renewed  call  of  the  prophet  after  a  period 
of  quietness.  This  is  favorod  by  the  position  of 
chap,  vi.,  and  modem  students  are  inclined  to 
attribute  chaps,  i.-v.  wholly  or  in  part  to  the  early 
years  of  Ussiah.  II  Chron.  xxzii.  32  speaks  of  a 
record  in  the  "  Vision  of  Isaiah  "  of  the  deeds  of 
Hesekiah  which  is  m  the  Book  of  Kings.  The  Sep- 
tuagint, Vulgate,  and  Taigum  place  an  "  and  " 
before  "  in  the  book,"  thus  mentioning  two  sources. 
It  is  to  be  noticed  that  **  Vision  of  Istdah  "  was  the 
title  of  the  canonical  Book  of  Isaiah  (Isa.  i.  1). 
The  passage  was  early  taken  as  indicating  an  inde- 
pendent "  Virion  of  Isaiah,"  and  an  apocryphal 
book  of  that  character  was  dted  by  Origen,  and  is 
perhaps  the  "Hartyrdom  (or  Ascension)  of  Isaiah  " 
known  in  the  Ethioptc  (see  Pbbudbpiorafra,  Old 
Tbstamsnt,  II.  34),  dealing  with  the  martyrdom 
of  Isaiah  imder  Manasseh.  This  tradition  of  a 
martyrdom  appears  also  in  the  (jemara  (Yebamol 
49b)  as  drawn  from  "  an  early  genealogical  record  " 
and  due  to  a  condemnation  of  certain  utter- 
ances of  the  prophet.  Another  tradition  connects 
the  death  of  Isaiah  with  his  condemnation  of  the 
act  of  Manasseh  recorded  in  II  Kings  xxi.  7,  and 
brings  into  relation  with  this  event  the  passage 
Isa.  Izvi.  1  sqq.,  and  a  prediction  of  the  coming 
of  Nebuchadreszar  to  destroy  the  temple.  This 
aroused  the  wrath  of  Manasseh,  who  ordered  the 
prophet  to  be  brought  and  slain.    Isaiah  fled  and 


took  refuge  in  the  heart  of  a  tree,  which  closed  about 
him  and  hid  him.  But  his  pursuers  sawed  through 
the  tree  until  the  blood  of  the  prophet  flowed  forth 
as  water.  The  passages  II  Kings  xxi.  16,  xxiv.  3-4 
are  brought  into  relation  with  this  tradition  and  the 
event  is  said  to  have  occurred  on  Tammus  17,  cor- 
responding to  July  6,  given  in  the  Roman  Catholic 
calendar  (cf.  A8B,  July,  ii.  250  sqq.;  A.  Kloster- 
maim,  Da$  Datum  des  Martyrium  Jemiias  im 
rdmiaehen  Kalendar,  in  T8K,  1880,  pp.  536  sqq.). 
The  one  tradition  of  value  seems  to  be  that  whidi 
places  his  death  in  the  reign  of  Manasseh. 

This  tradition  may  be  brought  into  connection 
with  the  title  of  the  book  by  way  of  defining  the 
I  P®"^  ®^  activity  of  the  prophet.  To 
oKroftSi  *^  period  of  the  four  kings  mentioned 
pi|[j^l^^  *  in  the  title  may  be  added  an  imdefined 
but  short  period  under  Manasseh,  and 
Isa.  vi.  1  is  often  taken  as  indicating  the  entry  of 
Isaiah  upon  prophetic  work  in  the  last  year  of 
Ussiah.  Supposing  that  he  was  then  twenty  years 
old,  his  age  at  the  accession  of  Manasseh  would  be 
eighty-one;  thus:  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  was 
in  586  B.C.,  the  eleventh  year  of  Zedekiah;  then, 
according  to  the  reckoning  of  the  Book  of  Kings, 
Manasseh  began  to  reign  in  696  b.c,  Hesekiah  in 
725  B.C.,  Ahas  in  741  B.C.,  Jotham  in  757  b.c, 
and  the  death  of  Ussiah  would  fail  in  758  b.c. 
[or  757];  the  siege  of  Samaria  under  Shalmaneaer 
b^g;an  in  the  fourth  year  of  Hesekiah,  722  b.c,  and 
its  capture  by  Sargon  in  Hezekiah's  sixth  year, 
720  B.C.  If  it  is  assumed,  as  is  most  probable, 
that  the  sign  on  the  dial  of  Ahas  is  to  be  ooimected 
with  the  eclipse  of  Mar.  14,  711  B.C.  (F.  K.  Ginael, 
Spegieller  Kanon  der  Sannerir  und  M€mdfin9term89e, 
Berlin,  1899),  visible  in  Jerusalem,  then  the  fore- 
going statements  in  general  and  the  assigimient  of 
the  year  711  b.c.  for  the  healing  of  Hesekiah  tally 
with  astronomical  data.  Therefore  the  embassy 
from  Merodach-baladan  (Isa.  xxxix.  1)  would  fall 
at  the  earliest  in  711  B.c,  and  Hesekiah's  deter- 
mination to  throw  off  Assyrian  overlordship  would 
fall  in  710  B.C.  The  Ptolemaic  Canon  allows  to  a 
Mardokempados  twelve  years  as  king  of  Babylon, 
and  to  his  conqueror,  Sargon,  five  years;  then  the 
last  year  of  Mardokempados  is  the  thirty-eighth  of 
the  era  of  Nabonassar,  and  the  first  year  of  Sargon  is 
709  B.C.  Then  that  the  **  king  of  Babylon,''  Mero- 
dach-baladan (Isa.  xxxix.  1),  is  not  an  indefinite 
usurper  of  that  mime,  but  that  the  Mardokempados 
of  the  Ptolemaic  (}anon  is  the  Merodach-baladan  of 
the  Assyrian  inscriptions  does  not  imply  error 
either  in  that  he  is  called  "  son  of  Yakin  "  in  the 


87 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Canon  or  that  he  is  called  ''  son  of  Baladan  "  in 
Isa.  xxzix.  The  former  is  accounted  for  by  his 
capital  being  at  Bit  Yakin  or  Dur  Yakin,  evidently 
taken  as  named  for  an  eponymous  ancestor,  and 
the  latter  may  have  arisen  from  a  like  connection 
with  a  supposed  ancestor  mentioned  in  the  second 
element  of  his  own  name.  Thus  the  Assyrian  data 
harmonize  with  the  foregoing  calculations.  Accord- 
ing to  contract  tablets  adduced  by  G.  Smith  (Assyr- 
ian Eponym  Canon,  London,  1875,  pp.  86-87), 
Saigon's  fourteenth  year  fell  in  the  eponymate  of 
Samashupahir,  and  his  fifteenth  year  as  king  of 
AasyriA  is  stated  to  have  been  his  third  as  king  of 
Babylon;  his  thirteenth  year  over  Assyria  was 
therefore  his  first  over  Babylon,  i.e.,  709  B.C.,  and 
his  reign  over  Assyria  b^;an  722-721  B.C.;  Sar- 
gon's  seventeenth  and  last  regnal  year  was  705 
B.C.,  and  the  first  of  his  successor,  Sennacherib,  was 
704  B.C.  The  Eponym  Canon  and  the  Ptolemaic 
Canon  give  assistance  from  this  point  on.  From 
Assyrian  records  it  is  clear  that  the  regnal  year  of 
Saigon  began  in  the  middle  of  an  eponymate. 
The  discrepancy  between  the  Biblical  date  of  720 
B.C.  and  the  apparent  Assyrian  of  722  B.C.  is  ex- 
plained partly  by  confusion  between  the  beginning 
of  the  eponymous  year  and  the  regnal  year  of  the 
king,  and  partly  by  a  transposition  occurring  in 
the  Canon  lists.  Concerning  the  relation  of  Shal- 
maneser  to  his  predecessor,  Tiglath-Pileser,  nothing 
can  be  said,  as  the  Canons  fail  here.  But  if  the  first 
regnal  year  of  Sennacherib  fell  in  the  last  part  of  the 
eponymate  of  Nabudinipus  and  the  first  part  of  the 
latter's  successor's,  Sennacherib  can  not  have  made 
an  expedition  to  the  West  in  Hezekiah's  fourteenth 
year  (Isa.  xxxvi.  1),  which  expedition  he  states  that 
he  made  in  his  own  third  year,  when  he  shut  Heze- 
kiali  up  "  like  a  bird  in  a  cage  "  (Schrader,  KAT,  p. 
293).  If  it  be  assumed  that  Sennacherib's  full  reg- 
nal year  is  meant,  it  might  fall  in  702-701  B.C.,  and 
with  this  would  agree  the  supposition  that  the  surely 
erroneous  dating  in  Hezekiah's  fourteenth  year  of 
Isa.  xxxvi.  1  is  due  to  a  previous  mention  of  his 
twenty-fourth  year.  So  that  in  702  b.c,  accord- 
ing to  the  AsByri&n  basis,  b^gan  the  Assyrian  sub- 
jection of  Judah  and  Hezekiah. 

Then  Isaiah's  activity  as  a  prophet  would  Call 
between  758  and  690  b.c.  at  the  latest,  a  period  of 
singular  moment.  The  Assyrians,  in 
their  conquest  of  Syria  and  Palestine, 
laid  a  basis  for  fiurther  conquests  in 
the  northwest  and  southwest,  hindered, 
however,  by  the  danger  from  the  Medes  and  other 
peoples  in  their  rear.  By  the  movements  which 
went  on  about  them,  the  Jews  were  brought  into 
contact  with  world  politics,  and  in  the  Book  of 
Isaiah  the  fortunes  of  distant  and  neighboring 
peoples  receive  larger  notice  than  had  been  custom- 
ary. The  northern  kingdom  fell  from  the  high  estate 
it  achieved  under  Jeroboam  II.  after  a  career  in  which 
the  most  contradictory  state  policies  had  been  pur- 
sued. It  had  become  identified  with  an  attempt  to 
unite  Syria,  Israel,  and  Judah  against  Assyria,  in 
which  the  refusal  of  Judah  had  led  to  an  attempt 
to  set  askle  the  Davidic  dynasty  in  Judah.  Uzziah 
had  thought  to  strengthen  his  own  kingdom  by 
securing  his  boimdaries  with  fortresses  and  by  heap- 


Xster- 

nal 


ing  up  the  means  and  materials  of  war  to  furnish 
material  guaranties  lor  the  faith  of  the  Jews  in  the 
security  of  the  city  of  Yahweh  and  of  the  dynasty. 
Ahaz  preferred  to  depend  upon  the  clemency  of 
the  Assyrian  king.  Hezekiah  rejected  this  means 
of  quiet,  and  put  his  trust  in  Yahweh  without  using 
human  means. 

The  lessons  of  the  period  for  the  pious  of  Israel 

and  of  all  times  are  that  Yahweh  reaches  the  ends 

corresponding   to  his   being   through 

4.  BelaUon  ^^  history  of  his  people  and  of  the 

Bvants     ^^^^^'     I^  <lo^  not  follow  that  he 

to  Faith,  i^pudiates  his  people  or  his  promises 
to  their  fathers,  nor  yet  that  he  makes 
the  foundation  of  his  kingdom  dependent  upon  the 
hegemony  of  any  earthly  state  where  his  worship 
should  be  conducted.  While  he  permitted  the 
Davidic  kingdom  to  fall  apart  and  Jerusalem  to 
become  the  capital  of  the  smaller  division,  allowed 
Israel's  land  to  receive  a  new  population,  and  the 
Davidic  king  to  become  a  vassal  of  Assyria,  while 
he  brought  to  nought  Sennacherib's  pUms  against 
Jerusalem,  the  purpose  seemed  to  be  to  purify  the 
faith  of  the  people  that  his  might  and  will  should 
ordain  healing  or  destruction.  The  Israelites  had 
supposed  God's  interests  bound  up  with  those  of 
his  people  in  his  land  and  its  institutions.  But 
they  had  to  learn  through  discipline  that  the 
people  to  whom  his  promises  came  and  to  whom 
they  applied  was  a  people  which  corresponded  in 
its  essence  to  his  own  sanctity  and  were  not  depend- 
ent upon  mere  fleshly  hopes.  It  contravened  past 
experience  that  he  who  had  promised  to  be  the 
savior  of  his  people  should  permit  them  to  be  beaten 
and  subdued,  while  to  tyrants  whose  purpose  he 
hated  he  had  given  the  victory.  The  kingdom  of 
Jeroboam,  founded  on  cunning  and  force,  was  no 
better  than  other  kingdoms;  nor  was  the  kingdom 
of  Judah,  with  its  externals  of  sacrifice,  that  to 
which  he  had  made  his  promises.  Of  course,  the 
conquerors,  who  thanked  themselves  and  their 
gods  for  the  victory,  were  even  less  fitted  to  be 
his  servants.  The  destruction  of  the  foe  at  the 
pinnacle  of  his  greatness  and  the  restoration  of  his 
people  were  to  reveal  the  ftdfilment  of  his  promises, 
no  more  to  be  endangered  by  the  rule  of  sin. 

Yet  Yahweh  had  not  given  over  his  land,  de- 
stroyed his  people,  laid  in  ruins  the  house  of  David 
and  Jerusalem,  burned  up  the  world  and 
£' t~?J^    destroyed  mankind  in  order  to  create 


Underly- 
ing 


^  a  new  earth.     Rather  the  kiea  was 

Propheoiee.  ^^^  symbolized  by  the  plant  world, 
where  the  dying  vegetation  promises 
new  life  by  its  seeds  and  its  shoots.  So  in  the  dying 
Israel  there  was  an  imperishable  remainder,  which 
was  to  survive  destruction  and  to  live  again  in 
unassailable  dominion,  to  be  menaced  neither  by 
sin  nor  the  anger  of  God.  The  people  which  had 
been  destroyed  was  to  be  awakened  to  new  life, 
and  the  house  of  David  was  to  rise  to  renewed 
kingly  power  in  the  son  of  a  young  woman.  But 
this  was  to  take  form  neither  in  nation,  state,  nor 
race.  The  germ  can  be  considered  only  as  an  in- 
visible church  known  only  to  Yahweh.  And  since 
in  Israel  the  prophet  of  Yahweh  is  he  who  learns 
the  will  of  Yidiweh  in  the  conditions  of  things  and 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


88 


translates  the  dark  sayings  of  God  as  uttered  in 
the  events  of  history,  so  the  people  gathered  by 
the  prophet's  word  and  unified  by  it  is  the  inde- 
structible Zion,  the  enduring  remainder  of  Israel 
which  makes  the  prophet's  teachings  the  ground  of 
its  inner  life.  The  prophet  is  the  medium  of  this 
new  life.  His  conduct  in  life,  his  hope  in  sorrow, 
are  the  prefigurement  and  pledge  of  that  which  is 
destined  for  the  conmiimity. 

Such  a  person  does  Isaiah  appear  in  the  testimony, 

direct  and  indirect,  which  his  book  carries.    Outside 

of  the  reports  of  his  life  already  con- 

|i~^*  sidered,  it  may  be  gathered  that  he  was 
Oharaoter.  '^  c^^^^  of  Jerusalem;  that  he  had 
several  children,  one  of  whom,  a  son, 
must  have  been  bom  in  Jotham's  reign  (vii.  3), 
and  another  during  the  Syrian-Ephraimitic  war 
(viii.  1  sqq.);  that  he  regarded  wife,  children,  and 
the  events  of  family  life  as  living  pictures  and  true 
signs  of  the  prophecies  he  uttered;  that  he  looked 
back  upon  the  hour  of  consecration  pictured  in 
chap.  vi.  as  pivotal,  and  as  conditioning  his  inner 
life  (viii.  11  sqq.).  Since  his  care  and  hopes  were 
so  different  from  those  which  public  life  offered,  he 
deemed  it  his  duty  to  implant  in  continuing  security 
in  the  heart  of  a  receptive  circle,  for  use  in  the  future, 
the  divine  knowledge  which  had  come  to  him. 

In  chap,  vii.,  in  the  midst  of  the  Syrian-Ephraim- 
itic crisis,  Isaiah  sought  in  vain  to  direct  the  policy  of 
the  Davidic  house  away  from  dependence  upon  As- 
syria to  trust  in  Yahweh,  and  in  chap.  viii.  testified 
that  the  waters  of  Shiloah  were  sufficient  to  with- 
stand the  turbulence  of  Resin  and  Pekah,  and  they 
did  not  need  the  addition  of  the  flood  of  Assyrian 
might,  which  would  overflow  the  land  it  was  de- 
signed to  protect.  Later  Isaiah  again  sought  to 
stem  the  course  of  public  events  among  his  people 
by  glowing  predictions  of  positive  success.  Such  a 
case  is  presented  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah  when  the 
foe  was  drawn  away  from  Jerusalem  and  the 
danger  to  the  city  was  averted  by  the  catastrophe 
which  befell  the  enemy. 

n.  The  Book  of  Isaiah.—! .  Its  Plaoe  in  the  Oanon : 
In  the  Hebrew  Bible  Isaiah  stands  first  in  the  divi- 
sion of  the  so-called  later  prophets  and  precedes 
Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel  evidently  upon  the  ground  of 
priority  in  history,  but  in  the  Septuagint  it  is  pre- 
ceded by  the  book  of  the  Minor  Prophets  (cf. 
Jerome,  Ad  Pat^tnum,  Prologua  ffaleatus).  The 
Hebrew  order  is  confirmed  by  the  treatment  in 
Ecclus.  xlviii.  22-xlix.  10.  The  Tahnudic  tract 
Baba  baihra  (col.  xiv.,  col.  2)  makes  Jeremiah  follow 
Kings  and  puts  Isaiah  between  Ezekiel  and  the 
Twelve  according  to  the  principle  which  arranges 
books  approximately  in  order  of  length.  Reasons 
for  this  difference  in  order  are  variously  given: 
Vitringa  thought  that  the  placing  of  Jeremiah  first 
was  due  to  the  tradition  that  Jeremiah  had  com- 
posed the  Books  of  Kings;  Lightfoot  alleged  apolo- 
getic interests  which  used  the  order  in  which  Jere- 
miah stood  first  to  show  that  Matt,  xxvii.  9  was  not 
in  error,  since  the  whole  of  the  prophetic  canon 
might  then  be  called  after  the  name  of  the  first  book; 
still  others  thought  it  might  be  due  to  the  fact  that 
after  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel  had  taken  form,  Isaiah 
had  been  changed  or  that  it  had  taken  form  only 


in  the  time  of  Cyrus.   But  these  methods  of  reason- 
ing are  not  conclusive. 

8.  The  Text:  The  variety  of  contents  and  style, 
the  idealistic  character  of  the  oracles  and  the  origi- 
nality of  thought  have  from  earliest 
^^^  times  made  this  book  difficidt  to  under- 
dition.  B^^c^d-  Much  read  and  often  edited,  it 
could  not  maintain  its  original  form, 
and  it  became  the  object  of  an  exegesis  which  sought 
to  come  to  an  understanding  with  the  traditional 
text  as  an  inviolable  and  sacred  thing.  The  con- 
dition of  the  text  in  chaps.  xl.-lxvi.  may  be  seen  in 
Klostermann's  conunentary  (Munich,  1893)  of 
chaps,  xxxvi.-xxxix.  in  the  same  author's  com- 
mentary on  the  parallel  section  in  Kings  (Munich, 
1887)  and  in  TSK,  1884.  And  revision  of  the  whole 
text  of  chaps,  i.-xxxv.  is  required  before  exegesis 
can  be  securely  founded,  an  especially  difficult  task, 
for  which  the  test  of  meter  and  artistic  form,  so 
often  suggested,  is  of  very  little  value.  Indeed, 
changes  of  form  by  the  prophet  or  his  disciples  are 
not  excluded  from  consideration;  for  example,  in 
the  great  picture  of  the  judgment  under  the  figure 
of  an  earthquake  in  xxiv.,  at  verse  7  there  is  the 
beginning  of  an  alphabetical  elegy  in  six-lined 
strophes,  the  first  two  strophes  of  which  are  present 
and  complete,  while  of  the  third  only  the  first  half 
is  given.  Similarly  in  xxiii.  16  only  the  beginning 
of  a  known  song  is  cited,  and  this  may  explain  the 
break  at  the  end  of  xxiv.  12. 

Not  to  be  disregarded  are  the  paraphrases  of 
Jonathan,  the  fragments  of  Aquilas,  Theodotion, 
and  Symmachus  as  they  have  come 
uid  ^B?  down  with  the  marginal  notes  of  the 
of  Errors.'  K®**P^  *^^  ^^m  thfl  notes  of  Jerome. 
These  will  at  times  serve  to  indicate 
the  introduction  of  errors  in  later  times.  Thus, 
Jonathan  indicates  in  viii.  14  the  loss  of  **  for  you  " 
after  **  he  shall  be,"  a  conclusion  supported  not  only 
by  the  Vulgate,  but  by  the  second  person  in  the 
Septuagint.  Doubled  readings  or  translations  in 
these  texts  are  often  a  guide  to  the  original  text, 
since  they  point  to  a  misreading  or  a  misunder- 
standing of  a  reading  to  which  such  misunder- 
standing is  a  direct  guide,  as  in  xxxiii.  7,  where 
"  their  valiant  ones  "  was  read  by  the  translators 
in  a  double  sense  as  the  object  of  fear  and  as  the 
subject,  which  led  to  further  changes  in  the  text 
of  the  verse.  The  Septuagint  shows  a  similar 
doubled  reading  in  ii.  16b  through  a  mistake  of 
the  eye  involving  further  changes  in  the  text. 
S<»netimes'  a  doubled  reading  is  merely  a  mistake 
in  copying  produced  by  itacism,  as  in  viii.  23, 
codex  304.  But  a  critical  text  of  the  Septuagint 
will  show  that  sometimes  the  translator  in  decipher- 
ing his  Hebrew  exemplar  has  in  a  surprising  manner 
gone  wrong  through  too  great  confidence  in  his 
apprehension  of  the  context.  Such  a  case  is  pre- 
sented in  viii.  7-8.  Examinations  of  the  Septua- 
gint make  it  perfectly  clear  that  its  present  text  is 
the  result  of  a  long  period  of  correction  of  a  text 
which  sought  to  give  the  sense  of  the  prophetical 
deliverances  without  having  a  sure  insight  into  the 
meaning  and  the  form  of  the  original.  But  the 
early  text  together  with  the  corrections  themselves 
and  the  differences  between  them  often  put  the 


89 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


student  upon  the  track  of  a  better  Hebrew  text 
than  the  one  which  has  been  transmitted.  There 
is  in  mind  here  not  only  the  1113  of  xxix.  3  in  the 
Septuagint,  which  alone  explains  why  Yahweh, 
who  is  beleaguering  Ariel  in  verse  1,  has  made  men- 
tion of  the  siege  of  Ariel  by  David  in  early  times, 
but  also  the  tOi  agapHOi  sou  of  zzvi.  17.  In  this 
latter  case  the  ^•Tlv,  which  apparently  lay  before 
the  translator,  goes  back  to  an  original  Tl^^?' 
which  belonged  to  verse  18  and  marks  y^tlO  as 
superfluous,  suggested  indeed  by  the  doubled  Dip 
of  Jonathan. 

Such  cases  as  this,  which  are  frequent,  are  suffi- 
cient to  enable  the  student  to  correct  the  errors  and 
sometimes  the  gaps  which  occur  in  the  synagogue 
text  of  the  Hebrew.  Again,  the  original  of  x.  11 
was  doubtless  originally  **  shall  I  not  also  do  so  to 
Samaria  and  her  idols  and  to  Jerusalem  and  her 
images."  The  present  text  sets  the  lot  of  Samaria 
as  a  type  and  prophecy  of  the  lot  of  Jerusalem, 
and  pictures  the  fall  of  Samaria  as  a  past  event, 
which  is  the  result  of  a  redaction  which  changed 
the  text  of  the  prophet  to  square  with  a  later  his- 
torical situation.  Mistakes  of  pointing  are  also  to 
be  noted,  as  when  ilDDBh  in  i.  7  is  thus  pointed 
as  a  noun  instead  of  TtlMth  as  a  verb,  or  in  x.  13 

T    -  i 

the  waw  in  "I^DKI  and  l^lKI  is  given  the  simple 
shewa  instead  of  kamets.  StiU  worse  is  the  pointing 
"131  for  l^"^  in  ix.  8,  for  which  the  Septuagint  has 
thanaiOB,  *'  death,"  which  corresponds  closely  to  the 
"  pestilence "  for  which  the  proposed  reading 
stands.  Accentuation  and  vocalization  are  both 
astray  in  ix.  1,  "  in  the  former  time,"  where  for 
n^l  should  be  read  (t\)J^y3  and  the  words  should 
be  joined  with  the  clause  which  goes  before. 
Part  of  the  errors  of  text  are  due  to  the  diffi- 
culties which  underlay  the  consonantal  form.  This 
especially  occurs  in  transferring  an  initial  M  to 
the  end  of  the  preceding  word,  but  appears 
also  in  the  loss  of  the  letter  in  the  middle  or 
end  of  a  word,  as  when  D7K1M  for  Dr6  HK^ 
was  given  the  form  D^KIM.  A  similar  case  occurs 
in  viii.  6,  where  the  double  reading  T)Wt^  nK1fi^(D) 
came  to  be  written  DMBHIS^CD),  and  then  was  changed 
into  DM  ends.  Other  changes  are  caused  by  the 
inclusion  in  the  text  of  notes  originally  made  in 
the  margin,  for  a  case  of  which  cf.  vii.  8-9  with 
verse  4.  With  such  enlargements  of  the  text  corre- 
spond also  gaps,  which  are  the  result  of  carelessness  or 
chance,  or  which  rest  upon  intended  shortening  of 
the  reading  or  upon  customaiy  abbreviations.  A  case 
of  the  last  is  found  in  viii.  21,  where  "  curse  by  their 
king  and  their  God  "  should  read  "  curse  the  house 
of  their  king  and  their  God,"  where  the  letter  beth, 
represented  in  the  English  by  "  by,"  is  an  abbrevia- 
tion or  a  mistake  for  beth, "  house."  Between  "  for  " 
and  "  head  "  in  viii.  8  has  fallen  out  the  word  MB^K, 
**  I  will  take  away."  If,  as  in  the  last  case  cited,  a 
word  may  fall  out,  so  frequently  from  a  word  a  letter 
may  be  missing,  of  which  numerous  examples  might 
be  dted.  To  these  causes  of  change  may  be  added 
exchanges  of  letters  which  either  look  or  sound 
alike.    Thus,  in  xi.  4,  )^1^  demanded  by  the  par- 


allelism appears  as  pK,  and  in  i.  7,  xxv.  2,  and 
xxix.  6,  instead  of  DHT  there  appears  D^T.  Inten- 
tional amendment  appears  in  the  change  from  the 
third  person  to  the  first  in  v.  3-6,  influenced  by 
verse  2.  Indeed,  the  riddles  of  interpretation  in 
whole  sections  of  Isaiah,  such  as  the  six  deliverances 
of  chaps,  xxviii.-xxxv.,  the  section  xxiv.-xxvii., 
and  their  relation  to  other  parts  of  the  book  require 
as  a  preliminaiy  to  their  solution  the  amendment 
of  the  text,  which  is  a  preliminary  to  the  work  of 
the  higher  criticism  and  the  detennination  of  the 
time  to  which  these  sections  belong. 

8.  Authorship:  It  is  evident  that  a  prophet  who 

intervened  in  public  affairs  in  crises  so  important, 

whose  experiences  were  so  large,  who, 

^A  th^    W**  ®^®°  *°  ^^^  ^"^®^  °^  private  life,  was 

ixi^GeneraL  ^"^wearyingly  diligent  in  instructing  a 
*  band  of  disciples  with  a  broad  future 
in  view,  employed  writing  not  only  for  the  purpose 
of  extending  Us  personal  activity  beyond  his  im- 
mediate environment,  as,  for  example,  to  the  Israel- 
ites in  exile,  to  the  end  that  they  might  have  his 
words  of  comfort  in  their  original  fonn,  but  that 
he  had  an  outlook  upon  the  more  distant  future. 
This  must  have  been  especially  the  case  when  the 
subject  matter  was  issued  at  the  joining-point  of 
the  past  and  the  future  when  old  things  were  be- 
coming new,  when  the  utterances  were  needed  as 
a  means  of  recognizing  God's  work  at  the  time  and 
for  the  time.  It  must  have  been  in  such  a  spirit 
that  the  prophets  wrote  their  books  and  unified 
their  earlier  utterances  in  written  discourse.  They 
were  enabled  in  this  way  to  supplement  by  adding 
historical  notices  and  even  to  refer  to  the  words  of 
earlier  prophets.  Since,  in  the  book  ascribed  to 
Isaiah,  there  exist  in  the  first  person  recollections 
of  the  fifty-second  year  of  Uzsiah,  and  in  close 
connection  with  these  and  in  similar  style  discourses 
which  relate  to  affairs  at  least  sixteen  years  later 
in  the  time  of  Ahaz,  and  inasmuch  as  these  latter 
approve  themselves  as  Isaianic  by  their  congruity 
with  the  activities  and  character  of  Isaiah  as  shown 
in  chaps,  xxxvi.-xxxvii.,  and  further,  since  in  this 
book  there  appear  whole  series  of  addresses  parallel 
in  matter  with  the  occasions  of  the  time,  and  setting 
forth  the  same  main  idea,  it  is  a  fair  presumption 
that  Isaiah  undertook  a  collection  of  his  prophecies. 
The  question  is  whether  the  present  book  contains 
only  his  sayings,  or  contains  them  in  full,  or  in  their 
original  order.  Until  this  is  settled,  it  is  of  little 
use  to  quote  what  Sirach,  Ambroeius,  Jerome, 
Cyril,  and  others  down  to  the  present  have  said 
as  to  the  worth  of  Isaiah  from  a  Christian,  ethical, 
or  esthetic  standpoint. 

To  judge  of  all  this  a  thoroughly  new  working- 
over  is  required,  a  historical  investigation,  and  for 
this  there  is  no  better  and  no  other 

*•  ^**"*r  starting-point  than  the  section  in  chaps. 
J  _j^^^*^^xxxvi.-xxxix.,  a  trustworthy  narrative 

'  2i.  -ixvl.  ^hich  has  found  place  also  in  the  Books 
of  Kings  (xviii.  13  sqq.).  This  narrar 
tive  is  interjected  by  the  compiler  of  the  book 
between  two  well-arranged  collections  of  anonymous 
addresses,  the  first  of  which  have  relation  to  the 
Assyrian  period  and  correspond  to  the  contents  of 

chaps,  xxxvi.-xxxvii.,  while  the  second  series  has 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


40 


relation  to  the  Babylonian  side  and  oorresponds  to 
chap.  xTxiT.  The  second  of  the  two  aeries  of 
addresses  begins  with  a  command  to  give  comfort 
as  the  first  dosed  with  encouragement  (xxxv.  3 
sqq.);  the  second  comes  to  a  dose  in  an  opposition 
of  Edom  and  Zion  (he  l-bjii.  6)  just  as  does  the 
first  (zzxiii.  13-zzzy.  10).  Since  in  both  the  general 
view  of  the  Holy  Land  and  Jerusalem  is  that  of  a 
desolate  and  depopulated  rogion,  to  be  repeopled 
by  the  return  of  the  exiled,  doubtless  the  editor 
meant  to  convey  the  idea  that,  of  both  parts,  the 
Isaiah  of  zzxvi.-xxxix.  is  the  prophetic  author. 
It  is  therefore  unscientific  arbitrariness,  instead  of 
setting  apart  chaps.  zzviii.-lzvi.  and  employing 
chaps,  zxviii.-zzxix.  as  the  key  to  zl.-hnri.,  to 
break  off  after  zxxv.-xzxix.  and  to  imagine  oneself 
in  a  new  region.  He  who  reads  xxxv.  3-^  does  not 
stumble  at  xl.  1;  and  only  he  who  reads  xxviii.- 
xxxix.  can  understand  xlviii.  3-11,  and  can  regard 
the  same  prophet  as  basing  a  second  prediction 
upon  the  fulfilment  of  the  first.  He  can  apply 
xlii.  19  to  the  downfall  of  the  northern  kingdom, 
and  xliii.  8-10  to  the  deliverance  from  Sennacherib, 
and  Ivi.  9-lvii.  21  to  the  end  of  the  Isaianic  times. 
Whoever  dares  to  read  the  six  addresses  of  aname- 
less  prophet  in  xxviii.-xxxv.  beginning  with  "  Woe  " 
and  to  regard  them  as  Isaianic  as  a  whole  and  to 
follow  this  out  in  such  alleged  exilic  pieces  as  xxxiv.- 
xxxv.  has  no  philosophicad  reason  for  the  timidity 
with  which  he  refuses  to  recognise  xl.-^xvi.  as  also 
Isaianic.  A  hindrance  to  tUs  has  been  the  ob- 
viousness with  which  Cyrus  is  mentioned  even  by 
name,  and  the  assurance  with  which  the  downfaU 
of  Babylon  and  the  freeing  of  the  Israelites  is 
announced,  predictions  which  the  modem  ccmstruo- 
tion  of  all  elements  of  the  prophetic  consdousness 
on  the  basis  of  our  knowledge  of  his  times  seem  to 
make  impossible.  But  the  Servant  of  Yahweh 
who  is  named  Righteous  is  as  concretely  and 
definitely  indicated  as  Cyrus  and  his  relations  to 
Babylcm  and  Israel;  and  the  hegemony  of  the 
restored  Jerusalem  and  the  repopulating  of  the 
Holy  Land  is  more  definitely  portrayed  than  the 
downfall  of  Babylon.  And,  although  the  one  fits 
better  with  Jesus  of  Nasareth,  and  the  other 
with  the  Jerusalem  of  Herod's  time,  at  least  in 
externals,  than  with  any  other  prophet  or  with 
the  Jerusalem  of  any  other  time,  yet  the  refusal 
is  made  so  to  relate  the  connections.  If  the  en- 
thusiastic utterances  of  a  prophet  work  out  into 
realization  500  years  later,  why  could  they  not 
with  reference  to  QyrusT  In  fact,  the  book  does 
not  predict  a  coming  victor  to  bear  the  name  of 
Cyrus,  but  says  of  one  who  has  come  that  he  is 
the  rcAliiation  of  predictions  made  long  before  for 
Jerusalem;  the  victory  and  success  of  Cyrus  had 
been  so  dhnctly  indicated  that  it  was  evident  that 
he  could  use  his  victoiy  only  as  Yahweh  willed, 
and  the  honor  was  to  come  not  to  him,  but  to 
Yahweh  and  his  people.  Thus  Yahweh  had  laid 
violent  hands  upon  the  prophet  when  he  seised 
upon  the  Isaianic  period  in  which  to  bring  before 
the  prophet's  vision  this  picture  of  the  future. 
Isaiah  realised  that  the  present  conqueror  had  been 
predicted  long  before  as  called  from  the  East  to 
cany  out  Yahweh's  purposes  of  punishment,  but 


that  he  had  been  driven  back  when  in  wilfulness  he 
had  attempted  to  go  farther  than  Yahweh's  pur- 
poses had  carried.  Why,  then,  should  he  not 
foresee  a  second  conqueror,  coming  from  the  East 
and  more  completely  realidng  God's  designs,  who, 
by  the  veiy  misfortunes  which  he  brought,  should 
create  the  desire  in  the  heathen  world  for  Yahweh, 
the  only  healing  Qod,  who  b  to  be  found  in  the 
midst  of  his  people  (xlv.  14-25)  T  And  why  should 
he  not  foresee  the  prophet  who  should  so  com- 
plete the  work  of  renovation  as  to  bring  about  the 
regeneration  of  the  community?  And  to  what 
prophet  could  such  a  vision  so  appropriately  have 
come  as  to  Isaiah,  a  man  who,  in  the  midst  of  the 
most  untoward  circumstances,  could  see  around  him 
the  promise  of  a  brilliant  and  righteous  future? 

If  this  be  true,  a  new  exposition  of  chaps.  xL- 
Ixvi.  is  required  (the  view-point  of  which  was  indi- 
cated in  the  Luiherisehe  ZeiUehrift,  1876) 
•v^****^'  and  a  new  investigation  of  the  frame- 
^wS^  work.    But  it  wiU  not  do  to  resolve  the 
Xaaianlor   ^^^^^^  ^^  <^  threefold  arrangement, 
each  part  having  nine  chapters.    As 
the  first  part  is  introduced  by  xl.  1-11,  the  second 
part  is  prefaced  by  xlviii.  16-22.    The  more  natu- 
rally the  investigation  proceeds,  the  surer  does  it 
become  that  xl.-lxvi.  does  not  as  such  proceed 
from  Isaiah,  but  that  it  arranges  and  works  over 
older  prophecies.    The  tendency  of  modem  eriti- 
dsm  is  to  distinguish  the  "Servant  of  Yahweh 
secticxi "  and  a  **  Trito-Isaiah,"  and,  indeed,  as 
many  Isaiahs  as  differences  in  style  suggest;   yet 
by  retaining  for  them  the  name  Isidah  this  criticism 
follows  a  correct  instinct.    The  editor  uiges  chaps. 
xxxvi.-xxxix.  upon  the  reader  as  the  key  to  the 
meaning  of  both  xl.-lxvi.  and  xxviii.-xxxv.,  and 
as  the  vindication  of  these  parts  as  Isaianic  in 
substance. 

It  appears  from  the  book  of  Isaiah  that  at  least 
from  the  thirteenth  year  of  Hesekiah  till  after  the 
campaign  of  Sennacherib  the  prophet 
AuSor^n  wielded  a  weighty  and  acknowledged 
of  zxvili.-  authority  with  king,  court,  and  priests, 
joixv,'  ^^^  ^  made  predictions  whidi  were 
observably  realised,  that  he  assured 
the  continuance  of  Jerusalem  and  Judah  beyond 
the  period  of  Assyrian  stress  and  stonn,  while 
Asssrria  was  to  become  a  possession  of  Babylon; 
but  besides  this,  it  is  dear  that  Hesekiah's  resolu- 
tion to  withstand  the  Assyrian  demands  rested  upon 
Isaiah's  warnings  and  promises,  and  that  the  prophet 
was  the  responsible  guarantor  of  a  seemingly  im- 
possible fortunate  issue.  Indeed,  xxxvii.  26  indi- 
cates a  prediction  by  Isaiah  of  the  Assyrian  victories 
before  Sennacherib's  appearance.  Upon  the  verifi- 
cation of  this  word  of  Yahweh  as  the  Lord  of  the 
world  was  built  the  assurance  that  in  the  very 
moment  when  Assyrian  victories  were  made  the 
basis  of  belief  that  Yahweh  was  overcome  the  im- 
potence of  the  Assyrian  against  him  would  be  made 
manifest,  and  this  dispensation  would  reveal  ded- 
sively  Yahweh's  relation  to  Jerusalem  and  to  the 
Davidic  house.  In  view  of  this,  the  six  woes  which 
appear  indissolubly  woven  together  in  chaps,  xxviii.- 
xxxv.  impress  one  as  rendering  exactly  the  historical 
position  of  the  Isaiah  of  chaps,  xxxvi.-xxxix.  and 


41 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


as  belonging  to  the  texture  of  thought  which  is 
there  demonstrably  that  of  Isaiah.  It  may  be  asked 
whether  these  were  put  together  by  the  prophet  or 
by  one  of  his  disciples  out  of  his  deliverances.  A 
dcmbt  has  been  raised  by  the  passage  zxx.  6-7, 
a  pieoe  which  is  related  to  the  *'  burdens  "  of  chaps. 
xxi.-zzii.;  but  the  interconnection  of  xxx.  5  with 
verse  8  indicates  a  continuity  of  thought.  More- 
over, chaps.  zzxiii.-xzzv.  are  inseparably  bound 
together,  as  was  long  ago  recognised  by  Ewald; 
the  direction  in  zxxiv.  1  sqq.  to  sdl  peoples  to  listen 
to  the  story  of  the  coming  judgment  is  parallel  to 
that  in  xxxiii.  13  warning  the  nations  to  take  to 
heart  the  judgment  upon  the  Assyrian  host.  If  they 
do  this,  they  may  be  exempt  from  the  general  jud^ 
ment  to  be  executed  upon  the  peoples  hostile  to 
Yahweh,  which  is  to  find  its  chief  exemplification  in 
the  punishment  of  Idumea  (xxxiv.  6).  Yet  when 
Ewald  remarked  that  xxxv.  must  be  regarded  as 
Isaianic,  while  of  xxxiv.  so  much  can  not  be  cer- 
tainly affirmed,  he  was  within  the  bounds  of  prob- 
ability, since  it  is  likely  that  the  prophet  here  used 
earlier  predictions.  The  passage  xxxiv.-xxxv. 
would  never  have  been  taken  for  exilic  had  not 
first  the  waste  in  xxxv.  been  arbitrarily  and  imnatu- 
rally  regarded  as  the  desert  between  Babylon  and 
Judea,  and  if,  in  the  second  phu»,  the  **  book  of 
Yahweh  "  of  xxxiv.  16  had  not  been  foolishly  re- 
garded as  the  book  of  our  prophet.  This  book  is 
indeed  the  book  of  the  kingdom,  in  which  the  future 
worM-king  Yahweh  has  entered  the  names  of  his 
peqsles  with  their  provinces  (Ps.  Ixxxvii.),  a  book 
that  was  known  to  Isaiah  (iv.  3);  while  the  play 
of  this  pictorial  representation  of  the  depopulation 
of  a  land  exactly  corresponds  to  that  in  xxxiii.  23, 
in  xxx.  32-^,  23-24,  and  to  the  taimtmg,  enig- 
noatical  character  which  all  these  disoourses  show. 
If  now  chaps,  xxxiii.-xxxv.  belong  together  as  a 
sixth  discourse,  Isaiah  is  the  originator,  and  .the 
present  arrangement  corresponds  to  his  intention. 
Then  the  foreign  elements,  whether  by  another 
author  or  by  himself  from  another  occasion,  can 
not  be  separated  from  the  whole.  It  is  a  distortion 
to  regard  xxviii.  1-6  as  an  oracle  concerning  Sa- 
maria; rather  is  xxviii.  the  first  of  six  oracles  about 
Judah  and  Jerusalem,  dating  frmn  the  time  before 
the  fall  of  the  northern  kingdom  as  a  state,  and 
belonging  with  iv.  2  sqq.,  as  the  resemblance  be- 
tween that  passage  and  xxviii.  5-6  shows.  It  is 
true  that  here,  as  in  ii.-iv.,  the  prophet  has  em- 
ployed other  oracles,  either  his  own  or  those  of 
another  prophet;  moreover,  to  remove  xxviii.  1-6 
would  Inive  what  followed  without  a  beginning 
and  destroy  the  cyde  of  oracles.  Accordingly  the 
prophet  aiKi  the  editor  of  these  six  deliverances  are 
essentially  (he  same,  while  the  relation  is  dififerent 
from  that  in  xl.-lxvi.  But  the  editor  put  these 
passages  before  xxxvi.-xxxix.  as  he  put  xl.-lxvi. 
after  them  because  of  their  formally  and  essentially 
similar  situation.  Isaiah  could  not  publish  this 
book  without  indicating  his  part  in  it;  and  it  is 
possible  that  Isa.  i.  was  the  introduction  to  the 
book  xxviii.-xxxv.  when  Isaiah  or  his  disciple  pub- 
lished it  as  a  monument  of  his  activity  in  the 
brilliant  prophetic  period  of  Hesekiah  for  the  fol- 
bwing  generation,  and  that  the  editor  inserted 


between  i.  and  xxviii.  the  parts  which  have  their 
own  titles  (ii.  1  and  xiii.  1). 

There  is  now  in  our  possession  an  assured  basis 
from  which  to  consider  and  decide  how  far  the  two 

secticms  ii.-xii,  and  xiii.-xxvii.,  which 

^m^'    ^^^^^  Isaiah's  name,  do  so  with  justice. 

I^_^^^      There  is  not  only  a  large  number  of 

parallels  with  (diaps.  xxviii.-xxxix., 
but  there  is  a  remarkable  agreement  in  situation, 
in  spite  of  the  intermingling  of  varied  fragments 
and  complete  sections.  There  come  out  partic- 
ularly the  ingratitude  and  obstinacy  of  Judah  and 
Jerusalem  and  the  consequently  necessary  purging 
by  pimishment  (ii.-iv.).  It  seems  credible  that 
Isaiah  himself  arranged  ii.-iv.;  and  as  he  surely 
wrote  vi.  and  xii.  as  components  of  a  connected 
whole,  all  the  individual  parts  of  v.-xii.  are  trace- 
able to  him,  though  that  inteii>olations  have  taken 
place  need  not  be  denied.  It  is  possible  that  these 
last  were,  according  to  the  custom  of  the  times, 
attributed  to  Isaii^  and  that  the  editor  had  the 
book  in  manuscript  form  before  him  in  which  the 
individual  pieces  had  been  inserted  unintelUgently 
among  others  which  were  then  laid  aside  or  put  in 
other  connections,  and  that  transpositions  were 
made  which  brought  these  parts  into  positions  earlier 
or  later  in  the  book  than  they  originally  occupied. 
In  the  second  part,  which  separates  into  the  four 
"  burdens  "  of  xiii.-xviii.  and  the  six  of  xix.-xxiii., 

there  are  certain  guiding  threads  which 
A^**"    come  both  from  i.-xii.  and  from  xxviii.- 

XXXV.   The  "  burden  "  of  the  beasts  of 


ters 
xiU.-xxTU. 


the  South  in  xxx.  6  sqq.  finds  its  coun- 
terparts in  the  "  burdens  **  of  xix.-xxiii. ;  and  xxxiv. 
1  sqq.  agrees  with  xviii.  3.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
note  of  the  leveling  of  the  heights  found  in  chap  ii. 
is  repeated  in  xix.  and  xxiii.,  while  the  doing  away  of 
the  lordship  of  Jacob  and  of  the  remains  of  Damas- 
cus in  xviii.  12  sqq.  is  anticipated  in  viii.  7-10. 
Indeed,  chap,  xviii.  comes  into  connection  with 
both  xi.  11  and  Ixvi.  20-21  in  its  thought  of  the 
return  of  the  Hebrews  from  distant  lands.  The 
**  burdens  "  are  marked  out  from  all  other  prophetic 
oracles  by  the  fact  that  they  bear  the  impress  of 
having  been  delivered  in  the  ecstatic  state,  and 
besides  this  they  deal  with  the  inunense  or  the 
distant  in  time.  They  take  on  a  different  coloring 
entirely  from  those  prophecies  which  come  out  of 
the  prophet's  own  life  or  relate  to  the  histoiy  of 
the  times.  Thus  it  comes  about  that  they  are 
separated  from  the  other  deliverances  of  the  prophet 
and  appear  as  cycles  of  deliverances  distinguished 
by  their  tone.  So  their  titles  arise  from  a  catch- 
word, or  a  subject,  or  a  locality,  or  an  emblem, 
some  of  which  can  be  shown  to  rest  upon  mistakes 
of  the  text  (xxi.  1).  Under  these  circumstances  it 
is  necessary  to  ask  whether  they  are  arranged  after 
the  literary  ideas  of  the  prophet  Isaiah.  It  is  re- 
markable that  the  oracle  on  Philistia  (xiv.  29  sqq.), 
the  people  on  the  western  border,  passes  on  in  xv.- 
xvi.  to  Moab  and  Edom,  on  the  east  and  southeast, 
and  in  xvii.  1  to  Damascus  and  the  Holy  Land  in 
order  to  portray  the  extreme  need  in  Israel  and  the 
overpowering  revolution  in  the  salvation  of  Jeru- 
salem (xviii.  7).  This  corresponds  to  the  way  in 
which  Amos  reached  the  expression  of  the  judg- 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


42 


ment  upon  Israel  (Amos  i.-ii).  In  xv.-xvi.  Isaiah 
has  so  remodeled  an  old  prophecy  that  it  now  has 
a  relation  to  the  foregoing  **  burden  ";  x.  5-12  ia 
specifically  Isaianic,  so  that  the  arrangement  of  at 
least  three  of  these  *'  burdens ''  is  his.  But  there  is  a 
clear  connection  of  these  with  the  oracle  in  xvii. 
12-xviii.  7,  which  shows  a  deliverance  in  Zion  and  the 
substitution  of  the  government  of  a  Davidic  rule  in 
place  of  that  of  the  condemned  tyrant  of  the  peoples. 
This  tjrrant,  the  king  of  the  satirical  song  in  xiv.  4 
sqq.,  is  an  ideal  representation  of  the  tyranny  which 
is  opposed  to  God,  which  subdues  the  world  and 
oppresses  God's  people,  but  is  cast  into  the  depth  of 
Hades.  By  his  overthrow  Yahweh  frees  the  world 
of  its  incubus,  and  Zion  becomes  the  refuge  of  the 
peoples  under  the  Davidic  dynasty.  Similarly,  the 
downfall  of  Babylon  is  pictured  in  xiii.,  and  it  is 
possible  that  in  chap  xix.  the  tyrant  who  oppresses 
the  Egyptians  is  tlds  same  ideal  tjrrant  by  whose 
overthrow  Egypt  is  to  become  a  province  of  Canaan. 
The  explanation  of  the  position  of  xxi.-xxii.  be- 
tween the  entirely  parallel  "  burdens  "  of  xix.-xx. 
and  xxiii.  is  more  difficult.  In  xxi.  clearly  the  fate 
of  heathen  cities  is  determined  by  the  decrees  of 
Yahweh,  for  the  execution  of  which  the  watchers 
are  waiting.  Chap.  xxii.  shows  a  contrast  in  the 
view  of  the  valley  of  vision,  where  the  watcher 
bewails  the  coming  misfortune,  while  in  the  second 
part  the  expectations  of  Shebna  for  a  quiet  death 
r.Dd  honorable  burial  in  a  chosen  place  are  pre- 
dicted to  be  baseless.  The  two  chapters  seem  to 
show  the  necessity  of  the  purgation  of  sin  through 
death,  out  of  which  resurrection  is  to  come.  But 
this  is  related  to  the  portrayal  in  xxiv.  The  suc- 
ceeding chapters  seem  to  portray  like  processes 
through  which  alike  Israel  and  the  nations  are  to 
pass,  the  particular  judgments  upon  the  nations 
which  have  been  passed  in  review  being  generalized 
until  there  comes  into  view  the  salvation  of  the 
once  rejected  people,  awakened  into  new  life  (xxvi. 
1-19,  cf.  ix.  2).  So  that  in  the  second  half  the  ruling 
idea  is  the  universal  kingdom  of  Yahweh  as  it  arises 
out  of  the  judgment  of  the  nations  and  the  humilia- 
tion of  human  might  and  centers  of  power,  the 
earthly  representation  of  which  is  the  throne  and 
city  of  David  raised  to  a  glorious  eminence. 

The  transmission  and  arrangement  of  this  book 

demand  of  the  reader  that  he  view  as  the  source  of 

u    ^^  peculiar  prophetic  content  and  as 

f  thT^*  its  predictive  subject  the  historically 

▼e.ti»Ai<m.  ^°^  ^**^'  ^^^  ^"^^y  *"^  ^y 

writing  sought  to  mold  public  opinion 
and  reared  up  by  esoteric  instruction  the  followers 
and  disciples  (viii.  16  sqq.,  lix.  21)  who  were  heirs 
of  his  prophecy  to  continue  his  testimony.  These 
heirs  of  Isaianic  prophecy  received  his  testimony 
and  made  it  fruitful  partly  by  publishing  in  book 
form  his  oral  and  written  testimony  for  '*  Judah 
and  Jerusalem  "  (i.  1),  and  partly  by  reproducing 
in  the  circles  of  the  faithful  the  esoteric  instruction 
given  them  (xlviii.  16)  and  making  it  the  basis 
and  guide  of  their  addresses.  In  order  to  preserve 
essentially  and  in  completeness  the  testimony  of 
Isaiah,  these  developments  of  Isaianic  contents 
required  later  fixation  in  writing  and  union  with 
the  then  existing  book  of  Isaiah.    Since  the  author 


of  the  addition  in  Ixlii.  7-lxvi.  24,  whose  theodicy 
reproduces  Isaianic  declarations,  looked  back  upon 
the  destruction  of  the  temple,  and  since  the  preacher 
of  xli.  1  sqq.  had  seen  the  victorious  march  of  Cyrus, 
the  origin  of  the  present  book  is  later  than  550  b.c. 
This  method  of  treating  the  Isaianic  deliverances, 
apart  from  other  results,  was  worked  out  in  abbrevi* 
ations  (as  in  ii.-iv.),  enrichment  (as  in  the  lyrics 
of  the  Deutero-Isaiah),  and  reinterpretation  (e.g., 
xiv.  5  sqq.).  In  view  of  these  results  fuller  justice 
is  done  the  book  if  its  relation  to  the  historical 
Isaiah  is  the  guide  to  its  exegesis  than  if  the  tradi- 
tion regarding  its  authorship  is  disregarded  and  its 
authors  are  scattered  along  through  the  centuries. 
(August  Klostebmann.) 
m.  The  Critical  View:  The  Book  of  Isaiah  in 
its  present  form  is  veiy  generally  regarded  &i 
possessing  a  certain  unity  of  plan  and  purpose. 
The  traditional  view  has  from  time  immemorial 
discovered,  in  this  unity,  the  pen  of  a  single  author, 

Isaiah,  the  contemporaiy  of  Hesekiah, 
1.  The      while  recent  critical  scholarship  main- 
Problem,    tains  that  this  writing  was  arranged 

and  edited  by  some  unknown  scribe 
or  scribes,  acting  as  diaskeuasts  in  the  first  quar- 
ter of  the  first  century  B.C.  In  a  little  over  a 
quarter  of  a  century,  after  Doderlein  (1775)  in  his 
commentary  on  Isaiah  first  threw  serious  doubt 
on  the  genuineness  of  Isa.  xl.-lxvi.,  a  fragmentary 
hypothrais  of  the  origin  of  this  prophetic  work 
gradually  gained  in  popularity.  The  latter  view 
was  first  enunciated  by  Koppe  in  his  notes  to 
Bishop  Lowth's  work  on  Isaiah  (1779-^1).  Kop- 
pe's  theory,  that  the  canonical  Book  of  Isaiah 
was  made  up  of  eighty-five  fragments,  never  won 
general  acceptance  as  it  was  strenuously  opposed 
by  the  Hebraist  Gesenius  and  the  commentator 
Hitzig.  But  a  new  form  of  the  fragmentary  hy- 
pothesis (see  below,  ||  3  sqq.),  differing  materi- 
ally from  that  of  Koppe,  has  won  many  adherents 
among  Biblical  scholars  since  it  was  brilliantly  ad- 
vocated by  Duhm  (1892),  Cheyne  (1895),  and 
Marti  (1900). 

To  understand  fully  the  history  of  critical  opin- 
ion, and  especially  its  latest  phases,  one  must  note 
the  structure  of  the  book.  All  commentators, 
modem  as  well  as  ancient,  have  observed  the  three- 
fold division  into  which  the  Book  of  Isaiah  natu- 
rally faUs:    (1)   i.-xxxv.,  (2)  xxxvi.-xxxix.,  (3)  xl.- 

Ixvi.    The  second    of   these    groups, 

8.  Strao-  giving  an  acooimt  of  Isaiah's  activity 

tuxe  of     in  the  crisis  produced  by  Sennacherib's 

the  Book,   invasion,  701  B.C.,  was  excerpted  from 

the  Book  of  Kings.  Chapters  xxxvi.- 
xxxix.  form  the  dividing  line  between  the  two  main 
sections  of  the  work.  The  passages  on  one  side 
differ  from  those  on  the  other  in  historical  back- 
ground, point  of  view,  theological  conceptions,  dic- 
tion and  phraseology.  The  earlier  chapters  refiect 
the  historical  changes  and  movements  of  740-701 
B.C.;  the  monarchs  mentioned — Hezekiah,  Sargon 
(xx.  1),  Sennacherib  (xxxvi.,  xxxvii.  17,  21,  37), 
ftnd  Merodach-Baladan  (xxxix.  1) — are  those  of 
the  eighth  century.  In  the  third  section  (xl-'facvi.) 
Cyrus  is  in  the  flood  tide  of  his  victorious  career 
(xliv.  28,  xiv. ;  cf .  xH.  2-3, 25,  etc.) ;  the  Assyrian  has 


48 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


dinppeared  from  the  stage  of  history,  and  in  his 
stead  laraers  oppressors  are  the  Babylonians  (zliii. 
14,  25,  zlvit.  1  sqq.,  zlviii.  14,  20).  In  the  third 
section  Jerusalem  is  described  as  lying  in  ruins  and 
desolate  (xliv.  26b,  Iviii.  12,  hd.  4,  fadii.  18,  hdv. 
10-11),  while  in  the  first  part  she  is  stUl  standing, 
the  object  of  her  enemies'  attacks  and  the  special 
ward  of  Jehovah  (i.-xxix.  1-8,  36-39).  In  addi- 
tion to  these  distin^iishing  features,  the  two  parts 
differ  greatly  in  spirit;  the  latter  is  a  book  of  con- 
solation, the  very  first  word  being  "  comfort " 
(xl.  1).  while  the  former  is  made  up  of  threatening 
and  judgment,  the  tone  of  arraignment  struck  in 
chap.  1.  appearing  in  one  form  or  other  clear  through 
to  chap.  xzzv.  While  in  this  connection  stress  is 
not  laid  upon  the  fact  that  the  phraseology  is  in 
striking  contrast,  as  this  frequently  leads  to  a  me- 
chanical argument,  the  difference  in  diction  may 
not  be  paswd  over  lightly,  as  the  careful  reader 
notices  the  change  even  in  the  English  version, 
while  one  accustomed  to  using  Hebrew  almost  in- 
stinctively notes  the  passing  from  a  piece  of  litera- 
ture in  a  style  "  condensed,  lapidaiy  and  plastic," 
to  one  that  is  dear  and  flowing.  In  chaps,  i.- 
xzxix.  the  emphasis  is  laid  upon  the  majesty  of 
Yahweh  (ii.  10  sqq.,  17,  19  sqq.,  x.  5  sqq.,  etc.),  in 
xl.-lxvi.  on  his  infinitude  (xl.  12-26-xli.  4,  etc.),  in 
the  third  section  the  personal  Messiah  is  depicted 
as  the  righteous  and  suffering  servant  (xlii.  1-4, 
xlix.  1-6,  1. 4-9,  lii.  13-liii.  12)  instead  of  the  ideal 
king  of  the  future  (vii.  14,  ix.  1-6,  xi.  1-5). 

Such  differences  as  these  were  deemed   valid 
grounds  for  dating  Isa.  xl.-lxvi.  in  the  sixth  century 
by  almost  every  great  commentator  of  the  last  cen- 
tury (Qesenius,  Ewald,  Knobel,  Dillmann,  Delitzsch 
in   his   last   edition,    Gheyne,  Orelli, 

8.  Basalts  Duhm,  Q.  A.  Smith).    Dillmann  char- 
of         acterised  this  view  as  "  one  of  the  sur- 

Ozltioiam.  est  results  of  modem  literary  investi- 
gation." Since  Delitssch  in  the  fourth 
edition  of  his  commentary  (1889)  went  over  to  this 
position,  it  may  truthfully  be  said  that  no  scientific 
exegetiod  work  has  held  to  the  traditional  view  of 
the  unity  of  the  Book  of  Isaiah.  In  America  the 
assignment  of  Isa.  xl.-lxvi.  to  the  sixth  century 
was  strenuously  opposed  in  magazine  articles  by 
Prof.  W.  H.  Green  of  Princeton  {Preabyterian  and 
Rearmed  Review,  vol.  iii.),  but  this  school  of  theol- 
ogy has  produced  no  work  of  exposition  on  the 
prophecies  of  Isaiah  since  the  appearance  of  that 
conunentary  of  first  rank  by  J.  A.  Alexander  (1846, 
rev.  ed.  1865).  The  aigimient  from  **  the  analogy 
of  prophecy"  worked  this  complete  revolution  in 
critical  opinion.  That  a  prophet  primarily  ad- 
dresses his  contemporaries;  that,  however  far  he 
may  project  himself  into  the  future,  his  point  of  de- 
parture is  his  own  age;  that  he  paints  the  distant 
scene  of  the  remotest  future  in  the  colors  of  his 
own  day;  that  he  plants  his  feet  firmly  upon  the 
events  of  his  own  time,  before  he  attempts  to  scan 
the  distant  horizcm — ^these  are  principles  recog- 
niawd  as  axiomatic  by  all  interpreters  of  prophecy. 
If  they  are  correctly  assumed,  Isa.  xl.-lxvi.  can 
not  be  assigned  to  Isaiah,  the  son  of  Amos.  In 
fact,  the  exilic  backgroimd  of  these  chapters  has 
been  recognised  by  some  of  the  most  s^ous  de- 


fenders of  the  Isaianic  authorship,  but  it  has  been 
attributed  to  '*  the  prophet's  ideal  point  of  view  " 
(Keil;  cf.  Hengstenberg). 

Having  attained  this  result,  criticism  did  not 
halt,  for  the  aigument  from  the  analogy  of  proph- 
ecy will  not  leave  the  first  part  of  the  work  intact 
(chaps.  i.-xxxv.).    As  early  as  Eichhom  (1783)  it 

was  applied  to  this  section,  and  re- 

*•  Jj''**j"   suited  in  the  denial  of  the  genuineness 

tS^     ^^  •  nimiber   of   passages.     (1)  The 

i.-zxjEiz.   ®""^®  ^^  ^^  ^*^  ®^  Babylon  (xiii.  1- 

xiv.  23)  was  assigned  to  the  Babylo- 
nian exile,  because  the  Medes  are  mentioned  as  the 
instruments  of  the  destruction  (xiii.  17),  and  Baby- 
lon is  described  as  the  supreme  world  power  of  that 
age  (xiii.  11,  19,  xiv.  4-5,  12  sqq.,  16-17).  (2)  In 
the  critical  disposition  of  passages,  xxi.  1-10  is 
naturally  associated  with  xiii.  1-xiv.  23,  for  in  it 
the  prophet  describes  the  fall  of  Babylon,  and  re- 
fers to  Elam  and  Media  (verse  2)  in  terms  which 
would  be  more  natural  to  a  prophet  of  the  sixth 
century  than  to  Isaiah  of  the  eighth.  (3)  With 
these  two  sections  just  noted  go  chaps,  xxxiv.  and 
XXXV.  The  latter  is  a  beautiful  lyric  which  is  a 
mosaic  of  phrases  and  imagery  borrowed  from  Deu- 
tero-Isaiah  (the  title  provisionally  assigned  to  the 
author  of  part  three);  the  former  is  assigned  to  the 
exile,  because  of  the  bitter  hatred  and  dire  ven- 
geance against  Edom  which  it  breathes  (xxxiv.  5 
sqq.,  8  sqq.;  cf.  Ps.  cxxxvii.  7).  (4)  While,  in  re- 
gard to  the  section  Isa.  xxiv.-xxvii.  there  is  a  gen- 
eral agreement  that  it  is  not  the  work  of  Isaiah,  no 
consensus  of  opinion  has  been  reached  as  to  the 
age  to  which  it  should  be  assigned.  Conservative 
critics  are  inclined  to  be  satisfi^  with  placing  it  in 
the  days  of  the  Persian  empire.  Dates,  varying 
from  the  reign  of  Darius  Hystaspis  (520-485)  to 
that  of  Artaxerxes  Ochus  (359-330),  have  been 
given.  Here  the  aigument  from  Biblical  theology 
overshadows  that  based  upon  the  analogy  of  propb- 
ecy.  No  explicit  historical  references  occur;  the 
imagery  is  apocalyptic  in  character,  which  in  itself 
points  to  the  age  of  the  decay  of  prophecy.  The 
writer's  ideas  of  the  future  life — ^immortality,  xxv. 
8,  and  the  resurrection,  xxvi.  19 — are  distinct  ad- 
vances on  those  of  Isaiah's  age,  but  the  traces  of 
Persian  angelology  conmionly  alleged  are  not  so 
evident,  ^tical  opinion  is  divided  about  the  age 
of  chap,  xxiii.  The  only  reason  for  denying  the 
Isaianic  character  of  this  passage  is  the  occurrence 
of  the  phrase  "  Behold  the  land  of  the  Chaldeans  " 
(verse  13).  The  text  is  extremely  uncertain  and 
has  led  to  emendations;  instead  of  Chaldeans, 
Ewald  suggested  Canaanites,  and  Duhm  offers  Chit- 
tim.  It  may  justly  be  regarded  as  an  Isaianic 
passage  to  be  assigned  either  to  723  or  to  701  b.c. 
Such  was  the  view  of  critical  scholarship  before 
the  rise  of  the  modem  fragmentary  hypothesis 
which  has  been  advocated  by  Duhm  and  Marti  in 
their  commentaries  (1892,  1900),  and  by  Cheyne 
in  his  Introduction  to  the  Book  of  Itaiah  (1895). 
These  three  exegetes  leave  only  a  very  small  part 
of  chaps,  i.-xxxix.  to  Isaiah,  and  Cheyne  has  tersely 
enunciated  the  principles  and  results  of  this  school, 
'^  It  is  too  boki  to  maintain  that  we  still  have  any 
collection  of  Isaianic  propheoieB  which  in  its  pres- 


Ishboaheth 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


44 


ent  form  goes  back  to  the  period  of  the  prophet  " 
{EB,  ii.  2104).  Gheyne  in  his  IntrodtuHon  to  the 
Book  qf  laaiah  aarigns  only  the  following  passages 
of  i.>zzxiz.  to  laaiah:  i.  5-31,  ii.  6-21,  iii.  1,  4-6, 
8-0  (2-3,  6-7  may  be  Isaianic),  12-15,  16-17,  24, 
V.  1-14,  17-22,  23-25b,  26-20,  vi.  1-13,  vu.  2-8a. 
0-14,  16,  18-20,  viii.  1-4,  5-6,  7a,  8-18,  ix.  7-12, 
16-x.  4,  X,  5-9,  13,-14,  28-32,  xiv.  24-27  (omit 
25b),  20-32,  xvi.  14,  xvii.  1-6,  0-14,  xviii.  1-6, 
XX.  1,  3-6,  xxi.  16  sqq.,  xxii.  1-5,  6-Oa,  llb-14, 
15a,  16-18,  xxiii.  1-2.  3(r),  4,  6-12,  14,  xxviii.  1- 

4,  7-10,  21-22,  xxix.  l-4a,  6,  0-10,  13-14,  xxix.  15, 
XXX.  l-7a,  8-17b,  xxxi.  l-5a. 

Before  tha  advent  of  thia  fragmentary  school, 
Isa.  xl.-lxvi.  was  looked  upon  as  a  literary  unity, 
and  was  attributed  to  a  single  prophet,  commonly 
termed  the  *'  Great  Unknown  of  the  Exile  "  or 
Deutero-Isaiah.  This  prophecy  was  regarded  as 
falling  into  three  sections  marked  by 
*;^*%-  the  refrain  xlviii.  22,  Ivii.  21  (Rttck- 
^Hil^  ert,  Hitaig,  and  DeUtasch).  Ewaki 
zL-1xt1  ^^  propounded  a  theory,  the  fore- 
runner of  the  one  now  to  be  consid- 
ered. He  maintained  that  Isa.  xl.-lxvi.  was  a  col- 
lecticm  of  "pamphlets  or  fly-leaves  which  the 
surging  stream  of  time  drew  forth,  one  after  an- 
other, from  tha  prophet."  The  writer  arranged 
theae  pamphleta  in  two  books,  xL -xlviii.,  xlix.-lx., 
to  which  were  added  an  epilogue,  hd.  l-bdii.  6,  and 
an  appendix,  bdii.  7-lxvi.  24.  According  to  Ewald, 
Deutero-Isaiah  borrowed  xL  1,  2,  Iii.  13-liii.  12, 
Ivi.  0-lvii.  11  from  a  prophet  of  Blanasseh's  reign, 
and  Ivii.  1-lix.  20  from  a  contemporary  of  Eaekiel. 
Dillmann  and  his  school  have  always  stood  for  the 
substantial  unity  of  this  section  of  the  Book  of 
Isaiah  (cf.  DiUmann's  KommetUar,  ed.  Kittel,  Leip- 
sic,  1808).  The  earlier  efforts  to  deny  the  unity  of 
Deutero-Isaiah  bore  fruit  in  the  commentary  of 
Duhm  already  mentioned.  In  this  epoch-making 
book,  Duhm  maintained  that  Isa.  xl.-lxvi.  is  the 
work  of  three  different  writers.  (1)  Deutero- 
Isaiah  is  reduced  to  xl.-lv.,  and  then  one-fourth  of 
its  contents  is  subtracted  as  later  additions.  Deu- 
tero-Isaiah is  supposed  to  have  written  his  work 
about  540  b.c.  in  Lebanon  or  Phenida.  Duhm  re- 
gards tha  following  versea  as  later  additions:   xl. 

5,  31b,  xH.  5,  xlii.  12,  15-24,  xliii.  20b,  21,  xUv.  0- 
20,  28b,  xlv.  10,  13b,  xlvi.  6^,  xlvii.  3a,  14b,  xlviii. 
1  in  part,  2,  4,  5b,  7b,  8b-10,  16b-10,  22,  1.  10,  11, 
IL  11,  16,  18,  Iii.  3-6,  liv.  15,  17b,  Iv.  3a,  7.  (2) 
From  chaps.  xl.-lv.  several  passages,  the  so-called 
*<  Servant  of  Yahweh  Songs  "  (xUi.  1-4,  xlix.  1-6, 
I.  4-0,  Iii.  13-liii.  12),  were  exadnded  and  aasigned 
to  a  later  date.  Duhm  takes  pains  to  show  that 
these  lyrica  are  dependent  oa  Jeremiah,  Job,  and 
Deutero-Isaiah,  although  the  last-named  does  not 
show  any  acquaintance  with  them.  The  Servant 
of  Yahweh  Songs  were  read  by  Trito-Isaiah,  and 
influenced  Malachi;  the  literary  connections  thus 
traced  point  to  a  member  of  the  Jewish  Church  of 
tha  first  half  of  the  fifth  centiuy  B.C.  as  their 
author.  Ifarti  differs  from  Duhm  in  regarding 
these  aonga  as  an  intq^ral  part  of  Deutero-Isaiah. 
(3)  The  dosing  section,  chaps.  lvi.-lxvi.,  is  attrib- 
uted to  a  thinl  writer,  who  is  designated  Trito- 
Isaiah.    He  writes  in  the  same  measure  as  Deutero- 


Isaiah,  imitates  his  style,  and  agrees  with  him  in 
proclaiming  the  future  glory  of  Jerusalem.  From 
the  internal  evidence,  it  is  argued  that  he  was  a 
resident  of  Jerusalem,  and  wrote  shortly  before  the 
mission  of  Nehemiah.  It  is  to  be  noted  that 
Clheyne  analyzes  this  section,  and  regards  it  as  a 
compilation  from  several  sources. 

Sanity  and  common  sense  suggest  that  the  liter- 
ary criticism  of  the  fragmentists  has  overreached 
itself.  The  aigimients  from  the  analogy  of  proph- 
ecy and  Biblical  theology  as  applied  by  Cheyne, 

Duhm,  and  Marti  necessarily  imply  a 
6.  Oon-  minute  knowledge  of  history  such  as 
elusion,     we  do  not  possess.     While  this  is  true, 

historical  criticism  has  reached  some 
assured  results.  It  has  been  proved  that  chaps. 
xxxvi.-xxxix.  were  excerpted  from  the  Book  of 
Kings,  and  certain  passages  of  chaps.  i.-xxxix.  can 
not  have  been  written  by  Isaiah  (see  above).  The 
literary  history  of  chaps.  xl.-lxvi.  is  not  as  simple 
as  it  once  was  supposed  to  be.  Of  these  chapters, 
xL-lv.  may  confidently  be  assigned  to  Deutero- 
Isaiah,  xl.-xlviii.  being  written  in  the  exile  (c. 
546),  and  xlix.-lv.  in  Palestine  shortly  after  the  re- 
turn. The  manner  and  date  of  origin  of  Ivii.-lxvi. 
can  not  be  determined  with  certainty;  probably 
they  were  written  in  the  age  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah, 
and  were  tha  product  of  a  school  of  writers  rather 
than  of  a  single  pen.  James  A.  Kelbo. 

BiBUOQftAPinr:  On  th«  Life  »nd  HmM  of  Iniah  the  best 
work  b  S.  R.  Driver,  iwaiah,  hu  Lift  and  Time*,  London, 
1803.  Consult  further:  A.  H.  Bayoe.  Lift  and  Timea  eflwaiah 
lUMttraUd  by  Conttrnporary  MonumeniM,  ib.  1880;  J.  Mein- 
hold,  J«MMi  ttfi^  MtfM  Zeit,  Freiburg,  1808;  R.  Sinker. 
Hutkiah  and  Hi»  Age.  ib.  1807;  F.  Kaohler.  Dm  Sui- 
lung  du  PropheUn  Je»aia  turn  Pditik  Miner  u^,  Tabingen, 
1006;  DB,  ii.  486-480;  EB,  ii.  2180-2100;  JE,  vi.  635- 
636;  F.  Wilke,  JMOJa  und  Amur,  Leipcic,  1005. 

On  the  text  oonsult  A.  Klostermaon,  DeuUrojtaaja, 
Munioh,  1803;  T.  K.  Cheyne,  NotM  and  Criiieiim*  on  fhe 
Hebrew  Text  ef  teaiah,  London,  1868;  idem.  /eouiA,  in 
8B0T;  idem,  Critica  Bildiea,  London,  1004;  R.  L.  Ottley. 
Book  ef  leaiah  aeeording  to  Ihe  LXX.,  2  vols..  New  York. 
1004-07;  G.  H.  Box,  ThoBookafleoMoh,  London,  1008. 

The  two  belt  oommentaries  on  the  book  ere  by  F. 
DelitMch.  2  vole..  Leipeie,  1880,  Eng.  trand..  2  vols.. 
London,  1801-02  (conservative),  and  J.  Skinner,  in  Cam^ 
bridoe  BibU,  2  vols..  Cambridge.  1806-08  (critical).  The 
book  has  been  constantly  the  subject  of  comment,  the 
most  noteworthy  of  which  is  contained  in  the  works  of 
C.  Vitringa,  2  vols..  Basel.  1732;  R.  Lowth.  London.  1778 
and  often  (marked  out  new  lines  by  introducing  the  sub- 
ject of  the  poetry  of  the  book);  W.  Geaenius.  2  vols.. 
Leipdc  1821  (phUok)gical);  F.  Hitsig.  Heidelberg,  1833; 
F.  J.  V.  D.  Maurer,  Leipsic,  1836;  E.  Henderson,  London, 
1867;  H.  Ewald.  Stuttgart,  1868,  Eng.  transl.,  London. 
1876-80;  K.  A.  Knobel,  ed.  L.  Diestel,  Leipsic.  1872; 
J.  A.  Alexander.  2  vols..  New  York,  1876;  W.  Kay.  in 
BibU  Commonlarv,  New  York.  1876;  B.  Neteler.  Monster, 
1876;  F.  W.  Weber.  Nftrdlingen,  1876;  S.  R.  Dnver  and 
A.  Neubaiier.  The  SSd  Chapter  of  leaiah  aeeordino  to  Jewiah 
Inierpretere,  2  vols..  Oxfofd,  1876-77;  A.  le  Hir.  Paris. 
1877;  S.  Sharpe,  London.  1877;  W.  Urwick.  The  Servant 
t4  JMoedk,  le.  IH.  JS-liii.  It,  Edinburgh.  1877;  T.  R. 
Birks,  London.  1878;  A.  HeUigstedt.  Halle.  1878;  K.  W. 
E.  Nigelsbach,  Bielefeld.  1877.  Eng.  transl..  New  York. 
1878  (in  Lange);  F.  KOctlin.  Berlin.  1870;  J.  W.  Nutt, 
Commentary  on  Isaiah  by  Rabbi  Eleater  of  Beauoenei, 
mlh  Notice  of  Mediaeval  Freneh  and  SpaniA  BsegoeiM, 
London.  1870;  J.  M.  Rodwell.  ib.  1881;  T.  K.  Gheyne. 
The  Book  ef  leaiah  ChronotogiaUly  Arranood,  London,  1884; 
Commontary,  2  vols.,  ib.  1881-84;  G.  A.  Smith.  2  vols.. 
1800;  H.  G.  Mitchell,  leaiah  i,-xii..  New  York.  1807; 
A.  Dillmann.  ed.  R.  Kittel.  Leipsic.  1808;  E.  KAnig,  The 
Exiiee*  Book  ef  Coneolation,  Edinbuigh.  1800;  A.  Con- 
damin,  Pkris.  1006. 


M 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


XshbMheth 


On  the  mibjeet  of  the  "  Senrant "  oonmilt:  J.  Forbes, 
7^  Senani  ^  At  Lord  in  /«.  ael.-2xvi.,  Edinburgh.  1870; 
M.  Sehutn,  Dm  SUd-Jakwtk-LUder  in  Je§,  40-^6,  Leipsle, 
1894;  K  Budde,  Dm  Bogenannttn  Sbed-Jahwt'lAetUr, 
GieeKD,  1900;  F.  QieMbraeht,  Dtr  Knecht  Jahwet  dM 
l>euUroimeia,  KOnigsberg.  1002;  H.  Roy.  Imrael  und  die 
WwU  in  Jm,  40^6,  .  .  .  SUd^ahtBt-Frage,  Leipeie.  1903; 
G.  O.  Workmim,  The  Servani  of  Jehovah;  or,  the  Paaeion- 
Propheei/  of  Seriphire,  London,  1907. 

For  CHtieiflm  and  Introduction  the  most  thorough-going 
work  it  T.  K.  Chesme,  Introduction  to  the  Book  «/  ieoiah, 
London,  1895.  Various  questions  and  pbasss  are  discussed 
in:  C.  P.  Ckspori,  Beitrlige  ntr  Einloitano  in  doe  Bwh 
Jeeain,  Berlin,  1848;  L6hr,  Zur  Frage  iOher  die  Behiheit 
von  Jeeaiaa  40-ee,  3  parts,  Berlin.  1878^80;  H.  KrCiger, 
La  ThMoffied'BeaU  4(^66,  Pkris.  1881;  J.  Bartb.  BeilrMge 
Mur  Erkiarung  doe  Jeeaja,  Garlsruhe,  1885;  H.  Outhe,  Dae 
Zukunftabild  dee  Jeeoia,  Leipsie,  1885;  F.  Giesebrscht, 
BeitrOoe  Mur  Jeeaia-KritUt,  G^ttingen,  1890:  J.  Kennedy, 
A  Popular  ArfpanenJtfor  tike  Unity  of  leaiah,  London,  1891; 
J.  Ley.  Jee,  40-06,  Marburg.  1893;  G.  C.  M.  Douglas, 
leaiak  One  and  Hie  Book  One,  London,  1895;  M.  Brflckner, 
Xompoeition  dee  .  .  .  Jee.  M8-SS,  Halle,  1897;  J.  Mein- 
hold.  Die  ieajaerxilhlungen  Jee.  SS-SS,  Gdttingen,  1898; 
A.  Bertholet,  Zu  Jeeaja  35,  Tubingen,  1899;  F..  Littmann, 
C^s6fr  die  Ai^aeeunoeeeit  dee  Tritojeeaia,  Freibuig.  1899; 
E.  Selim,  Dot  RMeel  dee  deuterojeeapmiet^ten  Buehee, 
Leipde.  1906;  Smith.  Prophete;  DB,  U.  485-499;  EB, 
u.  2189-2208:  JB,  yi,  630-642;  and  the  general  works 
on  Introduction  to  the  Bible  and  to  the  O.  T..  and  on 
O.  T.  Theology. 

ISAIAH,  MARTYRDOM  OF.  See  PIsxudepigra- 
PHA.  IV.,  34. 

ISERMANN  (more  correctly  Isenmenger  or  Bisen- 
menger),  JOHANH:  German  reformer;  b.  at 
Schw&bisch  Hall  (35  m.  n.e.  of  Stuttgart),  WOrttem- 
berg,  c.  1495;  d.  at  the  monastery  of  Anhausen 
on  the  Brenx  (near  Heidenheim,  in  Wdrttemberg, 
20  m.  n.n.e.  of  Uhn)  Feb.  18,  1574.  He  studied  at 
the  University  of  Heidelberg  in  Apr.,  1514,  became 
dean  of  the  classical  faculty  on  Dec.  20,  1521;  was 
called  to  Hall  as  pastor  in  the  spring  of  1524, 
and  then  wrought  for  twenty-four  srears  with  Brens 
for  the  Reformation  in  that  place.  The  festival  of 
Corpus  Christi  was  abolished  in  1524;  at  Christmas, 
1525,  the  Lord's  Supper  was  observed  by  Evan- 
gelical rite;  and  in  1526,  an  Evangelical  liturgy 
was  introduced.  Isenmann  took  an  eager  part  in 
the  Syngramma  Suevicum  in  1525  (see  Brknz, 
JoHANN,  §  2).  He  became  superintendent  in  1542. 
At  the  beginning  of  1546  he  reformed  the  imperial 
town  of  Wimpfen.  Heavy  tribulation  ensued  from 
the  Schmalkald  War,  with  the  emperor's  triimiphant 
entrance  to  Hall,  Dec.,  1546;  and  the  situation  grew 
still  more  dangerous  during  the  Interim,  which  both 
Isenmann  and  Brens  rejected.  When  the  Spaniards 
came,  the  council  had  to  dismiss  Evangelical 
preachers.  In  July,  1549,  Isenmann  removed  to 
Warttembeig,  and  became  preacher  at  Urach. 
Soon  afterward  he  became  pastor  at  Tubingen, 
and  general  superintendent  of  the  southwest  dis- 
trict. He  enjoyed  the  confidence  of  the  new  duke. 
In  1551  he  went  with  Jakob  Beurlin  (q.v.)  to  Lan- 
gensalza  and  Leipsie  to  have  the  Wdrttemberg 
Confession  subscribed  by  Melanchthon  and  the 
theologians,  of  Wittenberg  and  Leipsie.  In  the  sum- 
mer of  1557  he  accompanied  the  duke  to  the 
diet  at  Frankfort,  and  collaborated  in  the  great 
Apologia  cof^euAoms  WirUmbergicae.  In  1558  he 
was  appointed  abbot  at  Anhausen,  where  he  spent 
the  remainder  of  his  life.  G.  Bossbrt. 


fiiBLiooBAPmr:  L.  M.  Fieehlin,  Af tmoria  tkeeiogonim  Wirtem- 
bergeneium,  i  fi3.  Leipsie,  1710;  J.  Hutmann  and  C. 
JAger.  Johann  Brene,  2  vols.,  HambuTK,  1840-42;  T. 
Pressel.  Aneodoia  BrenOana,  2  vols.,  TQbincen,  1868;  O. 
Bossert.  Dae  interim  in  WUrUembero,  Halle.  1805;  ADB, 
xiv.  634. 

ISHBOSHBTH:  According  to  II  Sam.  ii.^iv.  a 
son  of  Saul,  whom  his  uncle,  Abner,  set  on  the 
throne  of  Israel  at  Mahanaim  after  the  slaughter 
by  the  Philistines  at  Gilboa.  In  I  Chron.  viii.  33, 
ix.  39  he  is  called  Esh-baal  (Hebr.  Eahba'al,  a  con- 
traction of  hhba^al,  '*  man  of  the  Lord,"  i.e.,  of 
Yahweh);  when  the  use  of  the  name  "Baal"  was 
shunned,  and  haaheUif  "  shame,"  substituted  for  it 
(see  Baal,  |  5),  the  form  Ishbosheth  became  com- 
mon. That  in  the  Hebrew  text  the  original  form 
was  Ishba^al  is  shown  by  the  translations  of  Aquila, 
Symmachus,  Theodotion,  Itala,  and  the  Septuagint 
codex  93  Holmes.  The  original  fonn  remains  in 
Chronicles  probably  because  those  books  were  read 
and  copied  less  frequently  than  Samuel.  The 
Chronicler  names  Ishbosheth  fourth  of  the  sons  of 
Saul  after  Jonathan,  Malchi-shua  and  Abinadab. 

I  Sam.  xxxi.  2  does  not  name  him,  I  Sam.  xiv.  49 
names  Jonathan,  Ishui,  and  Malchi-shua.  The 
order  here  indicates  that  Ishbosheth  was  the  yoimg- 
est  son  of  Saul,  and  that  is  the  more  probable  since 
he  was  dependent  upon  Abner,  since  there  is  no 
mention  of  his  wife  or  children,  and  since  he  is 
not  named  among  Saul's  sons  who  were  in  the 
battle  with  the  Philistines.     The  age  given  him  in 

II  Sam.  ii.  10  does  not  agree  with  the  indications 
of  the  context,  according  to  which  David  and 
Jonathan  were  not  yet  forty  years  old  at  the  time 
of  the  battle  of  GUboa;  the  item  belongs  to  the 
later  chronological  insertions. 

Abner,  a  cousin  of  Saul,  after  the  battle  of  Gilboa 
sought  to  save  for  Israel  as  much  as  he  might  of 
Saul's  achievements,  and  had  Ishbosheth  set  up  as 
king  beyond  the  Jordan  at  Mahanaim,  where  he 
was  recognised  by  Gilead,  Asher,  Jezreel,  Ephraim, 
and  Benjamin — ^practically  all  Israel.  Judah  and 
the  South  had  made  David  king  there,  though  under 
tributary  relations  with  the  Philistines;  and  for 
his  possessions  west  of  the  Jordan  Ishbosheth  was 
also  a  vassal  of  the  Philistines.  The  strife  which 
arose  between  Israel  and  Judah,  the  first  indication 
of  which  is  given  in  II  Sam.  ii.  12  sqq.,  was  suffered 
by  the  overlords,  and  continued  with  increasing 
success  for  David.  Finally  Abner  took  offense  at 
the  complaint  of  Ishbosheth  because  the  former 
had  married  one  of  Saul's  concubines,  and  told 
Ishbosheth  that  he  would  influence  Israel  to  choose 
David  king,  a  threat  which  he  proceeded  to  fulfil. 
David  thereupon  demanded  of  Ishbosheth  the 
return  of  his  former  wife,  Michal,  thus  forcing  recog- 
nition of  his  relationship  to  Saul's  household,  the 
way  having  been  paved  by  negotiations  between 
himself  and  Abner  (II  Sam.  iii.  12  sqq.).  At  the 
defection  of  Abner  Ishbosheth  lost  heart,  and  he 
was  soon  after  assassinated  by  two  of  his  military 
officers,  who  thought  in  this  way  to  secure  their 
own  advancement.  They  carried  his  head  to 
David ;  but  being  a  member  of  the  house  of  Saul, 
David  at  once  punished  the  murder  by  the  execu- 
tion of  the  murderers. 

This  is  the  course  of  the  Judaic  narrative  in  II 


Xshnxftol 

Isidore  of  SarlUe 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


46 


Sam.  ii.^iv.  Were  the  Ephraimitic  account  extant, 
possibly  the  coloring  of  the  story  might  be  some- 
what changed.  Two  points  in  the  stoiy  appear 
trustworthy:  that  David  wished  to  be  recognized 
as  the  son-in-law  of  Saul,  and  that  he  was  innocent 
of  the  death  of  Ishbosheth.  The  length  of  Ishbo- 
sheth's  reign  was  probably  a  little  less  than  that  of 
David  in  Hebron  (II  Sam.  vi.  5).      (H.  Gxtthb.) 

Biblioorapht:  A.  Kamphaiuen,  io  ZA  TW,  vi  (1886),  43-97; 
the  literature  under  Samukl,  Bookb  or;  and  the  per- 
tinent sectionB  of  the  works  cited  under  Ahab. 

ISHMAEL  (Hebr.  Yishma'd,  '*  God  hears";  LXX., 
Ismail):  The  son  of  Abraham  by  Hagar  (q.v.),  an 
EJgyptian  slave.  He  was  bom  in  the  house  of 
Abraham  and  was  included  in  the  covenant  of  cir- 
cumcision (Gen.  xvii.  25,  P).  Since,  however,  it 
was  the  will  of  God  that  Isaac  should  be  the  sole 
heir  of  the  covenant  blessings,  the  Lord  commanded 
Abraham  to  accede  to  the  demands  of  his  wife 
Sarah  that  Ishmael  be  driven  from  the  house. 
After  this  enforced  flight,  a  divine  revelation  came 
to  Hagar  (Gen.  xzi.,  E),  as  she  was  driven  to  despair 
for  her  son,  who  was  dying  of  thirst  in  the  "  desert 
of  Beersheba."  That  this  vision  is  only  another 
version  of  that  recounted  in  chap.  xvi.  (Hupfeld, 
Dillmann,  and  others)  can  not  be  maintained,  since 
the  details  of  the  divine  appearance  are  entirely 
different  and  there  is  also  a  difference  between  the 
chronology  of  P  and  that  of  E,  the  former  (Gen. 
xvii.  25)  making  Ishmael  at  least  fifteen  years  of 
age  at  the  time,  while  E  (Gen.  xxi.)  regards  him  as 
still  a  child  of  tender  years  (cf.  the  LXX.  of  xxi.  14 
which  says  expressly:  ''  and  she  placed  the  child 
upon  her  shoulder  "). 

The  especial  importance  of  Ishmael  lies  in  the 
relation  of  his  descendants  to  Israel.  They  were 
to  have  no  claim  on  the  promised  inheritance  of  the 
people  of  God,  but  were  destined  to  multiply  and 
spread.  These  descendants  are  characterised  by  the 
words  of  the  angel  concerning  the  ancestor  himself 
(Gen.  xvi.  12) :  "  And  he  will  be  a  wild  man;  his 
hand  will  be  against  eveiy  man,  and  eveiy  man's 
hand  against  him,"  thus  sketching  with  a  few 
strokes  the  spirit  and  manner  of  life  of  the  Bedou- 
ins. According  to  Gen.  xvi.  12,  they  were  to  dwell 
farther  to  the  eastward  than  tli^ir  brothers,  and  in 
fact  they  had  possession  of  the  desert  east  of  Pales- 
tine, occupying  also  the  countiy  to  the  south,  from 
the  Persian  Gulf  to  the  northeastern  boundary  of 
Egypt.  They  spread  out  over  the  whole  of  northern 
Arabia,  and  therefore  their  ethnic  designation,  Ish- 
maelites,  is  used  generally  for  the  tribes  of  northern 
Arabia,  including  also  the  Midianites.  Twelve 
peoples  of  northern  Arabia  are  derived  from  Ish- 
mael in  Gen.  xxv.  12  sqq.  (P),  where  the  genealogy 
is  more  ethnographic  than  is  usually  the  case  in 
the  histories  of  the  patriarchs.  Ishmael  is,  however, 
a  primitive  personal  name  which  occurs  in  andent 
Arabic  inscriptions,  and  in  this  case  the  leader  gave 
his  name  to  the  tribe,  although  all  the  groups  of 
peoples  which  are  brought  into  connection  with 
him  were  not  his  actual  descendants.  That  Israel 
recognized  its  blood-relationship  with  these  tribes 
rests  upon  a  correct  tradition.  The  Mohammedan 
Arabs,  who  proudly  reckon  Ishmael  among  their 
ancestors,  say  that  he  and  his  mother  were  buried 


in  the  Kaaba  at  Mecca  (Abulfeda,  Hidaria  arOe- 
islamica,  ed.  H.  O.  Fleischer,  pp.  24  sqq.,  Leipsic, 
1831;  E.  Pocock,  Specimen  hisUniae  Arabum,  pp. 
6-7,  177,  506-607,  Oxford,  1806;  B.  d'  Herbe- 
lot,  BxbliotMque  onenUde,  Maestricht,  1776,  s.w. 
"  Hagar,"  "  Ismael,"  "  Ischak  ")• 

(C.  VON  Orelli.) 

Beblxookapht:  Consult,  beaideB  the  literature  under  Isaac 
and  Asabia:  A.  H.  Sayoe.  Higher  CrUiciam  and  lh€  Monu- 
flMviit.  pp.  201-202,  London,  1804;  T.  P.  Hughea,  Diction^ 
ary  of  itlam,  pp.  21&-220,  ib.  1896;  DB,  u.  502-505;  EB, 
ii.  2211-2215;  the  appropriate  sections  in  works  on  the 
history  of  Israel  and  the  commentaries  on  Genesis. 

ISHTAR.  See  AssroRBTB;  Assyria,  VII.; 
Babylonia,  VII.,  2,  §  7,  3,  §  6. 

ISIDORE  MERCATOR:  A  fictitious  person,  the 
alleged  author  of  the  Pseudo-Isidorian  Decretals 
(q.v.) .  He  was  formerly  erroneously  identified  with 
I^dore  of  Seville;  hence  the  name  Pseudo-Isidore. 

ISIDORE  OF  PBLUSIUM:  Egyptian  abbot;  b. 
at  Alexandria  probably  before  370;  d.  near  Peiu- 
sium  (135  m.  e.  of  Alexandria)  about  440.  He  was 
presbyter  and  abbot  in  a  cloister  at  the  east  mouth 
of  the  Nile,  not  far  from  Pelusium.  It  can  not  be 
proved  that  he  was  a  pupil  of  John  Chrysostom; 
but  he  was  spiritually  akin  to  him,  and  highly 
valued  his  writings.  There  are  preserved  more 
than  2,000  of  his  letters,  mostly  brief  notes,  but 
frequently  of  great  length,  which  show  him  to  have 
been  a  highly  esteemed  spiritual  counselor,  thoi^ 
oughly  aglow  with  holy  earnestness;  a  very  shep- 
herd of  souls,  and  a  teacher  versed  in  Scripture. 

Isidore  was  an  example  of  Greek  monasticism 
in  its  noblest  form.  For  him  the  practical  philosophy 
of  the  disciples  of  C!hrist  (i.  63  and  elsewhere) 
throve  only  in  withdrawal  from  the  world,  in  volim- 
taiy  poverty  and  abstinence.  The  soul  could  not 
discern  God  (i.  402)  in  the  bustle  of  everyday  life; 
only  in  the  utmost  emancipation  from  worldly 
wants  did  it  approach  divine  freedom  (ii.  19). 
Yet  asceticism  and  flight  from  the  world  did  not 
alone  suffice:  the  garland  of  all  virtues  must  be 
woven  in  monasticism,  the  peculiar  dangers  of 
which,  however,  did  not  escape  Isidore.  But 
though  retired  from  the  world,  he  still  took  part  in 
the  need  and  perils  of  Christianity,  supporting,  ex- 
horting, wherever  he  could  reach  with  his  written 
message.  He  appeared  to  great  advantage  in  his 
attitude  toward  Cyril  of  Alexandria.  While  at  one 
with  him  in  dogmatic  opposition  to  Nestorius,  he 
still  perceived  Cyril's  intriguing  spirit,  and  warned 
him  against  blind  passion  (i.  310);  frankly  warning 
the  emperor,  too,  against  the  disorder  provoked 
by  the  interference  of  his  courtiers  in  dogmatic 
affairs  (i.  311).  But  when  Cyril,  content  with  the 
fact  that  Nestorius  had  been  dropped  by  the  Anti- 
ochians,  allowed  some  dogmatic  concessions  to  his 
opponents,  he  had  to  hear  the  admonition  from 
Isidore  that  he  should  stand  fast,  and  not  himself 
become  a  heretic  (i.  324).  Isidore  took  to  heart  the 
dignity  of  the  priesthood,  and  with  great  earnest- 
ness did  he  remind  negligent  ecclesiastics  of  their 
serious  accountability.  He  thus  veiy  persistently 
rebuked  Bishop  Eusebius  of  Pelusium  and  hiis 
clergy,  because  they  trafficked  in  priestly  offices, 
suffered  their  congregations  to  decay,  chose  rather 


47 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


IsidoM  of  8«TiU6 


to  build  sumptuous  churches  than  to  care  for  the 
poor,  and  caused  offense  by  their  scandalous  be- 
havior. In  patriarchal  fashion,  moreover,  he  con- 
oemed  himself  with  all  manner  of  human  needs, 
nor  feared,  in  so  doing,  the  great  of  this  earth.  He 
fervently  exhorted  the  emperor  to  mildness  and 
liberality  (i.  35).  For  the  weal  of  the  town,  he 
addressed  himself  to  the  civil  authorities  (ii.  25), 
and  interceded  with  their  masters  in  behalf  of  slaves 
who  fled  to  him  for  protection.  Of  literary  training 
himself,  he  granted  that  the  Christian,  like  the  bee, 
might  suck  honey  from  the  teachings  of  the  philos- 
ophers (ii.  3). 

Dogmatically  orthodox,  and  a  zealous  opponent 
of  all  heresies,  he  directed  his  attention  especially 
toward  the  doctrinal  questions  of  weight  for  prac- 
tical Christianity  (sin,  freedom,  grace).  He  was 
of  greater  significance,  however,  as  an  exegete. 
For  him  the  Scriptural  truth  was  the  heavenly 
treasure  in  earthen  vessels.  The  expositor  should 
approach  his  task  with  devout  conviction;  dwelling 
not  upon  separate  words,  but  on  the  entire  con- 
nection. Still  he  was  given  to  many  an  arbitrary 
all^ory:  particularly  in  his  Christological  views  of 
passages  in  the  Old  Testament.  At  the  same  time, 
in  the  exposition  of  the  Old  Testament  he  would 
not  have  the  historical  sense  annulled  by  the  mys- 
tical and  prophetic;  and  he  made  attempts  besides 
at  explanations  of  points  of  grammar  and  subject 
matter.  G.  KrCger. 

Bibuograprt:  An  ed.  of  th«  Optra  was  published  Paris, 
1638,  and  in  MPQ,  Izxiriii  103-lOM,  1647-1674.  Consult: 
ASB,  Feb..  L  468-473;  J.  Feasler,  IntHtuiumn  pairoloffiae, 
ed.  B.  Juncmann,  ii  2,  pp.  128-143,  Innsbruck,  1896; 
DCS,  iu.  815-320;  Tillemont,  M^nunret.  xv.  97-119.  847; 
C.  A.  Heumann,  De  indori  Ptbmoiae^  QAttincen,  1737; 
Fabridus-Harles.  BMioth«ea  Grtuea,  x.  480-494.  Hamburg. 
1807;  H.  A.  Niemeyer,  De  I»idon  PduHotae,  HaUe,  1825. 
and  MPG,  Ixxviu.  9-102;  P.  B.  Glaok.  !aidori§  PtluHotae 
twmna  doetrinas  moraits,  WQrsburg,  1848;  L.  Bober,  i>« 
arte  hermenmUtiea  itidoriM  Piiimolae,  Craoow.  1878;  O. 
Bardenhewer.  Patroloffie,  pp.  353-364,  Freiburs.  1894; 
XL.  vi.  964-969. 

ISIDORE  OF  SBVILLB:  Isidore,  archbishop  of 
Seville  and  encyclopedist,  was  bom  about  560,  the 
place  unknown ;  d.  at  Seville,  Spain, 
Life.  Apr.  4,  636.  He  was  a  scion  of  a  di»- 
tingmshed  Roman  family  which  had 
fled  from  Garthagena  during  the  Gothic  invasion, 
and  was  educated,  after  the  death  of  his  parents, 
by  his  brother  Leander,  whom  he  succeeded,  ap- 
parently about  600,  as  archbishop  of  Seville.  He 
attended  the  synod  held  by  King  Gimdemar  in 
610,  and  presided  over  those  held  by  King  Sisebut 
at  Seville  in  619  and  the  famous  Fourth  Synod 
of  Toledo  under  Sisenand  in  633  (see  Toledo, 
Synods  of). 

Isidore's  chief  importance,  however,  was  as  an 

author,  and  his  learning  embraced  the  entire  range 

possible    in    his    age    and    ooimtry. 

His  In-  Neither  originality  nor  independent  in- 
fluence and  vestigation,  neither  keen  criticism  nor 
Importance,  elegance  of  presentation  could  be  ex- 
pected from  him,  but  his  manifold 
interest,  reading,  and  diligence  in  collecting,  ex- 
cerpting, and  compiling  from  all  departments  of 
theological  and  secular  learning  are  imparalleled. 
His  position  in  history  is  determined  primarily  by 


two  works,  the  Ltbri  tenterUiarum,  the  first  dog- 
matics of  the  Latin  Church,  and  the  EtymotogyiB, 
the  source  of  linguistic  and  practical  knowledge 
for  centuries,  so  that  he  became  the  schoolmaster 
of  the  Middle  Ages.  Gradually  he  became  the 
national  hero  of  the  Spanish  Church,  and  to  him 
were  attributed  the  Old  Spanish  or  Mozarabic  lit- 
urgy, the  collection  of  Spanish  canons  upon  which 
was  based  the  foigery  of  the  pseudo-Isidore,  and 
even  the  collection  of  the  laws  of  the  West  Gothic 
kings.  The  Roman  Catholic  Church,  despite  the 
weakness  of  the  bonds  which  then  united  Spain  and 
Rome,  holds  that  he  was  a  pupil  of  Gregory  the 
Great,  that  he  was  vicar-apostolic  in  Spain,  received 
the  palliimi,  and  took  part  in  a  Roman  s3mod. 
Yet  it  is  quite  possible  that  he  did  not  recognise 
the  coundl  of  553,  and  that  he  treated  Justinian 
merely  as  a  heretic  who  sought  to  overthrow  the 
Chalcedonian  Creed;  while  he  did  not  mention  the 
papacy  in  his  ecclesiastical  handbook,  and  he  was 
even  slightly  heterodox  in  his  views  of  the  sacra- 
ments and  grace. 

The  works  of  Isidore  are  thus  enumerated  ac- 
cording to  a  list  by  Braulio  (in  MPL^  Ixxxi.  15  sqq.), 

which  seems,  in  the  main,  to  follow 

His       chronological  order:    (1)  Prooemiorum 

Writings,    liber  unus,  an  introduction  to  the  Bible, 

consisting  of  a  brief  prologue  on  the 
canon  in  general  and  short  tables  of  contents  of  the 
individual  books.  (2)  De  ortu  et  obUu  pafrum,  or 
De  vita  et  morte  sanctorum  lUrituque  Tetiamentif 
short  biographies  of  eighty-five  characters  of  the 
Bible,  sixty-four  from  the  Old  Testament  and 
twenty-one  from  the  New.  The  authenticity  of  the 
work  has  been  doubted,  but  without  sufiicient 
reason.  (3)  Officiorum  libri  duo,  usually  called  De 
officiU  ecdenasticia,  written  about  610,  one  of  the 
most  important  works  of  Isidore  for  theology  and 
ecclesiastical  archeology.  The  first  book,  entitled 
De  origins  officiorum,  discusses  the  origin  and  the 
authors  of  ecclesiastical  worship,  while  the  second, 
De  origins  ministeriorum,  is  devoted  to  the  duties 
of  the  orders  of  cleigy  and  various  estates  in  life. 
(4)  De  nomimbus  legis  et  evangeliorum  liber,  evidently 
identical  with  the  AUegoriae  guaedam  aanctae  scrip- 
turae  of  the  manuscripts  and  editions,  and  contain- 
ing an  allegorical  interpretation  of  129  names  and 
passages  from  the  Old  Testament  and  121  from 
the  New.  The  work  is  of  great  value  for  the  art 
and  literature  of  the  Middle  Ages.  (5)  De  haeresibus 
liber,  which  is  probably  identical  with  the  list  of 
Jewish  and  Christian  heresies  given  in  the  fourth 
and  fifth  chapters  of  the  eighth  book  of  the  Ety- 
m^logiae,  (6)  Sententiarum  libri  tree,  the  chief  theo- 
logical work  of  its  author,  and  the  first  Latin  com- 
pend  of  faith  and  morals,  chiefly  in  excerpts  from 
Augustine  and  Gregory  the  Great.  The  fiirst  book 
is  dogmatic  in  content,  and  treats  of  such  sub- 
jects as  the  qualities  of  God,  the  origin  of  evil,  the 
soul,  and  Christ,  the  seven  rules  of  exegesis,  the 
difference  between  the  Testaments,  creeds,  bap- 
tism, the  sacrament,  and  eschatology  (but  with  no 
mention  of  purgatory).  The  se«  ind  and  third  books 
are  ethical,  the  fonner  genera  juid  the  latter  spe- 
cial. The  first  discusses,  among  other  subjects,  the 
cardinal  virtues,  grace,  election,  conversion,  back- 


Zaidore  of  Seville 
Israel,  History  of 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


48 


Blidingi  repentanoe,  sin,  oonsoienoe,  virtue  and  vioe. 
The  last  book  discusses  the  estates  of  the  Christian 
life,  divine  judgments,  temptation,  prayer,  asceti- 
cism, temporal  authorities,  the  brevity  of  human 
life,  and  similar  topics.  (7)  Contra  Judaeos  Ubri  duo, 
or  De  fide  calholica  advernta  Judaeoa,  written  at  the 
request  of  his  sister  Florentina,  and  establishing  the 
truth  of  the  Christian  religion  from  the  prophecies 
of  the  Old  Testament  with  special  reference  to  the 
Jewish  question  in  Spain.  (8)  AforuuHeas  regtdae 
liber,  a  system  not  differing  essentially  frcmi  the 
Benedictine  rule,  although  in  no  way  related  to  it. 
(9)  Quaeaiionum  in  Vetu»  TestamerUutn  libri  duo, 
a  mystical  and  allegorical  interpretation  of  the  Old 
Testament,  consisting  entirely  of  excerpts  from  - 
Origen,  Victorinus,  Ambrose,  Jerome,  Augustine, 
Fulgentius,  Cassian,  and  especially  from  Gregory 
the  Great.  (10)  De  viri$  iUuttribtta  iive  de  acrip- 
toribua  eccUnatticia,  a  continuation  of  the  works  of 
Jerome  and  Gennadius.  It  contains  the  biographies 
of  fourteen  Spaniards  and  thirty-two  non-Spaniards, 
but  is  written  for  the  most  part  in  a  superficial 
manner  and  composed  in  great  measure  of  excerpts 
(which  are  frequently  incorrect)  from  Rufinus, 
Cassiodorus,  and  Victor  of  Tunnuna,  or  from  the 
works  of  the  authors  whom  Isidore  discusses.  (11) 
Chromcorutn  a  prindpio  mundi  uaque  ad  temptu 
auum  liber,  from  the  creation  to  the  Emperor  Hera- 
dius  and  King  Sisebut  (616),  based  on  Julius  Afri- 
c&nus,  Eusebius-Jerome,  and  Victor  of  Tunnuna, 
while  its  division  according  to  the  "  six  ages  of  the 
world  *'  was  taken  from  Augustine's  City  cf  God. 
The  work  is  extant  in  two  recensions,  as  well  as  in 
an  abridgment  forming  the  fifth  chapter  of  the 
Etymohgiae.  (12)  Hietoria  Oothorum,  Vandalorum 
et  Suevorum,  ako  in  two  redactions,  and  containing 
a  brief,  but  valuable,  accoimt  of  these  three  peoples, 
especially  of  the  Goths  from  the  earliest  times  to  the 
fifth  year  of  King  Swintila  (626).  (13)  Lihri  differ^ 
entUxrum  duo,  the  first  an  alphabetical  list  of  syn- 
onymous or  homonymous  words  with  their  mean- 
ings, and  the  second  an  elucidaticm  of  various  con- 
cepts. (14)  Synofiynumim  Ubri  duo,  or  according 
to  Ildefonsus,  Libri  lamenlatumum,  a  collection  of 
words  and  phrases  in  the  f onn  of  a  dialogue  between 
the  sinful  soul  and  comforting  "  reason/'  which 
points  it  to  penance  and  the  foigiveness  of  sins. 
(15)  De  natura  rerum,  written  at  the  request  of 
King  Sisebut  and  dedicated  to  him.  In  its  forty- 
five  chapters  it  contains  the  most  noteworthy  facts 
oonceming  the  elements,  the  heavenly  bodies,  the 
weather,  the  divisions  of  the  earth,  and  the  like,  the 
material  being  drawn  in  great  part  from  Suetonius, 
Ambrose,  the  pseudo-Clementine  writings,  and  Au- 
gustine (16)  De  numerie  liber,  a  mystic  interpretation 
of  the  niunbers  from  one  to  sixty  and  their  significance 
in  Scripture,  nature,  and  history.  The  work  is 
important  for  the  history  of  the  symbolism  of  figures. 
(17)  Eiym/oloffioTum  aive  originum  libri  viffinH,  the 
culmination  of  all  the  works  of  its  author,  his  other 
writings  being  either  preparations  or  extensions  of 
individual  parts  of  this  Ixwk.  It  formed  the  great 
encyclopedia  of  Isidore's  period,  and  derived  its 
name  from  the  etymology  prefixed  to  each  article. 
The  work  is  divided  into  twenty  books  treating  of 
the  following  subjects :  i.  grammar;  ii.  rhetoric  and 


dialectics;  iii.  arithmetic,  geometry,  music,  and  aa- 
tronomy;  iv.  medicine;  v.  jurisprudence  and  chro- 
nology, with  a  brief  tmiversal  history;  vi.  Bible, 
inspiration,  the  canon,  sacraments,  liturgy,  Easter, 
feasts,  libraries,  manuscripts,  beoks,  writing-ma^ 
terial,  and  the  like;  vii.  a  compend  of  theology, 
God,  the  Trinity,  angels  and  men,  patriarchs,  pro- 
phets, apostles,  martyrs,  clerks,  and  monks;  viii. 
churdi  and  synagogue,  religion  and  faith,  heresy 
and  schism,  Jewish  and  Christian  heretics,  gentile 
philosophers,  poets,  sibyls,  magicians,  and  gods; 
ix.  various  peoples  and  languages,  offices  and  forms 
of  government,  marriages  and  relationships;  z. 
Latin  lexicon,  with  an  explanation  of  about  500 
words  in  alphabetical  order;  xi.  mankind;  xii. 
animals;  xiii.  the  composition  and  motion  of  the 
world;  xiv.  divisions  of  the  earth,  lands,  and  moun- 
tains; XV.  cities;  xvi.  earth  and  stone,  gems  and 
metals,  weights  and  measures;  xvii.  agriculture, 
plants,  and  grain;  xviii.  war,  weapons,  games;  xix. 
ships,  buildings,  clothing,  adornment;  xx.  food, 
drink,  furniture,  and  agricultural  implements. 
Isidore's  chief  sources  were  Cassiodorus,  Boethius, 
Varro,  Solinus,  Pliny,  Hyginus,  Servius,  Lactantius, 
Tertullian,  and  especially  the  Praia  of  Suetonius,  but 
much  was  written  from  memory,  thus  accounting 
for  many  of  the  inaccuracies  of  the  work.  The  Ety- 
mologiae  remained  the  great  work  of  reference  for 
hundreds  of  years,  and  was  practically  copied  by 
Rabanus  in  his  encyclopedic  De  univerao  (844), 
while  it  was  profoimdly  admired  by  John  of  Salis- 
b\iry  in  the  twelfth  century.  Compiler  and  plagia- 
rist though  he  may  have  been,  it  has  been  well  said 
that  centuries  would  have  remained  in  darkness  if 
Isidore  had  not  let  his  light  shine. 

In  addition  to  the  works  already  enumerated, 
Isidore  is  said  to  have  written  many  smaller  trea- 
tises, and  others  still  have  been  ascribed  to  him, 
such  as  the  Quoeafumes'de  Veleri  et  Novo  Teetamento 
and  the  De  ordine  ereaturarum,  De  oofiUmphi  mundi, 
and  an  interpretation  of  the  Song  of  Solomon. 
A  number  of  Latin  poems  are  ascribed  to  him,  but 
with  little  warrant,  and  hymns  to  Agatha  and  other 
martyrs  are  included  among  the  Mozarabic  hynms. 
Several  of  his  letters  are  still  extant,  and  contain 
much  of  biographical  and  contemporary  interest. 

(R.  SCHMID.) 
Bibuoorapbt:  Lbts  of  litarmture  are  siven  in  G.  U.  J. 
GhevBlier.  Soutcm  MtforiguM  du  moyen^dog,  p.  1137.  Pkris, 
1877  Kiq.;  J.  E.  B.  Mayor,  BibUoorapkieai  ChM  to  Lofiw 
LUmUure,  p.  212,  London,  1876;  PbttliMt,  IF«viMtMr, 
pp.  687-680.  The  bMt  edition  of  his  worlu  is  by  F. 
AnmU,  7  toIs..  Rome,  1797-1803.  lepiodueed  in  MPL, 
lnxi.-lx3adv.  Others  ere  by  M.  de  l»  Biicne.  Peris.  1680; 
J.  de  Bnul  and  J.  Grial,  Pkris.  1601;  by  Grial  and  Gomes. 
Madrid.  1778.  Consult:  N.  Antonio,  BihHoOiitea  H%»pana 
estes,  ed.  P.  Bayer,  Madrid,  1788;  J.  C.  F.  Bihr.  OmchiekUs 
dm-  r^HmscAsii  /iilsroter,  supplement.  L  111-118.  Osrlsruhe. 
1886;  C.  E.  Boumt.  VteoU  dtriUenm  de  SwiXU,  pp.  6»- 
198.  Paris,  1866;  C.  F.  Montalembert,  Lm  Moinm  dt 
roeddefU,  U.  200-218,  6  vols.,  Paris.  1860-67.  Enc.  transl.. 
L  421-424.  Boston,  1872;  P.  Gams.  Kirtktnomddekie 
iSjMmsfu.  u.  2.  pp.  102-118,  Befansburg,  1874;  H.  Herts- 
bers,  Dm  Hitloritn  und  Chromiktn  dta  ltidant»  eon  Asvtila. 
G6ttin«en.  1874;  Wattenbaeh,  DQQ,  i  (1886).  81-83. 
i  (1893).  84-^;  A.  Ebert,  <7sse*«dUf  der  IMmetmt  dm 
MiUdalUr9,  I  688-602,  Leipsie.  1889;  W.  Smith,  Diction^ 
ary  (of  Qrmk  and  Roman  Biagropky  and  MvOuAogy,  iL  627- 
630.  London.  1890;  W.  8.  Tsnffel.  (TsscAuAls  der  temimshen 
LOsroeur.  pp.  1292-1296.  Leipsie.  1890;  C.  (2afinl.  San 
itidoro,  Serille.  1897;  Orillier.  Aiilfiiri  socr^  xL  710-728* 


49 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Isidore  of  SeviUe 
Israel,  History  of 


Neander.  ChriBUan  Church,  iii  161-163  et  puaim;  Scfaaff. 
ChriaHan  Church,  iy.  662-609  6t  paaom;  KL,  vi  009-976; 
DCB,  iii  305-313.  The  first  two  voliimefl  of  the  edition 
of  hia  works  by  Arevall  gather  up  the  various  aeoounts  of 
the  life  and  add  critical  oomments* 

ISIDORIAN   DECRETALS.    See    Pbeudo-Isido- 

RIAN   DbCBBTALB. 


ISIDORUS    MERCATOR.     See    Ibidobs    BIbr- 

CATOR. 

XSKANDARUNAH.    See   P&snicia,  Phbnicianb, 
L§2. 

ISLAM.    See  Mohammxb,  Mohammedanism. 


I.  fiiblieal  History. 

Primitive  History  (I  1). 

The  Abiahamic  History  (|  2). 

The  Sojourn  in  Egypt  (|  8). 

The  Exodus  and  the  Giving  of  the 

Law  (I  4). 
The   Conquest  of  Canaan  and  the 

Judges  (I  6). 
The  United  Kingdom  (|  6). 
The  Divided  Kingdom  (|  7). 
Judah  to  the  Exile  (|  8). 
The  Exile  (I  0). 
Tbe  Persian  Period  (i  10). 
The  Greek  Period  (|  11). 
The  Maeeabean  and  Roman  Periods 

(1 12). 


ISRAEL,  HISTORT  OF. 

IL  Post-Biblical  History. 

1.  General  Survey. 

2.  The  Early  Period. 

Conditions  after  the  War;   Jabneh 

(ID. 
The  Last  Insurrections  (§  2). 
Bise  of  the  Babylonian  School  ({  3). 
The  Two Talmudic Collections;  The 

Masorah  (|  4). 
8.  The  Middle  Ptaiod. 

In  the  Orient  and  Italy  (|  1). 

In  Spain;    Bise   of  Jewish  Culture 

(12). 
Jewish  Seholare  in  Spain  (|  3). 
Temporal   Situation   in   Spain    to 

1460  (f  4). 


The  Inquisition  in  Spain  (f  6). 

Jews  in  France  (|  6). 

In  England  (i  7). 

In  Italy  (|  8). 

In  Germany  (|  0). 

Revival  of  Messianism  (i  10). 

Jews  in  Poland  (I  11). 

4.  The  New  Period. 

5.  Jews  in  America. 
Early  Settlements  (i  1). 

In  the  United  States.  1800-«0  (|  2). 
Reform.  Educational,    and  Charit* 

able  Movements  (|3). 
The  New  Immigration  Since  1880 

(14). 
The  Press;  (Seneral  Conditions  (1 6). 


1.  Primi- 
tive 
Sistory. 


I.  BiUical  History:  Primitive  history  as  set  forth 
in  Genesis  takes  the  fonn  of  the  history  of  families. 
In  Semitic  nomadic  life  the  family  is 
the  miit  from  which  the  tribe  is  con- 
ceived as  developing.  Consequently 
the  Hebrews  regarded  the  nations  of 
the  world  as  the  results  of  ramifications  from  a 
single  stock.  It  is  debated  how  far  the  history  of 
fanulies  as  given  in  Genesis  is  to  be  taken  as  his- 
torical, and  how  far  the  genealogical  scheme  de- 
pends upon  observed  ethnograpldc  relationships. 
In  the  story  of  the  different  stocks,  while  in  general 
little  of  personal  life  appears,  the  forms  of  the 
patriarchs  stand  out  full  of  individuality,  and  the 
attempt  is  not  successful  to  read  the  experiences 
attributed  to  them  in  certain  situations  and  in 
individualistic  form  as  the  doings  of  a  tribe  or  a 
people.  Moreover,  the  sobriety  and  exactness  of 
detail  in  these  narratives  is  such  as  to  differentiate 
them  from  the  poetizing  sagas  in  which  folk-lore 
celebrates  the  eponymous  ancestors  to  whom  the 
origins  of  the  peoples  are  traced.  It  lies  on  the 
face  of  these  narratives  that  they  are  only  frag- 
ments of  traditions  which  had  for  a  long  time  been 
transmitted  orally,  and  in  the  course  of  this  trans- 
mission the  lesser  figures  have  dropped  from  the 
account  and  only  the  great  personalities  have  re- 
mained. But  th^  memory  of  such  personalities  as 
Abraham  (q.v.),  the  father  of  the  nation  with  whom 
is  associated  the  migration  from  the  Euphrates  to 
Canaan,  or  Jacob  (q.v.),  who  endured  hard  service 
in  the  Aramaic  territory  and  earned  the  blessing  of 
God  as  the  father  of  a  numerous  progeny,  or  Joseph 
(q.v.),  through  whose  vicissitudes  the  settlement  in 
E^ypt  was  brought  about,  remained  a  permanent 
possession  essentially  constant  in  form.  For  the 
historicity  of  the  person  of  Abraham  it  may  be  said 
that  his  history  is  not  discordant  with  what  Assjrr- 
ian-Babylonian  history  demands,  and  the  stoiy  of 
Joseph  is  accordant  with  what  is  known  of  Egyp- 
tian  history. 

In  Genesis  Abraham  is  the  descendant  and  spirit- 
ual heir  of  Shem.    According  to  Gen.  x.  21  sqq.  he 
shares  this  descent  with  a  group  of  nations,  all  of 
VI.-4 


whom  (except  Elam  and  Lud)  are  related  in  lan- 
guage and  blood  to  the  Hebrews  and  are  still  known 
A  mv  A «.  ^  Semites.  In  Gen.  xiv.  13  Abraham 
rS^'  ^  **"®^  "  ^^  Hebrew,"  and  according 
TTi^^yy,  ^  ^^  Biblical  representation  the  Isra- 
elites were  in  early  times  called  Hebrews 
by  other  peoples,  especially  by  the  Egyptians.  The 
connotation  of  this  term  Hebrew  is  narrower  than 
that  of  Semite,  but  broader  than  that  of  Israelite, 
though  its  exact  meaning  is  not  established.  It  can 
hardly  mean  "  those  who  dwell  beyond  the  Jordan  " 
(Stade  and  E.  Meyer),  but  is  better  brought  into 
relation  with  the  river  Euphrates  and  related  to 
the  Assyrian  expression  **  across  the  river."  The 
equating  of  the  Hebrew  form  'Ibhrim  with  the 
Egyptian  *Apr%u  is  questionable;  more  likely  is 
the  equivalency  of  the  Hebrew  form  with  the 
^abiri  of  the  Amama  Tablets,  though  the  significa- 
tion of  Habiri  must  not  be  restricted  to  the  fore- 
fathers of  the  Hebrews.  The  existence  of  the 
Hebraic  nomadic  family  life  in  Ganaan  was  arduous, 
according  to  the  concordant  testimony  of  the 
sources.  The  people  often  had  to  change  their 
dwelling-places  to  secure  pasturage.  Still  more 
difiicult  was  their  situation  in  times  of  famine,  as 
when  they  had  to  transfer  themselves  to  Egypt, 
at  that  time  the  granary  of  the  r^on,  and  found 
themselves  subject  to  oppression  and  placed  imder 
disabilities  (Gen.  xx.  11).  It  was  a  necessity  of 
this  kind  which  brought  about  the  settlement  of 
the  entire  Jacob  dan  in  Egypt,  in  the  northwestern 
part  known  as  Goshen,  the  later  "  Arab  nome  dis- 
trict "  about  Phakusa,  the  present  Saft  el-Henneh, 
a  r^on  not  yet  definitely  marked  out  (E.  Naville, 
Goshen  and  the  Shrine  of  Sq/t  d  Henneh,  London, 
1887).  While  little  is  known  of  the  people  during 
their  stay  there,  the  circumstances  were  so  favorable 
that  they  developed  into  a  nation  which  yet  was 
not  politically  organized  in  national  form,  but  lived 
under  the  patriarehal  government  of  tribal  sheiks. 
On  the  religious  side  much  must  have  been  borrowed 
from  the  orderly  state  in  which  they  were.  While 
a  part  of  the  people  followed  pastoral  occupations, 
another  part  settled  down  to  agricultural  life  (Num. 


IsnMl,  EictoxT  of 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOO 


50 


xi.  5),  and  Bomethiag  of  the  industrial  aooompliah- 
ment  of  the  Egsrptiana  must  have  been  acquired. 
That  the  Israelites  showed  a  greater  receptivity  and 
productivity  in  respect  to  euituxe  than  their  near 
relatives,  the  Edomites  and  Moabites,  is  due  in 
part  to  their  sojourn  in  Egypt.  The  pre-Moeaic 
period  was  a  preparation  also  for  the  theocratic 
and  national  cult  of  later  tunes.  The  preaching  of 
Moses  must  have  had  a  baaiB  in  the  knowledge  of 
contemporary  Hebrews;  and  the  sources  imitedly 
attribute  to  the  patriarchs  acquaintance  with  the 
God  of  the  covenant^  though  he  was  oalled  by  other 
names.  This  Qod  of  the  patriaiehs  was  invisible^ 
exalted,  not  bound  to  any  one  Umd,  though  he 
revealed  himself  in  definite  localities  which  were 
therefore  holy,  imd  was  the  possessor  of  heaven  and 
earth  (Gen.  sdv.  19),  dwelling  in  heaven  and  ruling 
the  earth.  The  recollection  clung  that  Abraham 
had  been  called  from  a  relationship  where  idolatry 
was  the  rule  (Josh.  xdv.  2,  14).  The  uniqueness 
of  God  was  not  theoretically  developed,  but  was 
rather  a  practical  monotheism  which  permitted  to 
the  Hebrews  worship  of  him  alone.  The  stone 
worship  and  totemism  some  find  in  Genesis  is  dis- 
covered only  through  wilful  exegesis  and  eisegesis. 
Even  in  the  naive  anthropomorphisms  of  Gen.  zi., 
xviii.-zix.  there  are  evidences  of  an  exalted  con- 
ception of  Qod.  These  religious  ideas  were  not 
derived  from  Egypt,  for  they  differ  entirely  from 
EJgyptian  conceptions,  thou^  that  the  Hebrews 
derived  some  things  from  the  Egyptians  is  clear 
from  Josh.  xxiv.  14;  Ecek.  zx.  7  sqq.,  but  that 
the  calf  worship  had  such  an  origin  is  improbable 
(see  Calf,  The  Golden). 

In  the  region  granted  them  by  the  Egyptians, 
the  Hebrew  shepherds  lived  in  relative  independence 

and  grew  strong.    Into  this  situation 

*•  ^***  *^  was  injected  the  circumstance  simply 

Bff^t.      o^i^CB^  ^  ^^  i.  8  as  the  rise  cf  a 

king  who  knew  not  Joseph.  This  is 
doubtless  to  be  connected  with  the  expulsion  of  the 
Hyksos  from  Egypt  and  the  antiforeign  sentiments 
of  the  new  dynasty.  The  half-nomads  in  the  north- 
east were  subjected  to  the  corv6e  and  put  to  build- 
ing fortresses  and  storehouses;  and  since  this  did 
not  suffice  to  reduce  their  strength,  the  slaughter 
of  the  male  children  was  ordered.  Thus  what  had 
been  a  welcome  asylum  became  a  place  of  slavery 
under  the  hardships  of  which  the  Hebrews  groaned. 
Liberation  from  this  situation  is  attributed  by  a 
unanimous  tradition  to  Moses.  The  period  of  the 
oppression  is  with  growing  assurance  asserted  to  be 
that  of  Rameses  II.,  whose  name  is  connected  with 
so  many  building-enterprises  and  monuments.  In 
that  case  his  son  and  successor,  Meneptah,  was  the 
Pharaoh  of  the  Exodus  (see  Eotpt,  I.,  4,  }  3). 
Apparently  against  this  is  an  inscription  of  Menep- 
tah telling  of  an  expedition  in  which  he  has  de- 
stroyed Syria  and  Israel  (the  latter  for  the  only 
time  found  mentioned  on  Egyptian  monuments). 
If  the  reference  is  to  Israel,  then  Israel  must  already 
have  been  living  in  Canaan,  and  the  Exodus  must 
have  taken  plaee  earlier.  This  agrees  better  with 
Hebrew  tradition,  which  (I  Kings  vi.  1)  reckoned 
480  years  between  the  Exodus  and  the  building 
of  Solomon's  temple,  which  would  place  the  Exodus 


0. 1440  B.C.,  therefore  in  the  time  of  Amenophis  II.; 
and  this  agrees  again  with  the  statement  of  Manetho, 
who  records  the  expulsion  of  the  lepers  under  a  long 
of  this  name.  One  circumstance,  indeed,  tells 
against  this  earlier  date,  vis.,  the  frequent  oeeur- 
rence  in  the  Pentateuch  of  the  name  Rameses  ((Sen. 
xlvii.  11;  Ex.  i.  11,  xii.  37;  Num.  xiiL  3,  6).  Fur- 
ther, against  the  late  dating  of  the  Exodus  is  the 
fact  that  the  tribal  name  Asher  appears  in  an  in- 
scription of  Seti,  father  of  Rameses  (c.  1350  b.c), 
according  to  which  that  tribe  must  have  had  its 
residence  in  the  neighborhood  of  Lebanon.  The 
supposition  that  this  tribe  departed  alone  from 
Egypt  is  improbable.*  Accoriding  to  Gen.  xv. 
13,  16,  the  sojourn  in  £!gypt  was  to  last  400  years 
or  four  generations.  The  Hebrew  of  Ex.  xii.  40-41 
gives  430  years,  but  the  Septuagint  reads  "  which 
they  sojourned  in  Egypt  and  the  land  of  Canaan." 
The  indication  of  the  narrative  of  P  is  that  215 
yean  were  assigned  to  the  EJgyptian  sojourn  and 
215  to  the  period  between  the  settlement  and  David, 
which  was  the  understanding  of  Josephus  and  of 
the  synagogue.  Along  with  this  goes  the  fact  that 
in  the  genealogies  of  Moses  and  Achan  between  Korah 
and  Levi  are  mentioned  only  two  steps,  between 
Judah  and  Achan  only  three  (Ex.  vi.  20;  Num.  xxvi. 
50,  xvi.  1;  Josh.  vii.  1).  But  since  in  Gen.  xv.  even 
the  Septuagint  has  the  higher  number,  its  reading 
in  Ex.  xii.  40  appears  to  he  an  emendation.  With 
the  longer  period  would  agree  the  censuses  of  Num.  i., 
xxvi.,  which  involve  a  population  of  about  2,000,000 
souls,  and  Num.  xi.  21.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is 
difficult  to  reconcile  these  high  numbers  with  the 
long  sojourn  in  the  peninsula  of  Sinai  [or  to  find 
room  for  so  many  people  in  the  region.  Therefore 
Uiese  numbers  are  now  rejected,  and  scholars  re- 
duce the  number  of  Israelites  in  the  Exodus  to  a 
few  thousands]. 

The  Exodus  under  Moses  was  regarded  by  the 

Israelites  as  the  birth  of  the  nation  (for  the  route 

of  the  Exodus  see  Reo  Sea;  Wan- 

d      aid  tiT  ^■""'®  ™  ""  WiLDEBNESs) .  The  his- 

Oivlnff  of*  ^^<5ity  of  the  narrative  of  the  Exodus 

the  Zjaw.    ^^uld  suffer  no  harm  if  it  were  asstuned 

that  only  the  noblest  part  of  the  people, 

to  which  the  Joseph  tribes  belonged,  took  part  in 

the  event,  while  the  other  tribes  were  alr»uly  in 

the  peninsula;  but  for  this  supposition  there  is  no 

sure  ground.    To  Moses,  under  direction  of  God, 

were  due   both  the   Exodus   and   the    covenant 

between  Yahweh  and  Israel;  but  they  were  esseur 

ttally  divine  acts,  and  God  became  known  by  his 

name  Yahweh  (see  Jehovah;  and  Yahweh).  The 

result  was  the  cult  and  the  conceptions  of  life  which 

*  The  tost  takes  no  fteoount  of  the  ezpUastioa  hy  leooDt 
orities  of  the  Beti  end  Meneptah  inecriptioBa.  This  is  to 
the  eileot  that  the  Hebrew  tribe*  whose  deeeent  wm  tneed 
to  concubines  of  Jacob  weie  those  who,  already  settled  in 
Canaan  in  prehistoric  times,  were  abeorbed  at  a  oompaia* 
tively  late  period,  to  whieh  faet  is  due  the  lees  faoooreble 
aooount  of  their  oricin.  The  tribes  mentioned  in  the  in- 
scriptions were  in  that  case  not  amons  the  refugees  in  Egypt 
or  the  Hebrews  of  the  Exodus,  but  had  maintained  their 
residence  in  Canaan,  where  they  were  ssseiled  by  Seta  and 
Meneptah.  This  is  eopported  by  the  legend  of  the  substi- 
tution of  the  name  Israel  for  Jacob,  which  is  the  epony- 
mous method  of  accounting  for  a  transfer  of  name  from  a 
portion  to  the  whole  people.  Q.  W.  G. 


61 


RSUQIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDU 


Xsraely  History  of 


beeame  ragnaat  in  Israel.  The  retnlting  fonn  of 
gOTemment  has,  since  the  time  of  Joeephus  (Apian, 
ii.  16),  been  ealted  a  theocracy,  the  idea  being  that 
to  God  was  assigned  the  authority  for  all  rights  and 
acts.  Hence  the  law  included  not  only  regulations 
for  civil  and  criminal  processes,  but  also  r^ulaUons 
governing  sacrifices  and  fisstivals  and  purifications. 
From  the  time  of  the  reception  of  the  law  the  soli- 
darity of  the  people  wae  an  accomplished  fact,  while 
at  the  same  time  the  penonality  of  deity  was  em- 
phasiaed.  The  people  had  become  a  united  religious 
community.  It  is  self-evident,  therefore,  that  Moees 
set  in  order  the  cultus  for  this  community,  sane* 
tioning  or  prohibiting  customs  then  prevalent,  those 
which  were  accepted  then  receiving  new  consecra* 
tion.  He  appointed  also  a  central  sanctuary,  with- 
out an  image, — the  ark  of  the  covenant  with  the 
celebrations  centering  about  it,  and  in  this  centrali- 
sation lay  the  only  protection  for  the  pure  worship 
of  Yahweh.  The  priests  at  the  oentml  sanctuary 
of  later  times  were  naturally  the  protectors  of  the 
Mosaic  law,  and  while  this  law  necessarily  received 
modifications  in  the  course  of  time,  in  general  no 
law  was  known  which  did  not  go  by  the  name  of 
Moees.  That  there  were  relapses  from  observance 
of  this  law  is  not  surprising.  Equally  sure  is  it  that 
the  law  is  not  merely  ideiUly  referred  to  the  deeert 
period  of  Israel's  life,  but  that  it  grew  out  of  the 
leader's  struggle  with  the  people,  whose  rebellious 
and  distrustful  character  so  often  manifested  itself 
in  the  desert.  The  continuance  of  the  desert  so- 
journ is  given  as  forty  years  by  the  concordant 
tradition  and  Amos  v.  26.  This  period  includes 
several  smaller  periods  when  the  people  settled 
about  eome  ^>ot,  as  at  the  mountain  and  at  Kadesh. 
With  this  period  of  forty  years  agrees  the  fact  that 
it  was  a  new  generation  which  imdertook  the  con- 
quest, different  from  that  which  had  participated 
in  the  crossing  of  the  Red  Sea. 

Moses  was  not  among  those  who  entered  the 
promised  land;  only  the  East-Jordanland,  not  in- 
cluded in  the  promises,  did  he  see  in 
*'  ^*,^"  poMCssion  of  the  people.  But  to 
CMimaa  and  ^^^'^  was  divinely  committed  the 
the  Judges.  **»^  ^^  leading  the  people  S470ss  the 
Jordan.  Campaigns  were  accomplished 
in  the  north,  then  in  the  central  portion  at  ShQoh 
the  central  sanctuary  was  established.  Before  his 
death  Joshua  called  an  assembly  of  the  people  at 
Shechem  and  there  eachorted  them  to  remain  true 
to  their  God.  For  the  relation  of  the  narrative  in 
the  Book  of  Joshua  to  Judges  i.,  see  Jobhua,  Book 
OF.  When  the  land  was  parceled  out  among  the 
tribes,  when  the  Hebrews  came  to  mingle  with  the 
earlier  inhabitants  and  were  no  longer  held  together 
by  a  central  authority,  it  could  hai^y  be  otherwise 
than  that  the  political  solidarity  shoiUd  be  lost,  that 
the  tribal  distinctions  shouki  emeige,  and  that  the 
tribes  shouki  enter  into  various  relationships  with 
the  Gaoaanites.  So,  too,  the  religious  unity  was  en- 
dangered through  communications  with  the  early 
sett&ia,  while  totally  different  conceptions  of  deity 
overbud  those  whidi  had  been  received  at  Sinai. 
It  was  easy  to  adopt  into  the  Yahweh  worship 
customs  which  in  origin  and  meaning  were  heathen. 
This  ha^iened  particularly  at  the  high  places,  the 


sanctuaries  of  the  Ganaanites,  which  were  adopted 
as  places  of  sacrifice  by  the  Hebrews  (see  High 
Placbb).  With  this  went  relapse  into  the  worship 
of  the  Baals  and  Astartes,  with  their  impure  cults 
so  opposed  to  that  of  Yahweh.  The  obliteration 
of  the  religious  distincticm  between  Hebrews  and 
Ganaanites  carried  with  it  more  or  less  of  social 
and  political  dependence  or  amalgamation,  especially 
where  the  Hebrews  were  in  the  minority.  To  this 
was  perhaps  due  the  loss  of  physical  courage 
through  which  subjection  to  the  inroads  of  the 
hordes  of  Midianites,  Amalekites,  Moabites,  Am- 
monites, and  Philistines  was  brought  about,  relief 
from  which  was  wrought  by  the  inspired  heroes 
who  aroused  the  people  to  resistance.  These  heroes 
— ^the  Judges — ^were,  above  all,  champions  of  free- 
dom, but  their  strength  and  success  lay  in  the  fact 
that  they  recalled  the  people  to  trust  and  obedience 
given  to  the  God  of  Moses  and  Joshua  (see  Judges). 
This  is  true  of  such  of  the  Judges  as  Deborah, 
Guieon,  Jephthah  (qq.v.),  while  of  Samson  (q.v.) 
it  must  be  said  that  his  significance  wae  rather  in- 
dividual than  national  or  tribal,  and  of  others,  such 
as  Elon  and  Abdon,  the  influence  was  rather  tribal 
or  local  than  national.  The  result  of  this  period 
was  severance  into  tribal  groups  and  loss  of  the 
sense  of  nationality. 

This  severance,  due  to  the  breaking  of  the  cove- 
nant bond  founded  upon  the  relationship  with  Yah- 
Thm  ^®^'  naturally  led  in  turn  to  the  de- 
'SnUad     ™^°^  ^^^  ^  finner  political  union  under 

Xi&Bdoni.  '^  u&tional  head  in  whom  leadership 
'  was  more  externally  evident  than 
under  a  pure  theocracy.  The  tendency  toward  a 
monarchical  form  of  government  was  manifested 
under  Gideon,  whose  son,  Abimelech,  exercised  a 
brief  sway  over  a  limited  r^on.  The  founding  of 
the  kingdom  is,  however,  inseparably  connected 
with  the  name  of  Samuel  (q.v.),  the  last  of  the 
Judges,  who  exercised  also  the  functions  of  priest 
and  prophet.  The  immediate  occasion  of  the  es- 
tablishnient  of  the  kingdom  was  the  oppression  by 
the  Philistines.  The  hope  of  relief  from  this  distress 
was  realised  under  Saul  (q.v.),  who,  however,  soon 
regarded  himself  as  sovereign  and  not  as  the  repre- 
sentative of  the  sole  king,  Yahweh.  This  led  to  the 
announcement  of  his  rejection  through  Samuel, 
followed  quickly  by  his  melancholia  and  his  defeat 
and  death  at  GUboa.  Before  his  death  his  successor 
had  been  chosen  in  the  person  of  David  (q.v.), 
son  of  Jesse,  of  Bethlehem  of  Judah,  who  had 
achieved  prominence  as  a  leader  in  war  and  had 
aroused  Saul's  jealousy,  hatred,  and  persecution. 
After  the  death  of  Saul,  David  was  for  seven  and  a 
half  years  king  in  Hebron  over  Judah,  while  Ish- 
bosheth  (q.v.)  reigned  in  Mahanaim  across  the 
Jordan  over  the  northern  tribes.  After  the  violent 
death  of  Ishbosheth  David  became  king  over  the 
united  tribes,  and  fixed  his  residence  finally  in  Jeru^ 
salem,  then  newly  captured.  His  leadership  in  war 
and  peace  brought  the  kingdom  to  its  highest  point 
of  prosperity.  His  spiritual  and  religious  signif- 
icance was  also  great,  characterised  as  it  was  by 
complete  concord  between  king  and  prophet;  and 
no  less  marked  was  his  influence  upon  the  cultus 
through  his  placing  of  the  ark  in  the  capital,  through 


Z«raal,  History  of 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


62 


hifl  service  to  the  ritual  of  song,  as  well  as  hia 
aealoua  devotion  to  Yahweh.  His  son  and  auc- 
oeasor,  Solomon  (q.v.)f  built  in  Jerusalem  the 
temple,  which  became  more  and  more  the  cultio 
center  for  the  entire  land,  in  spite  of  its  temporary 
destruction.  His  reign,  unlike  that  of  his  father's, 
was  one  of  peace;  yet  the  very  fact  that  the  land 
was  unassailed  by  external  foes,  together  with  the 
jealousy  of  the  northern  tribes  at  being  ruled  by  a 
Judahite,  prepared  the  way  for  the  division  of  the 
kingdom,  which  was  supported  by  the  prophetic 
leaders,  swayed  in  part  by  Solomon's  acquiescence 
in  the  practise  of  heathen  rites  introduced  by  the 
princesses  whom  he  had  made  his  wives. 

After  the  death  of  Solomon  the  laiger  part  of  the 

nation  revolted  from  the  Davidic  dynasty  and  set 

up  the  Ephraimite  Jeroboam   (q.v.) 

ni^M  ■■  ^^*  ^^^  ^  Rehoboam  (q.v.), 
Kingdom.  'Solomon's  son,  only  the  southern  part 
remained  true  with  the  capital,  to 
which  adhered  Judah,  part  of  Benjamin,  remains 
of  Simeon,  and  Dan,  and  most  of  the  Levites.  A 
hostility  began  between  the  two  kingdoms  which 
resulted  in  mutual  weakening  and  in  consequent 
inability  to  resist  external  powers  such  as  Syria 
and  Assyria.  The  division  was  also  religiously  dis- 
astrous. In  order  to  wean  the  people  from  Jeru- 
salem and  its  sanctuary,  Jeroboam  set  up  golden 
calves  (see  Calt,  thb  Golden)  as  images  of  Yah- 
weh at  Dan  and  Bethel  and  in  this  way  reintroduced 
the  principle  of  religious  syncretism  into  the  worship 
of  Yahweh.  Nevertheless  the  prophets  remained  a 
powerful  agency  in  the  Ephraimitic  kingdom. 
Politically  the  situation  there  was  lamentable. 
Dynasty  succeeded  dynasty  in  rapid  succession, 
and  the  revolutionary  principle  was  often  in  evi- 
dence in  the  further  history,  The  dynasty  of  Jero- 
boam (q.v.)  had  but  two  generations,  as  had  that 
of  the  next  founded  by  the  usurper  Baasha  (q.v.); 
Zimri  (q.v.)  reigned  but  seven  days,  and  was  over- 
thrown by  Omri  (q.v.),  whose  name  became  so  cele- 
brated that  in  the  Assyrian  inscriptions  Israel  was 
long  known  as  the  "  land  of  Omri."  Omri  made 
Samaria  (q.v.)  the  permanent  capital,  and  was  suc- 
ceeded by  his  son,  Ahab  (q.v.),  a  king  successful 
in  his  external  relations,  but  swayed  at  home  by 
his  consort,  Jeaebel  (q.v.),  whose  unremitting  efforts 
to  subvert  the  Yahweh  cult  for  that  of  Biud  were 
opposed  by  Elijah  (q.v.).  The  reigns  of  Ahab's 
sons,  Ahasiah  and  Joram  (qq.v.),  brought  the 
dynasty  to  an  end.  The  period  of  the  Omri  dynasty 
was  one  of  peace  and  alliance  between  the  two 
kingdoms,  cemented  by  marriage  between  the  two 
houses  in  the  persons  of  Athaliah,  daughter  of 
Jeiebel,  and  Ahab  and  Joram  (q.v.)  of  Judah.  In 
the  meantime  the  southern  kingdom  under  Reho- 
boam had  suffered  severely  imder  a  campaign  of 
Shishak  of  Egypt,  but  under  his  grandson,  Asa 
(q.v.),  and  his  great-grandson,  Jehoshaphat  (q.v.), 
its  prestige  was  recovered.  The  alliance  between 
the  two  houses  almost  resulted  in  the  extinction  of 
the  Davidic  dynasty  through  the  massacre  by 
Athaliah,  from  which  only  Joash  (q.v.)  of  the  seed 
royal  escaped .  Under  Joram,  father  of  Joash,  Edom , 
the  one  vassal  people  remaining  to  Judah  from 
the  united  kingdom,  had  secured  its  independence. 


In  the  northern  kingdom  judgment  came  upon  the 
dynasty  of  Omri  through  Jehu  (q.v.),  who,  with 
frightful  slaughter,  established  a  new  dynasty  in 
Samaria.  Jehu  and  his  son  and  successor,  Jehoahaz 
(q.v.),  were,  however,  vassals  of  the  Syrians. 
Under  Jehu's  grandson,  Joash  (q.v.),  this  vassalage 
was  broken  and  Judah  was  reduced  to  a  tributary 
position  under  Amaziah  (q.v.),  son  of  Joash  of 
Judah.  Jeroboam  II.  (q.v.),  the  fourth  of  Jehu's 
dynasty,  raised  the  kingdom  to  an  unexampled 
height  of  prosperity,  quickly  lost  under  his  suc- 
cessor, Zaehariah  (q.v.).  Jeroboam  reestablished 
the  early  bounds  of  tfae  kingdom  by  bringing  the 
Moabites  and  part  of  the  Syrian  territory  under 
Israelitic  dominion.  This  was  the  period  of  the 
prophets  Amos,  Rosea,  and  Jonah  the  son  of 
Amittai  (qq.v.),  who  showed  the  contrast  between 
the  apparent  prosperity  and  the  internal  decay  of 
the  kingdom.  The  Assyrians  had  been  battering 
at  Syria  and  had  already  come  into  close  relations 
with  Israel  Ahab  had  fought  against  Assyria  at 
Karkar,  Jehu  had  paid  costly  tribute  in  842  B.C.; 
but  Tiglath-Pileser  III.  (see  Asbtria,  VI.,  3,  |  9) 
had  subjected  to  his  power  the  coimtiy  up  to  the 
Mediterranean  coast;  Jehu's  dynasty  ended  with 
Zaehariah,  who  was  slain  by  Shallum,  and  he  in 
turn  was  killed  by  Menahem  (q.v.)  after  a  reign  of 
one  month.  Menahem  reigned  five  years,  a  vassal 
of  Tiglath-Pileser;  his  son  Pekahiah  (q.v.)  was 
slain  by  the  usurper  Pekah  (q.v.),  whose  combina- 
tion with  Syria  against  Judah  was  aimed  against 
Assyria,  and  led  to  the  final  catastrophe  under  his 
successor,  Hoshea  (q.v.).  In  Judah  the  calamity 
sustained  imder  Axnasiah  was  gradually  foigotten 
during  the  long  reign  of  Uzziah  (q.v.),  whose  general- 
ship secured  the  subjection  of  the  Edomites,  Moab- 
ites, and  Ammonites,  while  the  northern  kingdom 
declined.  Whether  the  Asriyahu  of  Yaudi  ("  Ju- 
dah ")  mentioned  in  the  inscriptions  of  Tiglath- 
Pileser  as  at  the  head  of  an  anti-Assyrian  combina- 
tion is  to  be  identified  with  this  king  or  with  the 
king  of  a  North-Syrian  Yaudi  is  still  debated.  Us- 
siah  directed  well  the  inner  fortunes  of  the  state, 
patronizing  agriculture  and  grazing.  The  Chronicler 
ascribes  his  leprosy  to  an  invasion  of  priestly  rights; 
in  consequence  of  this  disease  his  son  Jotham  (q.v.) 
ruled  long  as  r^ent  before  he  succeeded  to  the 
throne.  In  the  time  of  Jotham's  successor.  Abas 
(q.v.),  occurred  the  alliance  of  Israel  and  Syria 
against  Judah,  referred  to  above;  and  the  situation 
was  complicated  by  a  hostile  combination  of  Edom- 
ites and  Philistines.  But  Ahaz  was  relieved  by  the 
successes  of  Tiglath-Pileser,  whose  campaigns  were 
directed  against  Judah's  foes.  The  Assyrian  beset 
Samaria,  which  Sargon  finally  took,  carrying  27,000 
of  its  inhabitants  into  captivity,  leaving  Judah  to 
survive  for  135  years. 

The  successor  of  Ahaz  to  the  throne  of  Judah  was 
Hesekiah  (q.v.),  a  vassal  of  Assyria,  but  most  rest- 
less  in  that  relation,  who  was  saved 
to  ^*^  from  the  vengeance  of  Sennacherib  in 
2^^^^     a  way  regarded  as  miraculous.     His 
son,  Manasseh  (q.v.),  was  strongly  dis- 
posed toward  heathenism,  persecuting  the  adher- 
ents of  the  Yahweh  religion.    This  policy  was  con> 
tinned  imder  his  son  Ammon  (q.v.),  but  reversed 


53 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDU 


Xaraal,  History  of 


under  his  second  suooessor,  Josiah  (q.v.)>  who,  with 
ail  earnestness,  reintroduced  the  Mosaic  faith  and 
cultus.  Josiah's  untimely  death,  caused  by  his  con- 
fronting the  Egyptian  Necho  at  Megiddo,  was  a  most 
serious  blow  to  the  welfare  of  Judah.  His  son  Jeho- 
ahaa  (q.v.)  was  removed  from  the  throne  by  Necho 
after  the  latter's  return  from  the  East  three  months 
later,  and  Jehoiakim,  his  elder  brother,  was  put  in 
his  place.  Jehoiakim  (q.v.)  became  tributaiy  to  the 
Babylonians,  but  revolted  after  three  years,  an  of- 
fense which  was  expiated  after  his  death  by  his 
son,  Jehoiachin  (q.v.),  whom,  after  a  reign  of  three 
months,  Nebuchadrezsar  took  prisoner  and  carried 
to  Babylon  with  the  noblest  of  the  land.  The  Baby- 
lonians placed  upon  the  throne  a  third  son  of  Josiah, 
who  assumed  the  name  Zedekiah  (q.v.);  he,  in  the 
ninth  year  of  his  reign,  conspired  in  alliance  with 
the  Pharaoh  Hophra  to  throw  off  the  Babylonian 
yoke,  in  this  going  counter  to  the  advice  of  Jeremiah 
and  Ezekiel  and  thereby  challenging  the  might  of 
the  Euphrates  kingdom.  The  Babylonians  invested 
Jerusalem  after  defeating  a  force  of  Egyptians  sent 
to  break  the  siege,  captured  the  city  in  586  b.c, 
destroyed  the  temple  and  the  city's  defenses,  vis- 
ited with  pimtshment  the  leaders  of  the  people,  and 
carried  away  into  captivity  all  whose  social  rank 
exposed  them  to  possibilities  of  leadership.  Geda- 
liah  (q.v.)  was  made  governor  and  took  up  his  resi- 
dence in  Mizpah,  where  the  remnant  of  the  people 
gathered  about  him,  and  where  he  soon  became 
the  victim  of  assassination.  Many  of  the  remaining 
people  fled  into  Egypt,  taking  with  them  against 
his  will  the  prophet  Jeremiah.  Jerusalem  lay  in 
ruins,  large  parts  of  the  territory  of  Judea  passed 
into  the  possession  of  the  Edomites,  and  the  future 
and  promise  of  Israel  for  the  next  fifty  years  was 
in  the  exiles  in  Babylon. 

The  exiles  were  settled  in  Babylonia  along  the 
Chebar  in  the  neighborhood  of  Nippur  (see  Babt- 
g  ^^  LONiA,  IV.,  I  9),  where  they  possessed 
1^^^  their  own  houses  and  lands  and  a  cer- 
tain degree  of  autonomy.  The  only 
basis  for  a  history  of  the  exilic  period  and  the  life 
of  that  time  is  in  the  books  of  Jeremiah,  Esekiel, 
and  I>eutero-Isaiah,  which  last  originated  in  the 
last  third  of  the  exile.  Part  of  the  people  relapsed 
into  idolatiy.  But  for  the  rest,  in  their  enforced 
abstinence  from  participation  in  the  religious  or- 
difumces  of  the  sanctuary,  the  spiritual  significance 
of  such  observances  as  the  Sabbath  rest,  and  the 
ordinances  regarding  food  and  circimicision  became 
deepened  as  being  signs  of  their  distinction  as  the 
people  of  God.  The  very  nearness  of  heathenism 
repelled  many  of  the  Jews,  as  there  was  borne  in 
upon  them  tbe  fact  that  their  own  experiences  were 
the  expression  of  a  long-deferred  judgment  for  this 
sin.  There  was  also  impressed  upon  the  nation  the 
idea  of  its  mission  in  the  world  as  a  mediator  between 
God  and  the  nations. 

About  fifty  years  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusa- 
lem the  Babylonian  empire  came  into  the  hands  of 
Cyrus.  Babylon  was  taken  in  539,  and  in  that  year 
the  Jews  received  from  the  victor  permission  to  re- 
turn. Of  this  permission  42,360  males,  with  their 
families,  availed  themselves  under  the  leadership 
of  Sheshbaszar-Zerubbabel  (the  identity  of  Shesh- 


bazsar  and  Zerubbabel  is  still  debated)  and  the 
high  priest  Joshua,  and  reached  Jerusalem  probably 
10  Th  ^  ^^'  '^^y  settled  in  Jerusalem  and 
Persiaa  ^  ^^^  outlying  cities,  set  up  the  altar 
Period.  ^^  burnt  offerings,  and  made  prepara- 
tions to  rebuild  the  temple.  Owing, 
however,  to  the  opposition  of  the  Samaritans,  who 
placed  all  difficulties  in  the  way,  and  to  the  necessity 
of  securing  means  of  subsistence,  the  reconstruction 
of  the  temple  was  deferred  till  the  beginning  of 
the  reign  of  Darius,  in  the  years  520-516  B.C.,  and 
was  accomplished  then  under  the  stimulus  of  the 
prophets  Hsggai  and  Zechariah.  The  report  of  the 
return  in  538  has  been  seriously  questioned,  and  the 
thesis  advanced  that  Zerubbabel  was  never  in  exile, 
and  that  the  temple  was  rebuilt  by  the  Jews  who 
had  remained  in  Palestine;  but  these  hypotheses 
are  based  on  arbitrary  constructions  which  fall  on 
examination.  For  the  period  516-458  no  reports 
have  been  transmitted,  except  that  the  narrative 
of  the  Book  of  Esther  (q.v.)  refers  to  the  time  of 
Xerxes.  In  458  B.C.  under  Artaxerxes  I.  the  con- 
dition of  the  colony  at  Jerusalem  was  miserable 
and  the  maintenance  of  its  religious  distinction  en- 
dangered. Then  the  scribe  £^ra  (q.v.)  led  back 
to  Judea  a  new  company  of  exiles  consisting  of 
1,500  males  with  their  faniilies.  He  was  empowered 
by  royal  firman  to  put  into  practise  the  require- 
ments of  the  Mosaic  law,  but  entire  success  in  this 
direction  was  attained  oniy  when,  in  445-^444  B.C., 
Nehemiah  (q.v.)  came  to  his  support,  clothed  with 
the  authority  of  the  governorship.  Nehemiah  re- 
established the  defenses  of  Jerusalem  by  having 
the  walls  of  the  city  repaired,  notwithstanding  the 
opposition  of  the  Samaritans,  and  then  assisted 
Ezra  in  the  purification  of  the  commimity  by 
causing  the  dismission  of  the  heathen  wives  and 
requiring  the  observance  of  the  entire  Mosaic  law. 
After  a  residence  of  twelve  years  Nehemiah  re- 
turned to  the  Persian  court,  but  in  a  later  visit  to 
Jerusalem  found  it  necessary  to  employ  stem 
measures  for  the  preservation  of  the  Mosaic  institu- 
tions, expelling  from  the  community  a  grandson 
of  the  high  priest  who  had  married  a  daughter  of 
the  Samaritan  noble  Sanballat  (q.v.).  According 
to  Josephus  (ArU,  XI.,  viii.  2  sqq.),  this  priest, 
with  the  help  of  his  father-in-law,  established  the 
sanctuaiy  of  the  Samaritans  on  Moimt  Gerizim 
and  set  in  order  its  priesthood;  but  Josephus  con- 
fused these  events  with  others  which  occurred  in 
the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great.  Undoubtedly  at 
that  time  the  Samaritans  received  from  the  Jews 
the  Pentateuch,  which  constitutes  their  Scriptures. 
Of  the  last  ten  years  of  the  Persian  period  no  trust- 
worthy reports  have  come  down.  There  are  state- 
ments that  Artaxerxes  III.  Ochus  ordered  a  deporta- 
tion of  Jews  to  Hyrcania,  on  the  south  shore  of  the 
Caspian,  because  they  were  involved  in  a  rebellion 
of  Phenicians  and  C^riotes  against  the  Persians. 
On  this  occasion  the  Persian  General  Bagoses  pushed 
into  the  temple,  and  Josephus  reports  (AtU,  XI., 
vii.  1)  that  he  substituted  Jesus  (Joshua)  as  high 
priest  for  his  brother  John.  The  political  impor- 
tance of  the  high  priest  originated  in  that  period. 

With  the  destruction  of  the  Persian  empire  by 
Alexander  the  Great  a  new  period  began  for  Judea. 


ZanMl,  Sistory  of 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOQ 


M 


Alexander's  attitude  toward  the  Jews  was  friendlj. 
But  when,  after  the  oonqueror's  death,  hii  eo^iire 
•PhA  ^"^  divided,  Judea,  lying  between  the 
G«Mk  l^^QS^^^'"^  ^  ^^  eontendbg  Ptolemies 
Period.  ^^'^  ^^  Seleueidae,  was  a  oontinual 
sufferer  by  the  eonfliet.  At  first 
Judea  came  into  the  power  of  the  Ptolemies. 
Josephus  reports  that  Ptolemy  Logus  violated  the 
Sabbath,  captured  Jerusalem,  and  carried  active 
to  Egypt  a  large  number  of  Jews  from  Jerusalem 
and  Galilee  (Apion,  i.  22;  AfU.  XII.,  i.,  XIII., 
xii.  4) .  Hecataeus  says  that  later  this  Ptolemy  was 
so  friendly  toward  the  Jews  that  many  of  them  of 
their  own  accord  went  to  Egypt  and  settled  there, 
particularly  in  Alexandria.  Judea  still  remained 
the  object  of  strife  between  Syria  and  Egypt,  and 
came  finally  into  the  power  of  Syria  under  Anti- 
ochus  III.  the  Great,  by  his  victory  over  Scopus 
near  Paneas.  Of  Seleucus  Philopator,  son  of 
Antiochus  the  Great,  it  is  reported  that  hfe  general, 
Heliodorus,  entered  the  temple  to  plunder  it  and 
was  prevented  by  a  miraculous  vision.  The  sue- 
cession  of  Antiodius  IV.  Epiphanee  to  the  throne 
of  Syria  (175  B.C.)  was  of  especial  moment  to  the 
Jews.  During  the  changes  which  had  befallen  the 
political  possession  of  Palestine,  Jewish  independ- 
ence being  entirely  lost,  the  chief  concern  of  the  Jews 
was  their  religious  freedom.  But  contact  with  Greek 
civilisation  and  the  attempts  of  the  leaders  to  make 
capital  out  of  the  quarrels  of  the  overlords,  as  well 
as  the  building  up  in  the  land  of  centers  of  Greek 
life  through  settlement  there  of  Greek  colonies,  intro- 
duced the  spirit  of  Hellenism  and  caused  the  estab- 
lishment of  a  party  among  the  Jews  favoraUe  to 
Greek  civilization,  receiving  therefore  the  support 
of  the  overlords.  Opposed  to  this  Hellenistic  party 
was  the  party  of  the  Hasideans,  conmiitted  to  the 
observance  of  the  Mosaic  ordinances,  and  to  the 
condemnation  of  Hellenism.  Into  the  contest 
between  these  two  parties  Antiochus  Epiphanee 
intruded  by  his  brutal  attack  on  the  sanctuary, 
168  B.C.,  as  well  as  by  his  assault  upon  the  religious 
observances  of  the  Jews  and  his  eidict  against  the 
Sabbath  and  circumcision.  His  anger  on  aeeount 
of  the  failure  of  his  expedition  against  Egypt  he 
vented  in  this  way  upon  the  Jews,  and  he  thus 
became  the  antetype  of  the  New-Testament  Anti- 
christ. Severe  persecution  followed,  in  the  course 
of  which  many  Jews  abandoned  their  religion. 

A  turn  in  affairs  was  given  in  the  year  167  B.c 
in  the  resistance  offered  by  the  priest  Mattathias 

Id.  The  ^^  Modem,  supported  by  his  sona 
Kaooabean  Rebellion  against  Syria  broke  out,  led 

and  Bo-    by  Judas,  son  of  Mattathias,  who  won 

man  Pe-  many  victories  over  Syrian  troops, 
viods.  restored  the  service  of  the  temple,  and 
died  a  hero's  death.  The  strife  was  carried  on  by 
the  brothers  of  Judas,  one  of  whom,  Simon,  gained 
the  position  of  high  priest  and  prince  by  choice 
of  the  people  and  recognition  by  the  Syrians.  Until 
the  time  of  Simon's  son,  John  Hyrcanus,  the  Maooa- 
bees  and  the  Hasideans  were  of  the  same  party 
and,  indeed,  bore  the  same  name  (see  Habmonbakb). 
They  were  the  predecessors  of  the  Pharisees  (see 
PtLABiMOB  Aim  Qajdvucxm),  John  broke  with  the 
orthodox  party  and  connected  himself  with  the 


Sbuldueeai.  After  hie  death  his  family  beaune  in- 
volved in  quarrels  over  the  suooenion  and  lost  its 
preeminent  position^  imd  against  his  son  Alexander 
Jannaeus  (104-78  B.c.)  the  Pharisees  sought  Syrian 
help.  In  the  strife  that  ensued  upon  his  cteth, 
caused  by  attempts  to  gain  the  suooession,  the 
Romans  obtained  entrance,  and  Pompey  e^ytuxed 
Jerusalem  after  a  three  months'  si^ge.  Herod,  son 
of  the  Idumean  Antipater,  was  nuule  king  by 
the  Roman  senate  in  39  B.C.,  and  established  him- 
self by  the  help  of  the  Roman  legions  in  97  bx. 
He  soiight  to  eonoiliata  the  Jews,  partieularly  by 
his  magnificent  restormtion  of  the  temple.  After 
the  death  of  this  talented  but  oonaeienodess  tyrant, 
his  kingdom  wae  divided  between  his  sons  ArchelauB, 
Ant^Ms,  and  Philip.  The  first,  to  whom  Judea  had 
fallen,  was  soon  deposed  by  the  Romans  (6  aj>.)» 
and  government  by  Roman  proouraton  was  insti- 
tuted with  ei^Htal  at  Caesarea.  TkM  procuratoiv 
appointed  by  the  Romans  had  no  appreciation  of 
Jewish  characteristics,  and  constant  itt-feeling  was 
aroused  over  religious  matters.  The  best  known  of 
thsae  officers  is  Pontius  Pilate  (26-36  a.d.),  whoee 
conduct  caused  many  oonfliete  with  the  people  and 
whoee  unstable  character  ii  revealed  in  the  story 
of  the  trial  of  Jesus  (see  Pilatb,  Pontius).  The 
opposition  between  the  suppressed  theocratic  con- 
sciousness of  the  Jews  and  the  daims  of  the  Caesars 
grew  ever  sharper  until  the  final  conflict.  Open  rup- 
ture was  almost  provoked  in  the  year  40  a.d.  by  the 
order  of  Caligula  to  have  his  image  set  up  in  the 
temple,  a  crisis  that  was  passed  only  by  the  inter- 
cession of  Agrippa  I.  at  Kotat.  To  this  end  Agrippa 
was  given  the  realm  which  had  been  Herod's,  and 
his  favor  to  the  Jews  appears  in  his  attitude  toward 
tJbe  Christians  (see  Hbbod  and  bis  Family).  The 
situation  of  the  Jews  became  more  diflkult  under 
Felix  and  Festus,  still  harder  under  Albinue,  and 
the  rebellion  came  to  a  head  under  Gbssius  Floras. 
The  Zeabta  seised  the  temple  and  fortified  them- 
selves there;  Agrq>pa  II.,  who  had  succeeded  to  a 
lesser  area  of  sovereignty  than  Agrippa  I.  controlled, 
did  not  suppress  the  insurrection.  In  a  battle  near 
Beth-horon  a  Roman  force  was  nearly  annihilated. 
This  victory  inflamed  the  whole  country.  But  the 
Romans  began  to  press  in,  and  under  Vespasian 
they  conquered  Peraea  in  68  aj>,,  while  internal 
strife  divided  the  Jews  between  the  Zealots  and  the 
moderates.  In  the  year  70,  a  few  days  before  the 
Passover,  Titus  appeared  before  the  walls  of  Jeru- 
salem and  asBsiled  it  from  the  north.  In  fourteen 
days  the  outer  wall  wae  taken,  and,  a  few  days 
after,  the  second,  while  the  innermost  and  strongest 
afforded  means  of  greater  resistance.  Famine  seised 
the  defenders,  but  in  spite  both  of  the  mild  pr<^[X)eali 
of  Titus  for  the  surrender  of  the  city  and  his  stem 
exhibitions  of  punishment  that  must  ensue,  the 
defense  was  maintained.  The  pec^le  still  hoped  for 
such  deliverance  from  God  as  their  lustoiy  recorded 
as  having  occurred  in  earlier  times.  'Hm  temple 
was  the  kit  stranghokl.  When  it  was  taken,  Titw 
woukl  have  preserved  R  at  the  request  of  Josephus, 
but  hk  intention  was  frustrated  by  the  ungnaitied 
act  of  a  soUier  who  applied  the  tor^.  After  the 
fan  of  Jerunlei%  noslaaee  was  stiU  offered  at  a  few 
fortresass,  such  as  Herodsum  near  Tekoa,  ] 


55 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Israel,  Hiatory  of 


across  ths  Jordan,  azKl  Masada,  west  of  the  Dead  Sea. 
But  from  that  time  the  Jews  have  bad  to  live  with- 
out country,  sanctuary,  and  nationality. 

C.  VON  Orelu. 

n.  Post-BibUcal  History.— l.  Osnsral  Survey: 
With  the  fall  of  Jerusalein  the  Jewish  nation  lost 
the  remains  of  its  independence  and  all  control  over 
its  external  destiny,  while  it  became  dependent 
upon  the  peoples  among  whom  it  lived.  It  never- 
theless had  received  such  a  development  of  spiritual, 
social,  and  religious  life  as  had  differentiated  it  from 
the  other  nations  with  which  its  lot  was  from  that 
time  cast  and  had  made  absorption  into  them  an 
impossibility.  Conaequently  the  Jewish  people 
baa  had  for  1,900  years  its  own  inner  history,  which 
has  not  been  without  influence  upon  the  world  at 
large.  Elztemally  and  internally  this  history  divides 
into  three  periods:  (1)  From  the  fall  of  Jerusalem 
to  the  Mohammedan  conquest  and  the  emergence 
of  the  Teutons;  (2)  to  the  French  Revolution;  (3) 
to  the  present.  In  the  first  of  these  periods  the  Jews 
built  about  themselves  a  spiritual  wall  within  which 
they  protected  and  developed  their  peculiar  and 
individual  bent.  Abandoning  all  claims  upon  the 
outer  world,  they  busied  themselves  with  the  pro- 
duction of  the  Talmud,  the  citadel  of  their  spirit- 
ual life,  the  treasury  of  their  thought,  the  basis  of 
the  physical  and  iq;nritual  laws  of  their  existence. 
Wheal  their  individuality  had  thus  been  fixed  in 
enduring  form,  they  could  without  danger  to  their 
peculiar  genius  participate  in  the  life  of  the  nations 
of  the  world  so  far  as  this  was  permitted  to  them. 
In  the  second  period  this  participation  was  very 
limited,  ccmfined  chiefly  to  the  exercise  of  the  func- 
tions of  commerce  and  of  the  privileges  of  middle- 
men between  the  Orient  and  Occident.  They  also 
exercised  a  decided  influence  upon  culture  and  medi- 
ated between  Greek  learning  and  philosophy  and  the 
Arabic  and  between  the  Arabs  and  the  West,  and  so 
contributed  to  learning  of  the  scholastic  type,  pro- 
ducing a  monistic  type  of  thought  best  illustrated 
by  Spinosa.  With  the  French  Revolution  began 
the  gradual  emancipation  of  the  Jews,  in  which 
they  gained  p^^tical  equality  with  Christians,  lost 
the  quality  of  separativeness,  acquired  eminence  in 
the  world  of  wealth  and  of  letters,  but  at  the  ex- 
pense of  that  intensity  of  religious  life  which  had 
distinguished  them  through  the  centuries.  Against 
this  there  came  late  in  the  nineteenth  century  a 
reaction  which  took  the  form  of  Zionism  (q.v.),  one 
of  the  purposes  of  which  is  the  unification  of  the 
nation  through  the  erection  of  a  Jewish  state  in 
Palestine.  TbB  present  century  finds  among  the 
Jews  a  social  excitement  and  a  spiritual  ferment 
such  as  it  has  not  known  since  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem. 

a.  TheBarly  Period:  The  Jewish  war  left  Judea 

a  waste  and  its  Jewish  inhabitants  despoiled.    Ves- 

pasian  took  the  land  as  his  perscmal 

«'   «  Jj^  domain,  from  which  he  bestowed  es- 

l^^vnur   ^'^^^ ^^^  ^  friends;  he  settled  800 

Jabneh.'  'veterans  in  the  neighborhood  of  Jeru- 
salem, and  compelled  those  Jews  who 
wished  to  remain  in  the  country  to  purchase  their 
holdings  from  the  conqueror.    The  Jews  who  had 
previously  been  domiciled  in  other  lands  became 


the  real  strength  of  those  nations.  Th^y  were  in 
greatest  force  in  Egypt,  especially  in  Alexandria; 
but  they  were  scattered  elsewhere  from  India  west- 
ward, and  no  considerable  city  was  without  its 
Jewish  community  and  its  synagogue.  In  Rome 
there  were  at  least  8,000  Jews  with  i&ir  own  quarter 
of  the  city;  Jewish  merchants  followed  the  legions, 
while  the  Herodian  family  had  a  recognised  place 
at  court,  and  Jews  under  the  empire  had  special 
exemption  and  position.  With  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  the  Jews  had  lost  their  imifying  center. 
But  by  his  flight  to  the  camp  of  the  Romans  and  his 
prediction  to  Vespasian  of  elevation  to  the  throne. 
Rabbi  Johanan  ben  Zakkai  (cf.  JE,  vii.  214  sqq.) 
had  gained  the  emperor's  favor  and  a  promise  to 
grant  any  request  the  rabbi  might  make.  The  latter 
asked  permission  to  establish  a  school  of  Jewish  law, 
and  when  this  was  given,  settled  at  Jabneh  or  Jam- 
nia,  a  little  city  near  the  coast  south  of  Joppa.  Un- 
der the  care  of  the  institution  there  erected  came 
the  settlement  of  many  mattera  formerly  in  chaig9 
of  the  Sanhedrin,  including  the  Jewish  calendar. 
Hence  arose  the  tradition  that  Rabbi  Johanan 
transferred  the  Sanhedrin  to  Jabneh.  While  it  had 
not  been  his  purpose  to  create  a  new  center  of 
Judaism,  the  gathering  of  scholars  there  and  the 
study  of  the  law  had  this  effect,  and  so  made  possible 
the  continued  survival  of  the  Jewish  spirit.  Jews 
from  abroad  sent  their  sons  for  the  study  of  the  law, 
while  the  teachers  gave  their  pronouncement  upon 
mattere  of  importance  for  all  their  coreligionists. 
Here  was  developed  the  tradition  of  the  law,  as  di- 
vided into  Halacha  and  Haggada  (see  MinRASB), 
out  of  which  came  a  definite  and  characteristic  set  of 
views  which  stamps  the  Jewish  learning  with  what 
may  be  called  a  Talmudio  type  as  opposed  to  the 
Biblical  type  of  post-exilic  and  pre-Christian  Juda- 
ism. This  is  the  third  stage  in  the  development  of 
the  Jewish  spirit,  the  first  being  what  may  be  termed 
the  pre-Biblical.  In  this  stage  the  four  generations  to 
the  close  of  the  Mishna  are  known  as  Tanaim,  the  five 
to  the  close  of  the  Talmud  as  Amoraim,  both  classes 
influential  upon  all  succeeding  Judaism,  guarding 
as  they  did  Judak;  orthodoxy.  Among  the  Tanaim 
two  men  were  of  eminent  importance,  Gamaliel  the 
younger  (cf.  JE,  v.  560  sqq.),  and  Akiba  (q.v.). 
The  first  stood  for  the  influence  of  HiUel's  inter- 
pretation of  the  law,  for  the  decision  of  legal  nukttera 
by  a  majority  of  authorities,  and  for  Jabneh  as  the 
continued  center  of  official  Judaism.  Rabbi  Akiba's 
fame  rests  not  merely  upon  his  collection  of  the 
Halachoth,  but  upon  his  new  method  of  using  the 
literal  and  minute  elements  of  Scripture  as  a  basis 
of  legal  formulas.  Under  Gamaliel  the  estrange- 
ment between  Jews  and  Christians  became  final 
and  complete. 

Judaism  meanwhile  gained  ever  a  stronger  in- 
fluence, and  proselytes  of  eminence  in  the  heathen 

world    adopted    the   Jewish   religion. 

2.  Tlie  lAst  rj^^  aroused  Danitian's  distrust,  and 

ttoiuL^*  he  had  the  Jewish  law  examined  to 

discover  whether  it  were  a  danger  to 
the  state.  Under  Trajan  this  distrust  became 
greater  because  of  the  practical  aid  given  by  Jews 
to  the  Parthians,  and  victory  over  these  was  recog- 
nized, even  in  inscriptions  on  coins,  as  a  new  victory 


Israel,  History  of 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


66 


over  the  Jews.  But  the  victory  over  the  Jews  of 
the  Orient  was  fearfully  avenged  upon  both  Romans 
and  Greeks  in  a  rising  of  the  Jews  of  the  Occident. 
The  imperial  legions  were  exterminated,  and  in 
Cyprus  alone  240,000  Greeks  were  said  to  have  been 
slaughtered.  Trajan  called  in  the  aid  of  his  best 
generals  to  suppress  the  insurrection,  and  severe 
vengeance  was  taken  on  the  Jews  of  Mediterranean 
lands,  while  the  beautiful  synagogue  in  Alexandria 
was  completely  destroyed.  But  in  Syria  and  Asia 
Minor  a  new  revolt  was  raised,  and  the  fanaticism 
of  the  Jewish  spirit,  fanned  by  the  Messianic  hope 
centered  in  Bar  Kokba,  made  necessary  the  sending 
of  Trajan's  most  capable  general,  Julius  Severus, 
from  Britain  to  Palestine.  This  was  the  last  im- 
portant attempt  of  the  Jews  to  establish  a  Messianic 
kingdom  by  force  of  arms;  thenceforth  they  looked 
for  it  to  come  only  by  special  divine  interposition. 
The  site  of  Jerusalem  was  given  to  the  plow,  and 
in  134  a  Roman  colony,  Aelia  Gapitolina,  was 
founded  to  the  north  of  the  old  city.  Another 
revolt  among  the  Jews  was  suppressed  in  135.  A 
poll  tax  was  levied,  and  cireumcision  and  observ- 
ance of  the  Sabbath  were  forbidden.  By  these 
means  the  possibilities  of  political  danger  from  the 
Jews  were  so  thoroughly  eliminated  by  the  time  of 
Antoninus  Pius  that  he  abolished  the  severe  restric- 
tions, and  their  renewal  imder  Mareus  Aurelius 
was  caused  not  by  political  conditions,  but  by  relig- 
ious intolerance.  The  Jews  themselves  recognized 
that  their  political  importance  was  a  thing  of  the 
past  and  that  all  which  remained  was  their  com- 
munity in  matters  of  religion. 

At  the  end  of  the  second  century  the  Sanhedrin 
lost  its  eminence,  and  the  decisions  of  Rabbi  Juda 

ben  Simon  were  recognised  as  authori- 

th^^iit    ^^^^®-     ^®  established  as  finally  de- 

lonSm  '  ®***^   *^®   Mishna  of  Rabbi   Akiba, 

Sohool.     while  other  collections  were  pronoimoed 

devoid  of  authority.  At  this  time,  it  is 
probable,  the  Mishna  ceased  to  be  oral  and  was 
committed  to  writing.  Since  all  national,  political, 
and  judicial  rights  had  ceased,  the  law  had  in  part 
only  an  ideal  value  as  fashioning  the  inner  life  and 
conceptions  of  Jews.  With  the  compilation  of  the 
Mishna  Palestinian  Judaism  had  exhausted  itself, 
and  the  scholastic  center  shifted  to  Babylon  in  the 
production  of  the  Gemara  or  the  Talmud  proper  by 
the  school  of  the  Amoraim.  What  the  Mishna  is  to 
the  Bible  the  Gemara  is  to  the  Mishna^-a  continuous 
refinement  of  the  law,  binding  Judaism  within  ever 
tightening  chains.  The  first  Amoraim  were  Pales- 
tinians, the  most  eminent  among  them  Rabbi  Juda 
the  yoimger.  He  transferred  the  seat  of  the  school 
to  Tiberias,  where,  \mder  the  favor  of  Alexander 
Severus,  something  of  splendor  appeared.  Rela- 
tions between  Jews  and  Romans  became  not  merely 
friendly,  but  intimate,  and  laxity  in  following 
Judaic  practises  was  the  natural  result.  During 
this  period  Babylon  was  coming  into  greater  sig- 
nificance for  the  Jews,  and  was  even  called  "  the 
land  of  Israel."  The  head  of  the  Babylonian  Jews 
was  an  officer  under  the  Parthian  government, 
fourth  in  rank  after  the  king,  and  a  descendant  of 
the  Davidic  line.  His  power,  however,  was  tem- 
poral,  not  as  yet  spiritual.     Rabbi  Abba  Rab 


brought  the  Mishna  from  Palestine  and  founded  a 
school  at  Babylon  which  soon  had  1,200  students. 
His  friend  Mar  Samuel  first  enunciated  the  maxim 
which  became  authoritative  for  Jews — "  the  law 
of  the  state  is  valid."  During  the  reign  of  Alex- 
ander Severus  the  neo-Persian  kingdom  of  the 
Sassanides  was  established,  and  this,  in  its  zeal  for 
Zoroastrianism,  excluded  Jews  from  office  and 
introduced  certain  restrictions  to  be  followed  on 
Zoroastrian  festivals.  These  restrictions  did  not 
continue  long,  and  until  Ck)nstantine's  time  the 
Jews  had  peace.  Constantine's  edict  of  toleration 
(312  A.D.)  included  the  Jews  also,  but  later  his 
policy  changed  and  proselyting  was  forbidden  as 
well  as  the  circumcision  of  slaves  of  Jews.  In  this 
Jews  saw  the  approach  of  Messianic  times,  for  it 
had  long  been  said  that  "  the  Messiah  will  not  come 
till  the  Roman  empire  is  Christian."  But  Rabbi 
Hillel  the  younger  declared  that  Israel  had  no 
Messiah  to  look  forward  to,  for  the  prediction  by 
the  prophet  of  a  mighty  rukr  had  been  fulfiUed  in 
Hezekiah;  the  head  of  the  Babylonian  school 
replied  in  the  prayer  **  May  God  forgive  Rabbi 
Hillel  for  holding  this  error."  Under  Constantius 
matters  were  still  worse  for  the  Jews,  and  many  in 
the  Roman  empire  emigrated  to  Persia.  Constan- 
tine's  laws  were  enforced  with  the  addition  that 
marriage  between  Jews  and  Christians  was  forbid- 
den. Julian  especially  favored  the  Jews,  and  prep- 
arations were  made  for  rebuilding  the  temple, 
which  ceased,  however,  on  his  death. 

About  the  year  400  a.d.  Rabbi  Aschi  had  the  oral 
explanations,  discussions,  decisions  and  investiga- 
4.  The  Two  ^^^°^  based  on  the  Mishna  collected  in 
Talmndio  the  Babylonian  Talmud,  which  became 
Oollaotlons:  the  chief  source  of  spiritual  instruction, 
the  Kasso*  as  much  superior  to  the  Mishna  in  the 
'^l^  regard  of  scholastic  Judaism  as  the 
Mishna  was  to  the  Bible.  Even  till  the  present  the 
Talmud  has  been  for  millions  of  Jews  the  totality 
of  truth,  wisdom,  righteousness  and  holiness,  and 
study  of  it  the  certain  way  to  eternal  life,  while  to 
study  anjrthing  else  is  to  a  real  Jew  a  sign  of  god- 
lessness.  To  a  Jew  instructed  in  the  Talmud  God 
and  his  revelation  as  set  forth  therein  are  the  first 
and  highest  interests  of  life,  thought,  feeling  and 
action.  Thus  this  collection  became  the  wall  which 
hedged  about  all  Jewish  life,  the  influence  which 
controlled  all  Jewish  thought  and  molded  Jewish 
conceptions  for  fifteen  hundred  years.  It  was  the 
obstacle,  as  well,  to  further  development  of  Jewish 
religion  and  life  (see  Talmud).  This  great  produc- 
tion came  forth  in  the  time  when  Rome  was  hard 
pressed  by  the  Germanic  peoples  and  North  Africa 
became  the  booty  of  the  Vandals.  The  mighty 
world-movements  of  the  times  served  to  arouse 
once  more  the  Messianic  hopes  of  the  Jews,  ex- 
pressed in  the  saying  that  the  Messiah  would  not 
come  till  the  eighty-fifth  Jubilee  (4200  anno  mundi, 
440  A.D.),  about  the  time  when  the  Vandals  captured 
the  temple  treasures  at  Rome  and  carried  them  to 
Africa.  As  at  this  time  the  old  sacred  treasures  of 
the  Jews  disappeared,  the  more  precious  became 
the  Talmud  as  the  one  sacred  instrument  remaining. 
So  in  Palestine  the  Amoraim  collected  their  tradi- 
tions in  the  Jerusalem  Talmud,  though  it  is  not 


67 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Israel,  Hifltory  of 


known  where  or  by  whom  this  was  done.  In  the 
declining  Roman  empire  the  situation  of  the  Jews 
was  not  favorable.  Theodosius  sought  to  protect 
them,  though  foiled  by  the  opposition  of  Ambrose, 
and  his  suocessors  also  tried  to  secure  their  peace. 
Under  Theodosius  II.,  CytH  of  Alexandria  had  the 
Jews  expelled  from  the  city  and  their  possessions 
given  to  the  rabble,  while  their  synagogue  in  Anti- 
och  was  sacked.  Enmity  between  Jews  and  Chris- 
tians became  acute.  Jerome's  Hebrew  teacher  could 
attend  his  pupil  only  in  secret.  Palestinian  Judaism 
meanwhile  did  not  perish  without  leaving  one  more 
monument  of  exceeding  value  in  the  Massorah — i.e., 
the  addition  of  vowels,  accents,  and  marks  of  divi- 
sion or  distinction  to  the  consonantal  text  of  the  Old 
Testament,  with  annotations  on  the  text.  In  470 
there  began  an  official  persecution  of  the  Jews  of  Per- 
sia, and  many  were  compelled  to  emigrate  to  India. 
Later,  in  l^ilabar  they  received  privileges  which 
are  chronicled  on  a  tablet  still  extant,  inscribed  in 
Hebrew  and  eariy  Indian.  The  end  of  the  period 
of  the  Amoraim  fell  at  the  close  of  the  fifth  century. 
8.  The  Kiddle  Period:  For  the  Jews  of  the  By- 
santine  empire  this  period  began  with  the  reign  of 

Justinian,  whose  laws  were  the  basis 

Mmt  ^^*  ^^  *^  treatment  of  the  Jews  during  the 

Italy.      ^^cUe  Ages.    Under  his  code  Jewish 

testimony  against  a  Christian  was  not 
received,  a  Christian  might  not  become  a  prose- 
l3rte  to  Judaism,  Jews  had  to  support  highly  paid 
city  officials  from  whom  they  received  no  bene- 
fits or  immimities,  they  might  not  celebrate  their 
Paasover  before  the  Christian  Easter,  might  read 
the  Scriptures  in  the  synagogue  on  the  Sabbath 
only  in  Greek  or  Latin,  while  they  were  subjected 
at  the  hands  of  the  rabble  to  frequent  riots  with  all 
attendant  evils.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Jews  lost 
no  opportunity  for  vengeance,  which  in  turn  excited 
new  animosity.  At  this  time  the  Jews  of  the  Orient 
dropped  out  of  history  and  those  of  the  Occident 
became  prominent,  especially  those  of  SpaiA.  In 
Italy,  under  the  great  movements  of  the  Germanic 
peoples,  Jews  suffered  as  did  the  Christians.  During 
the  Gothic  rule  the  laws  of  Theodosius  were  in  force; 
Jews  controlled  the  slave-trade  and  held  Christians 
in  slavery,  and  were  largely  autonomous  besides 
disregarding  the  laws  designed  to  protect  Christians. 
Still,  the  highest  authorities  did  all  possible  to  pro- 
tect the  Jews,  and  the  efforts  of  the  popes  to  this 
end  were  constant.  Gregory  the  Great  was  espe- 
cially kind  to  them,  compelUng  indemnification  for 
destroyed  synagogues,  but  he  forbade  the  holding 
of  Christians  as  slaves,  and  wrote  to  several  of  the 
kings  of  his  day  to  make  an  end  of  the  trade  in 
Christian  slaves  carried  on  by  the  Jews. 

Of  all  the  countries  of  Europe  none  was  so  fa- 
vorable to  the  Jews  as  Spain.    There  the  highest 

products  of  Jewish  industry,  intellect 
^*  ^^  and  skill  were  in  evidence;  in  wealth, 
™*~  J  honor,  philosophy  and  poetry  the  days 
Jevdah  ®'  ^^  ^^^'^  ^^  Spain  still  mark  for  them 
Ooltare.    ^^  epoch.    On  the  other  hand,  in  the 

reaction  nowhere  was  the  suffering  so 
great  as  there.  Jewish  settlements  in  the  Spanish 
peninsula  were  very  ancient,  made  perhaps  under 
the  Phenicians;  certainly  after  the  destruction  of 


Jerusalem  great  numbers  of  Jews  were  sold  into 
Spain,  and  Granada  was  so  largely  settled  by  them 
as  to  be  called  a  Jewish  state.  Christianity  also 
made  early  and  great  conquests  there,  and  laws  sim- 
ilar to  those  mentioned  above  were  enacted  to  pre- 
vent holding  of  Christian  slaves  by  Jews  and  pros- 
eljrting  by  force.  Later  King  Sisebut  ordered  all 
Jews  to  receive  baptism  or  to  give  up  their  holdings 
of  land,  and  many  Jews  complied,  while  many  others 
migrated  to  France  or  Africa.  Tlie  Jewish  question 
came  under  discussion  at  the  Synod  of  Toledo  (633 
A.D.).  Isidore  of  Seville  opposed  forcible  conversion 
of  the  Jews,  but  forbade  that  Christians  should  be- 
come jews  and  prohibited  intercourse  between  Jews 
and  Christians.  The  situation  changed  from  time  to 
time.  Under  one  king  the  Jews  would  enjoy  relig- 
ious liberty,  and  Jews  who  had  nominally  accepted 
Christianity  were  permitted  to  return  to  their  old 
faith;  under  another  the  menace  to  the  Church 
of  so  large  a  population  of  Jews  was  felt,  and  severe 
laws  against  them  were  put  in  force.  Under  King 
Egica  a  conspiracy  of  Spanish  and  African  Jews 
with  the  Arabs  to  overthrow  the  Gothic  kingdom 
was  discovered,  but  too  late;  Jews  and  Arabs  made 
common  cause,  and  the  Mohammedan  conqueror, 
Tarik,  brought  the  Gothic  kingdom  of  Spain  to  an 
end  in  711  a.d.  The  relations  between  Jews  and 
Mohammedans  was  peculiar.  Jews  regarded  Islam 
as  a  younger  daughter  of  Judaism,  as  was  Christian- 
ity, but  they  felt  more  closely  related  to  Islam  and 
never  made  common  cause  with  Christians  against 
Mohammedans.  In  Arabia  they  had  made  ineffect- 
ive Constantine's  efforts  for  the  spread  of  Christi- 
anity. They  had  many  important  settlements  there 
which  were  governed  by  Jewish  princes,  and  they  had 
a  school  of  the  law  and  possessed  Talmudic  learning. 
When  Mohammed  proclaimed  his  faith  as  that  of 
Abraham,  the  Jews  had  faith  in  him  and  he  called 
them  "  helpers."  But  differences  arose,  and  Mo- 
hammed published  parts  of  Suras  against  them  in 
which  he  called  them  murderers  of  prophets  and 
falsifiers  of  revelation.  Then  there  came  war  with 
the  Jewish  tribe  of  the  Banu-Kainuka,  and  one  of 
the  two  Jewish  women  whom  the  prophet  brought 
back  tried  to  poison  him.  After  his  death  the  strife 
between  Mohammedans  and  Jews  continued.  In 
Spain  the  Jews  opened  the  gates  of  Toledo  to  Tarik 
and  took  bloody  vengeance  upon  the  Christians, 
while  they  received  many  favors  from  the  con- 
querors. In  this  period  occurred  the  founding  of 
the  sect  of  the  Karaites  (q.v.)  by  Anan  ben  David 
(cf.  JE,  i.  553  sqq.),  who,  in  Babylon  and  Palestine, 
opposed  the  Tahnudic  learning  and  would  have  the 
Old  Testament  alone  authoritative.  He  was  the 
first  Jew  to  compose  a  commentary  on  the  Penta- 
teuch. In  Palestine  there  was  propounded  also  a 
Jewish  mysticism  and  system  of  ascetics  whose 
followers  oUled  themselves  "  men  of  faith,"  claimed 
miraculous  powers,  and  influenced  all  medieval 
Judaism.  The  Karaites  were  opposed  by  Saadia 
of  Egypt,  who  founded  Jewish  science  and  trans- 
lated the  Old  Testament  into  Arabic.  His  phil- 
osophic-religious system  is  contained  fully  in  his 
Emunoih  toedeoth,  written  in  943  a.o.,  in  which  he 
introduced  Greek-Christian  philosophy  to  the 
Orient. 


XaMMlf  Histmry  •f 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOQ 


68 


The  tenth  century  nw  the  flowering  of  Jewish 
culture  In  Spftin,  eepoeiaUy  nt  the  eourt  of  AbduU 

^    ^ ,  .   Rahman  III.  at  Cordova.   Thefint  of 

all  *  the  Mriee  of  noted  Jewish  scholars  was 
"^^■/^  Samuel  Halevi  ibn  Nagdela  (b.  993), 
n^bi,  author  and  poet.  Then  came 
Jona  Marinus  (Merwan  ito^anach,  99&-1050), 
grammarian  and  exegete;  Solomon  ibn-'Oebirol, 
who  wrote  in  Arabic  Mekar  hayinif  '*  The  Fountain 
of  Life/'  a  cosmogony  which  contained  little  esp^* 
cially  Jewish  except  a  basis  in  the  divine  word  of 
power,  being  a  syncretism  of  Neoplatonism  and 
Arktotelianism.     This  was  translated  into  Latin 

100  yean  later  and  was  much  used  by  the  School- 
men. Bahya  ibn-Pakuda  wrote  (1050-dO  a.d.;  cf. 
JE,  ii.  447  sqq.)  a  *'  Guide  to  Inner  Duties  "  baaed 
on  Platonic  asceticism.  The  celebrated  Solomon 
bar  Isaac  (ef.  JE,  z.324  sqq.)r  known  as  Rashi  (q.v.), 
wrote  his  commentary  in  the  first  half  of  the  eleventh 
century.  The  greatest  Jewish  poet  of  all  the  cen- 
turies was  Judah  Halevi  (106(V-1145;  of.  JE,  viL 
346  sqq.),  who  wrote  the  songs  which  have  become 
the  national  pride  of  Jews.  He  proclaimed  the 
sovereignty  of  Judaism  and  the  preeminence  of 
Jews  on  the  ground  that  from  Adam  down  they 
alone  had  preserved  the  gifts  of  grace  and  the 
essence  of  manhood.  Jews  were  between  angels 
and  the  highest  rank  of  men;  proselsrtss  might  par- 
take of  iha  external  blessings  of  Jews,  birt  oould 
never  reach  the  height  of  privilege  which  belonged 
to  the  native  Jew.  Israel  is  God's  servant  upon 
whom  are  laid  the  ills  and  hurts  of  mankind.  The 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  was  of  divine  purpose  that 
the  earth  might  be  leavened  with  the  Jewish  spirit. 
Twenty  years  later  Abraham  ibn-Daud  (cf.  JEy  L 

101  sqq.)  used  Aristotelian  philosophy  to  prove 
Judaism  the  one  system  of  truth  and  reason.  Abra- 
ham ibn-Esra  of  Toledo  (1088-1167;  cf.  JE,  vL 
520  sqq.)  was  a  keen  critic,  though  a  superstitioue 
astrologer  and  alchemist.  Most  celebrated  of  all 
was  Moses  ben  Maimun,  known  best  as  Maimonides 
(1135-1204;  q.v.),  in  whom  the  movement  just 
sketched  reached  its  height.  Soon  after  his  death 
arose  not  merely  the  banning  by  the  rabble  of 
Maimonides'  writings,  but  hostility  to  all  study  of 
philosophy.  Jews  divided  themselves  into  followers 
and  opponents  of  Maimonides,  but  until  the  tfane 
of  l^inoaa  the  Jews  did  notldng  further  for  phi- 
losophy. 

While  at  first  the  Jews  were  favored  under  the 

Arabs  of  Spain,  later  they  were  forced  either  to 

accept  Ishm  or  to  leave  the  country. 

r^^  They  then  began  to  take  the  side  of  the 
ral  Sltna-  m.  rJ-        ^^        ..T^   Vtl         v    • 
Uoa  in    ^^^bristums  and  assisted  Alfonso  X*  m 

gpi^lx^  ^  the  conquest  of  Seville,  for  which  serv- 
1469.  ioe  they  were  given  three  mosqusa  to 
use  as  synagogues.  But  in  1260  the 
old  laws  of  the  Goths  were  revived  and  new  restric- 
tions were  imposed.  On  the  other  hand  (Siristians 
were  not  to  dishonor  sjrnagogues,  force  baptism  of 
Jews,  or  emi^y  legal  measures  against  them  on  Jew« 
ish  feast  days.  Many  of  these  laws  remained  a  dead 
letter.  A  little  later  the  Dominican  Raymond  of 
Pefiaforte  (see  Doicimc,  Sadit,  and  tn  DoMiincAH 
Order,  g  4)  undertocA  his  minion  to  the  Jews. 
At  the  instigation  of  Pope  Clement  IV.,  Jayme  I.  of 


Spain  ordered  that  aS  paasagee  in  the  Talmud 
opposing  Christianity  shouki  be  erased.  Under  Al- 
fonso X.  of  Castile  began  agolden  age  for  the  Jews, 
during  whioh  they  appeared  at  court  and  gained 
riches  and  positkin.  Under  Don  Pedro  (1350- 
1369)  even  more  favorable  wae  their  situatkm,  but 
with  his  fall  great  reverses  were  experienced.  Jews 
were  forbkidien  to  bear  Spanish  names  and  were 
compelled  to  wear  a  distinguishing  mark;  in  or- 
der to  make  headway  against  Jewish  usury,  to 
Christians  Jews  were  ordmd  to  remit  a  third  of 
their  indebtedness.  Disputations  took  place  in 
which  the  systems  of  Oiristianity  and  Judaism 
were  attadud  and  defended.  Even  Jews  bewailed 
the  greed  and  selfishness  of  men  of  their  own  natk>n 
who  were  in  positioBB  of  wealth  and  power»  and 
the  voices  of  eminent  Jewish  sebokus  were  raised 
against  such  men  as  impiooa  and  godless.  In 
Seville  In  1391  oeeurred  the  first  popular  rising 
against  the  Jews,  suppressed  only  by  royal  troops, 
lliree  months  later,  in  a  new  uprising,  4,000  Jews 
were  shun,  the  wives  and  children  soki  to  Mo- 
hammedans, and  two  synagogues  converted  into 
churches.  Many  Jews  suffered  themselves  to  be 
bi^itlsed,  among  tiasm  Samuel  Abrabanel;  in  Cor^ 
dova  and  Tdedo  also  mai^  Jews  became  nominal 
Christiana.  These  beeame  a  great  danger  to  the 
Church,  preserving  as  they  did  in  secret  their 
fidelity  to  Judaism  and  the  Talmud,  and  were  more 
under  suspkaon  and  more  hated  than  those  who  had 
remained  faithful  to  their  religioa.  Some,  however, 
showed  great  sincerity  and  endeavored  to  convert 
their  brethren,  among  whom  may  be  named  Sol- 
omon Levi  of  Bui«0B  (1353-1435;  ef.  JE,  iz.  562- 
563),  who  received  ordination  and,  as  Paul  of 
Burgos,  attained  a  h%h  position,  beeoming  bishop 
of  Seville.  Other  sealous  converts  were  Joshua 
Lorqui,  whose  Christian  name  was  Geronimo  of 
Santa  F^  physician  to  Benedict  XIII.,  and  Vicente 
Ferrer,  who  even  in  the  qrRAgogues  ssssiled  Judaism. 
At  this  time  an  edict  was  issued  assigning  the  Jews 
to  qpecial  residence  quarters,  inhibiting  certain 
trades,  ofl&ces,  and  oommeroe  with  Christians,  order- 
ing a  style  of  dress  with  the  Jewish  mark  on  it, 
ami  prohibiting  the  trimming  of  the  beard  and  the 
carrying  of  weapons.  Continued  popular  uprismgn 
drove  many  of  the  Jews  over  to  Christianity,  whOe 
the  synagogues  were  ehai^ged  into  churches.  Bene- 
dict XIII.  ordered  a  dispii^ation  which  was  held  in 
Tortosa.  It  hurted  fifteen  months,  and  heki  sixty- 
eight  sessions,  In  which  Joshua  Lorqui  disputed 
with  sizteen  of  the  foremost  rabbis.  As  a  result 
Benedict  issued  his  buU  forbidding  the  reading  of 
the  Talmud,  while  the  scurrilous  writings  on  the 
life  of  Jesus  were  proecrftwd,  especially  the  Mar 
mar  Jmu.  A  period  of  literary  pdemios  between 
Jews  and  Christians  ensued  which  lasted  for  fifty 
years.  In  1442  Pope  Eugenius  IV.  issued  a  bull 
to  the  bishops  of  Castile  and  Leon  enforcing  the 
old  church  laws  against  Jews,  and  King  John  IV. 
put  forth  an  edict  protecting  them,  which  the  terri- 
toiial  limitation  of  his  authority  made  of  little 
value.  Almost  no  Jewish  literature  was  produced, 
while  the  woite  of  Thomas  Aquinas,  Duns  SootuB, 
and  William  of  Occam  were  translated  into  Hebrew. 
Cabalistic  works  continued  to  appear,  and  Jews 


M 


RELIGIOUS  iaJCYCLOPEDIA 


IsnMl,  History  of 


eohmted  the  beaUng  itft.  In  the  tecood  half  of 
tk  fifteenth  oentury  the  ehuge  was  again  made 
ckt  Jewa  murdered  Chriitiao  children,  and  thii 
afammy  eootinued  m  spite  of  repeated  failure  to 
eooTiet  in  the  courts.  The  fact  that  Jewish  con- 
?ert3  to  Christianity  held  many  of  the  most  lucra- 
tive offices  caused  numerous  anti-Jewish  riots. 

The  turning-point  was  the  marriage  (1469)  of 
Isabella  of  Castile  to  Don  Ferdinand  of  Aragon. 
In  1480  the  Inquisition  was  set  at  work 
nStf  ^**  against  the  Jews,  with  whom  the  pris- 
L  Spa^  ^^"^  ^'^^  ^^^^^  filled,  and  four  days  aft- 
er the  setting  up  of  the  Holy  Office  six 
Jewish  eonverts  to  Christianity  were  humed  at  the 
itske.  Converts  and  all  Spaniards  were  invited  to  be- 
tisy  converts  8u;^>ected  of  secretly  Judaizing,  and  a 
list  of  suspicious  circumstances  was  published  to  aid 
ia  detecting  the  apostates.  Between  January  and 
November,  1481, 298  of  these  supposedly  false  Jewish 
converts  solfered  death,  while  in  the  archbishopric  of 
Cadii  in  the  same  year  2,000  Jewish  heretics  were 
foond.  The  proscribed  who  had  already  died  were 
exhumed  and  their  bones  burned,  while  their  prcqierty 
v&B  confiscated.  Sixtus  IV.  censured  the  proceed- 
ings of  the  inquisitors  and  disapproved  the  request  of 
Ferdinand  to  have  the  tribuiud  set  up  in  his  other 
dominions.  In  1482  Torquemada  was  made  chief 
inquisitor,  the  Inquisition  was  released  from  restrio- 
tion  to  l^gal  forms  and  its  sphere  of  influence  ex- 
tended to  Aragon.  Attempts  were  made  against 
the  highest  dignitaries  of  Church  and  State  if  only 
they  were  of  Jewish  blood.  At  the  court  of  Fer- 
dinand Isaac  Abrabanel  was  minister  of  finance, 
but  in  spite  of  his  influence  the  edict  was  issued  to 
exile  all  Jews  from  Castile,  Aragon,  Sicily,  and 
Sardinia.  To  the  number  of  300,000  they  fled  into 
Portugal,  Navarre,  Italy,  Morocco,  and  Turkey. 
The  princes  of  Europe  censiued  the  regulations  of 
Ferdinand,  while  the  Sultan  Bajazid  remarked, 
"  You  call  Ferdinand  a  clever  king,  who  has  im- 
poverished his  own  land  and  made  ours  rich."  In 
1496  Emmanuel  of  Portugal  issued  an  edict  giving 
the  Jews  the  alternative  of  baptism  or  exile.  Many 
chose  exile,  thousands  were  bi^tized,  while  hundreds 
killed  themselves  and  their  families  in  order  to 
eae&pe  enforced  baptism. 

In  Frsnoe  Chariemagne  favored  the  Jews  because 
tbey  were  the  only  merchants  in  the  realm.    To  the 
embassy  to  Harun  al-Rashid  he  made 
zT'*    a  Jew  interpreter,  and  after  the  death 
fjf^Q^    of    the    ambassador    the    interpreter 
carried  through  the  work  of  the  mission. 
Under  Louis  the  Pious,  Jews  held  an  important 
plsee  at  court,   though  opposed  by  Agobard  of 
Lyons.    At  the  Synod  of  Meaux  the  bishops  re- 
lucted the  old  ecclesiastical  laws  against  the  Jews, 
which  Charles  the  Bald  prevented  from  taking  effect. 
Yet  popular  demonstrations  were  made  against  the 
Jews.   In  Toulouse  it  was  the  right  of  the  count 
on  Good  Friday  to  administer  to  the  chief  of  the 
Jewiih  community  a  box  on  the  ear.    The  Jews 
ttcured  immunity  from  this  by  paying  a  yearly 
tnbute,  and  in  the  same  way  elsewhere  they  pur- 
dttaed  the  good  will  of  the  powerful.   Hugh  Capet's 
<lttth  in  996  was  charged  against  the  Jews  beoiuse 
Hqgh's  physician  was  a  Jew.  The  crusades  gave  new 


<^)portunities  to  despoil  this  people.  The  principal 
colony  was  at  Narbonne,  consisting  of  300  families, 
among  them  that  of  the  Hebrew  grammarian  Kim- 
chi;  another  great  colony  was  at  Montpellier.  In  the 
twelfth  century  the  story  was  told  that  Jews  were 
killing  the  children  of  Christians  to  use  their  blood 
in  the  Passover.  On  the  basis  of  this  charge,  King 
Philip  August,  about  the  year  1180,  mulcted  the 
Jews  of  his  realm  in  15,000  marks  silver  and  de- 
clared all  debts  to  Jews  void  except  such  as  paid 
him  one-fifth  of  the  entire  amount.  The  possessions 
of  Jews  were  regarded  as  the  property  of  the  barons, 
and  nobles  made  sales  of  "  property  and  Jews." 
At  this  time  arose  in  France  the  Cabala  (q.v.)  with 
its  mysticism,  magic  and  theosophy,  exercising  in- 
fluence not  only  upon  Jewish,  but  upon  Christian 
thought,  and  playing  its  part  in  exegesis  of  both 
Tahnud  and  Bible.  Its  force  is  felt  to  the  present, 
nnce  the  modem  Chasidism  of  Russia  and  Galida 
is  the  Cabala  in  its  most  recent  form,  and  its  essence 
reflects  the  spirit  of  Jewish  thought.  In  the  third 
crusade  the  Jews  of  various  parts  of  France  suffered 
as  they  had  m  the  first  and  second,  although  Pope 
Gregory  IX.  declared  that  the  Church  desired 
neither  their  enforced  conversion  nor  their  destruc- 
tion. But  this  pope  committed  to  the  bishop  of 
Paris  the  question  whether  the  Talmud  reviled 
Christ  and  his  mother  and  contained  statements 
derogatory  of  Scripture  and  of  God.  The  Talmud 
was  condemned,  and  in  1244  twenty-four  wagon 
loads  of  copies  of  this  work  were  bimied  in  a  square 
of  the  city.  At  this  time  the  Jews  themselves  con- 
demned and  burned  the  writings  of  Maimonides. 
In  1269  Louis  IX.  required  all  Jews  to  wear  a  badge 
of  yellow  on  breast  and  back,  and  in  1306  Philip  IV. 
ordered  them  driven  from  the  kingdom,  and  their 
gold,  silver,  and  jewels  were  forfeited  to  him,  while 
only  their  clothes  were  left  in  their  possession.  In 
1360  they  were  allowed  to  return  under  favorable 
ccmditions,  such  as  that  permitting  them  to  charge 
interest  at  eighty  per  cent.,  only  to  be  driven  out 
again  under  Charles  VI.  in  1394. 

In  England  after  the  conquest  by  the  Normans 
the  Jews  found  themselves  in  fortunate  eiroum- 
stances,  and  in  London  their  dwellings 
were  like  royal  palaces.  These  condi- 
tions were  first  disturbed  at  the  corona- 
tion of  Richard  in  1189,  for  when  the  Jews  of  the 
realm  were  about  to  bring  their  dues  of  homage, 
in  popular  uprisings  in  many  of  the  cities  niun- 
bers  of  them  were  slain,  and  some  were  burned 
in  their  houses.  In  York  they  intrenched  them- 
selves in  the  fortress  and,  when  hope  of  escape 
was  gone,  set  fire  to  it  and  perished  in  the  flames. 
John  Lackland  and  Henry  III.  extorted  from  them 
more  than  10,000,000  francs,  and  the  latter  en- 
couraged efforts  to  convert  them  (see  Jews,  Mission 
TO  thb).  In  1275  parliament  by  statute  inter- 
dicted the  collection  of  usury,  yet  Jews  might  buy 
houses  and  lands  and  engage  in  commerce.  In  1278 
the  circulation  of  counterfeit  coin  was  attributed  to 
the  Jews  and  293  were  hanged.  In  1290  Jews  were 
banned,  mortgages  held  by  them  canceled,  and 
they  were  compelled  to  sell  their  property;  1&- 
000  left  the  country  and  were  not  permitted  to  re- 
turn till  the  time  of  Cromwell,  when  individuate 


7.  m 

Bnffland. 


Jmgmtlt  HUtpry  of 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZOG 


60 


were  permitted  to  settle  there.  Cromwell  was  look- 
ing for  the  Messianic  kingdom  in  which  he  al- 
lotted a  great  part  to  the  chosen  race. 

In  Italy  the  Jews  suffered  no  such  hard  fortune 
as  in  other  lands,  since  the  influence  of  the  popes 
^  .  was  there  more  effective,  though  re- 
T^i  strictive  measures  were  passed  limit- 
ing their  privileges.  Under  the  Nor- 
mans in  Ni^>leB  and  Sicily  Jews  and  Christians  had 
equal  privileges.  The  great  centers  of  Jewish  life 
in  Italy  were  in  the  central  and  southern  parts, 
not  in  the  great  Christian  commercial  cities  of  the 
north.  In  1109  Innocent  III.  issued  a  Coruliiutio 
Judaeorum  protecting  the  Jews,  and  this  was  con- 
firmed by  Gregory  IX.  in  1235.  Innocent  IV.  issued 
a  bull  at  the  Council  of  Lyons  of  1245  to  the  German 
and  French  princes,  directed  against  the  charge  that 
Jews  killed  the  children  of  Christians;  he  also  com- 
manded that  the  Talmud  be  protected  if  only  it 
were  found  free  from  assault  upon  Christianity. 
When,  in  consequence  of  the  Black  Death,  many 
Jews  in  South  France,  Spain,  Savoy,  on  the  South- 
em  Rhine,  and  in  Switaerland  were  tortured,  mur- 
dered or  burned,  Clement  VI.  in  a  bull  forbade  the 
killing  of  them  and  the  taking  of  their  goods  with- 
out due  process  of  law,  and  also  forcible  baptism. 
In  1419  Ifartin  V.  issued  a  bull  in  favor  of  this 
people.  But  Eugenius  IV.  in  1442  put  in  force  the 
old  canonical  limitations,  and  even  intensified  them, 
and  in  this  course  he  was  followed  by  Nicholas  V. 
in  1447.  The  latter's  legate  to  the  Synod  of  Bam- 
berg, Nicholas  of  Cusa  (q.v.),  directed  in  Germany 
the  execution  of  these  regulations.  During  the 
Inquisition  in  Spain  and  after  the  exile  of  Jews  from 
Spain  and  Portugal,  many  of  them  found  refuge 
in  the  Papal  States  and  Turkey.  The  popes  of  those 
times,  Alexander  VI.,  Julius  II.,  Leo  X.,  and  Clem- 
ent VII.,  had  Jewish  physicians,  and  the  princes 
of  the  Church  followed  their  example.  Clement  dis- 
approved of  forcible  baptism  of  adult  Jews,  but  en- 
couraged the  baptism  of  Jewish  children  if  their 
parents  consented.  He  also  attempted  to  protect 
the  Jews  who  had  perforce  received  baptism  in 
Spain  but  were  persecuted  as  unfaithful.  Paul  III. 
was  charged  with  being  more  kind  to  Jews  than  to 
Christians,  and  his  benefits  extended  to  the  per- 
secuted Jewish-Christian  converts  of  Portugal.  In 
1536  Charles  V.  obtamed  from  Paul  III.  sanction 
of  the  Inquisition,  but  with  limitations;  and  while 
following  popes  continued  this  course,  it  was  rather 
regarded  as  an  existing  fact  than  as  a  legal  institu- 
tion, and  Clement  VIII.  openly  discountenanced  it. 
When  under  Julius  III.  Cardinal  Caraffa  in  1542 
made  the  Inquisition  general  throughout  the  Chris- 
tian worU  and  increued  its  rigor,  in  Italy  attack 
upon  the  Talmud  began;  in  1553  the  pope  signed  a 
decree  of  condemnation,  and  on  the  Jewish  New 
Year's  Day  all  copies  in  Rome  were  burned,  while 
throughout  Italy  many  thousand  copies  suffered  the 
same  fate.  Under  MaroeUus  II.  the  Jews  were  ex- 
pelled from  Rome  in  consequence  of  accusations  of 
the  murder  of  chiklren,  and  Paul  II.,  a  confirmed 
enemy  of  the  Jews,  laid  a  tribute  on  the  synagogues 
and  enforced  the  old  restrictions  with  additional 
enactments,  while  in  many  other  ways  he  mani- 
fested his  hostility.    Against  him  Sultan  Suleiman 


acted  in  protection  of  the  Jews  of  Anoona.  During 
this  period  so  many  Jewish-Christian  converts  en- 
tered the  Franciscan  and  Jesuit  orders  that  Paul  IV. 
forbade  the  reception  of  Jews  therein  before  the 
fourth  generation.  At  this  time  the  Sohar,  the 
chief  CabaUstic  writing,  was  first  printed  by  per- 
mission of  the  Inquisition.  Pius  IV.  mitigated  the 
hard  conditions,  and  the  Talmud,  issued  in  censured 
form,  was  first  printed  at  Basel,  1578-^.  Pius  V. 
again  put  in  force  the  early  restrictions  with  further 
limitations,  and  permitted  the  Jews  to  reside  within 
the  Papal  States  only  at  Rome  and  Ancona.  Greg- 
ory XIII.  ordered  that  Christian  scholars  acquainted 
with  Hebrew  preach  to  the  Jews  in  their  synagogues 
on  feast  days,  and  Jews  were  compelled  to  support 
the  preachers.  Clement  VIII.  withdrew  in  1593 
the  decree  of  banishment  and  annulled  the  anti- 
Jewish  regulations  of  his  predecessors.  Since  then 
the  popes  have  taken  no  official  steps  respecting 
the  Jews  with  the  exception  of  the  declaration  of 
Pius  IX.  in  1870  with  respect  to  their  conversion. 

The  Jews  entered  Germany  with  the   Roman 
legions.    Their  presence  at  Cologne  in  the  fourth 

century    is    demonstrable.     Most    of 

9.  In  Oer-  them,  however,  passed  on  into  France. 

many.     According  to  German  law  they  had 

their  own  regulations  and  freedom  in 
religion,  but  were  without  citisenship.    They  were 
dependent  upon  the  emperor  for  protection,  and 
paid  a  special  tribute  to  him  and  to  the  princes. 
Their  s<^olara  they  received  from   other  lands. 
Henry  II.  drove  them  from  Mains,  though  they  re- 
turned the  next  year.    In  Speyer  they  had  their 
owii  quarter,  protected  by  a  wall.    Forcible  bap- 
tism was  not  allowed,  in  legal  contests  Jewish  law 
prevailed,  and  the  ordeal  by  fire  and  water  was  not 
applied  to  Jews.    The  first  crusade  in  lOM  saw  the 
first  persecution  of  the  Jews,  and  in  Treves,  Speyer, 
and  Mains  many  Jews  perished.    At  the  time  of 
the  second  crusade  the  monk  Rudolph  preached 
against  them  from  city  to  city,  but  they  received 
some  protection  from  Conrad  IV.  and  from  certain 
of  the  princes  of  the  Church,  while  Bernard  of  Claii^ 
vaux  rebuked  Rudolph  for  his  incitement  to  murder. 
For  what  protection  the  Jews  received,  however, 
they  had  to  pay.    The  charges  of  murder  were  also 
occasions  of  extortion  of  money  and  of  persecution. 
In  spite  of  all  this,  the  Jews  contributed  to  the  cul- 
ture of  the  country,  especially  in  the  Miimelieder. 
Under  Frederick  II.  the  canonical  regulation  against 
office-holding  by  the  Jews  was  enforced.    Under 
Frederick  I.  of  Austria  the  legal  position  of  Jews 
was  excellent,  while  Rudolph  of  Hapsbuig  contra- 
dicted   the  old    charge  of   the   murder  of  Chris- 
tian children.    Notwithstanding,  popular  uprisings 
against  the  Jews  took  place  in  many  cities  with  all 
attendant  atrocities.    In  1298  the  new  charge  of 
desecrating   the   host   raised   persecutions  which 
spread  over  Germany  and  into  Austria.   Albrecht  L 
compelled  many  cities  to  pay  damages  and  took 
the  Jews  under  his  protection.    In  the  fourteenth 
century  bkune  for  the  Bhick  Death  was  laid  upon 
them  on  the  ground  that  they  had  poisoned  weiJs 
and  springs,  and  resulting  uprisals  of  the  population 
inflicted  fearful  sufferings  upon  the  supposed  authors 
of  the  scourge.    In  some  cities  the  whole  Jewish 


61 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Israel,  History  of 


oommunity  was  put  to  death  at  the  stake,  in  others 
they  burned  themselves  to  death.  While  in  many 
plaoes  the  magistrates  swore  never  to  receive  Jews 
back  again  for  residence,  the  oath  soon  became  a 
dead  letter,  and  to  Strasburg,  Nuremberg,  Vienna, 
Erfurt,  Basel,  Zurich,  and  Heilbronn  the  Jews  re- 
turned by  invitation.  Campaigns  against  the  Hus- 
sites began  always  with  assaults  upon  Jews.  The 
Council  of  Basel  occupied  itself  in  its  nineteenth 
sitting  with  this  people,  ordered  the  enforcement  of 
the  ecclesiastical  regulations,  and  recommended  the 
study  of  Hebrew  and  Aramaic  to  the  universities 
in  order  better  to  carry  on  missions  among  them. 
At  the  instigation  of  a  Jewish-Christian  convert 
named  Pfefferkom  the  Dominicans  at  Cologne  be- 
gan a  campaign  against  the  Talmud,  and  were 
opposed  by  Johann  Reuchlin  (q.v.),  who  believed 
that  in  the  Talmud  and  the  Cabala  were  to  be  f o\md 
divine  philosophy  and  the  wisdom  of  the  patriarchs. 
Against  Reuchlin  came  Jakob  van  Hoogstraten 
(q.v.)  with  his  composition  on  the  "  Destruction  of 
the  Cabala."  In  1509  Pfefferkom  obtained  an  order 
from  Emperor  Maximilian  to  the  Jews  to  deliver 
to  the  former  all  their  anti-Christian  writings,  and 
a  second  edict  directed  Hoogstraten,  Reuchlin,  a 
Jewish-Christian  named  Viktor  von  Karben,  and 
certain  universities  to  pronounce  upon  the  contents. 
Reuchlin  adduced  what  he  declared  to  be  Christ's 
testimony  to  the  Talmud  as  a  witness  for  Christian 
verity.  Reuchlin  and  Pfefferkom  engaged  in  a 
campaign  of  nicknames  into  which  the  archbishop 
of  Mains  intruded,  the  himianists  of  Germany  took 
the  part  of  ReuchUn  with  an  anti-ecclesiastical  bias, 
and  Luther  found  therein  one  of  his  opportunities 
(see  Epistoljb  Obscttrorum  Virorum).  In  several 
of  his  utterances  he  manifested  favor  to  the  Jews, 
though  later  he  reversed  his  position  and  violently 
assailed  them,  so  that  the  Reformation  did  not 
bring  to  them  the  relief  they  expected.  But  in  1544 
Charles  V.  restored  to  the  Jews  their  privileges  and 
declared  them  not  guUty  of  murdering  Christian 
children  for  Passover  purposes. 

The  suspicions   and   attacks  \mder  which   the 

Jews  after  the  twelfth  century  had  suffered  through- 

j^^     out  Europe  prevented  expansion  and 

Jtd'  «r  "    growth  of  spiritual  life,  and  a  further 

^^Hf"?*  hindrance  was  the  opposition  of  the 
rabbis  to  the  study  of  philosophy  on 
the  groimd  that  it  led  to  CJhristianity  and  heresy. 
Hence  the  Jews  became  superstitious  and  sank  into 
the  practise  of  magic  and  into  religious  fanaticism. 
Consequently  the  people  came  to  look  for  Messianic 
deliverance,  and  imder  the  pressure  of  constant 
reports  of  coming  relief  Shabbethai  ^bi  (b.  in 
Smyrna  in  1626)  claimed  to  be  the  Messiah,  put 
forth  prophecies,  and  in  the  year  1666,  reckoned 
by  Jews  as  the  year  of  the  coming  redemption,  went 
to  Jerusalem,  while  another  Jew  assumed  the  r61e 
of  Elijah.  The  greatest  expectations  were  aroused 
among  his  own  people  throughout  Europe.  Had 
Shabbethai  possessed  the  qualities  requisite  for  the 
canTing  out  of  such  a  scheme,  he  would  have  caused 
the  greatest  movement  of  modem  times  among  the 
Jews.  But  in  1666  the  Turkish  cadi  sent  him  to 
the  sultan  at  Constantinople,  who  put  on  him  a  white 
turban  and  a  green  mantle  and  made  him,  as 


Mehemed  Effendi,  his  doorkeeper,  while  the  Jews 
of  Europe  were  plunged  into  shame  and  chagrin. 
Among  the  more  intelligent  Jews  this  one  experience 
killed  all  seeds  of  the  Messianic  hope.  But  the 
ignorant  masses  of  the  East  still  had  expectations, 
and  in  1720  in  Galicia  Jacob  Frank  (q.v.)  claimed 
to  be  the  reincarnated  Shabbethai  and  gained  a 
following  which  replaced  the  Talmud  by  tfa^  Sohar. 
The  Chasidim  of  Russia  and  Poland,  named  from 
Juda  Chasid,  are  the  remainder  of  a  movement 
similar  to  that  inaugurated  by  Frank.  Among 
them  ecstasy  is  sought  with  the  aid  of  stimulants, 
asceticism  is  practised,  and  the  Sohar  is  regarded 
as  of  the  highest  value  (see  Chasidim,  2).  Contem- 
poraneous with  these  outbreaks  of  fanaticism  and 
superstition  were  the  life  and  momentous  work  of 
Baruch  Spinoza  (1632-77),  whose  achievements 
prove  that  the  inner  genius  of  Judaism  could  not 
be  destroyed  by  opposing  external  forces  or  by 
internal  error,  though  indeed  official  Judaism  sought 
to  destroy  by  ban  and  actual  attack  the  man  who 
glorified  this  race. 

In  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries 
Poland  became  the  chief  center  of  Judaism.    Since 

^^  the  fourteenth  century  that  land  had 

\^*  been  the  refuge  of  persecuted  Jews 

Poland.  ^^^  ^be  west  of  Europe,  especially 
from  Germany.  Consequently  Russian 
and  Polish  Jews  came  to  use  a  mixed  dialect  of 
which  the  foimdation  is  German  with  Russian,  Polish 
and  Hebrew  words  mingled,  and  this  dialect  has 
produced  a  literature.  Settlement  of  Jews  from  the 
East  was  made  in  quite  early  times.  Gregory  IX. 
urged  King  Andrew  to  exclude  Jews  and  Moham- 
medans from  office,  and  the  synod  of  Ofen  (1279) 
ordered  Jews  to  wear  a  red  wheel  on  the  left  breast. 
Casimtr  the  Great  renewed  and  extended  in  1334 
the  favorable  laws  of  a  century  earlier,  requiring  the 
accordant  testimony  of  three  Jews  and  three  Chris- 
tians to  convict  a  Jew  of  the  crime  of  murder  of  a 
Christian  child;  thirteen  years  later  he  limited  the 
privileges  accorded  Jews.  During  a  pestilence 
the  Jews  of  the  principal  cities  were  attacked  by 
the  populace.  Casimir  IV.  made  the  laws  still  more 
favorable,  but  (}ardinal  Olesnick  permitted  the 
monk  Capistrano,  "  the  scourge  of  the  Jews,"  to 
preach  against  them,  and  Casimir  had  to  withdraw 
his  concessions.  Si^smund  I.  (1506-48)  protected 
the  Jews.  MeanwhUe  the  study  of  the  Talmud  had 
flourished  under  the  care  of  German  Jews  in  Poland, 
and  Joseph  Caro  produced  the  Skulhan  Arueh, 
which  has  remained  the  guide  of  life  for  Jews  since, 
while  the  Talmudio  schools  of  the  land  became 
celebrated  in  all  Europe.  Study  of  the  Bible  lan- 
guished, only  one  work  of  importance  being  issued, 
the  Hiuuk  emunah  by  Isaac  Troki  (cf.  JE,  xii. 
265-266),  a  keen  polemic  against  the  Gospels  and 
(Christianity.  During  the  seventeenth  century  the 
Jews  of  Poland  were  ruled  by  their  own  rabbis, 
constituting  a  state  within  a  state  with  an  annual 
synod.  But  under  this  regime  and  a  narrowing  of 
studies  to  matters  of  legal  refinement,  the  character 
of  the  people  had  deteriorated,  while  the  Polish 
impress  stamped  all  European  Judaism,  except 
that  of  Spain,  with  the  traits  most  disliked  by  the 
European  peoples.     Polish  Jews  became  compro- 


Imn/tl,  History  of 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


6S 


mised  in  an  attempt  to  reduee  to  serf  age  the  ooMnoVii 
of  Ukraine,  and  many  thouunda  perishad,  and  a 
lange  nimiber  were  kUled  tn  the  Ruasian-Swedish 
war  under  Charles  X.  It  is  aaid  that  180,000  fam- 
ilies perished,  1648-1668,  and  Polish  Judaism  lost 
its  eminent  position. 

4.  The  New  Period:  By  the  end  of  the  eighteenth 
century  a  general  deterioration  and  rankness  of 
religious  life  had  conquered  Judaism  all  over  the 
world;  if  the  people  was  to  be  saved,  a  rebirth  was 
necessary  for  the  whole  people.  The  reformation 
of  the  inner  spirit  of  Judaion  began  in  Qermany 
through  Moses  Mendelssohn  (q.v.);  the  betterment 
of  the  external  situation  began  with  the  emandpar 
tion  of  the  Jews  of  Franoe.  The  great  elector, 
Frederick  William,  had  settled  fifty  Jewish  families 
from  Vienna  in  Berlin,  and  to  that  place  came 
Mendelssohn,  and  gave  himself  to  educational  and 
philosophical  work.  His  reputation,  recognised 
even  by  Christians,  stimulated  the  younger  Jews  to 
care  for  larger  interests,  and  study  of  the  Talmud 
alone  no  longer  satisfied.  His  translation  of  the 
Pentateuch  into  Qerman,  though  necessarily  printed 
in  Hebrew  type,  had  great  influence,  though  use  of 
it  was  forbidden  by  t^  rabbis.  Following  his  lead, 
a  generation  of  authors  sprang  up  having  the  pur- 
pose to  release  the  Jewish  people  and  religion  from 
the  superstition  and  regard  for  mere  ceremony  into 
which  they  had  fallen,  to  break  the  yoke  of  TaLnud- 
ism,  and  substitute  the  Bible  as  the  basis  of  life. 
In  France  in  1791  Jews  were  given  the  right  of 
citisenship,  though  this  was  withdrawn  in  Alsace 
in  1808.  In  1812,  after  six  years  of  preparatory 
measures,  Napoleon  declared  the  Jews  of  the  empire 
eligible  to  citixenship,  though  in  the  free  cities  of 
Qermany  this  right  had  to  be  purchased,  and  it  was 
afterward  withdrawn.  Progress  toward  the  same 
end  of  freedom  for  the  Jews  was  made  in  other  Euro- 
pean countries.  In  Germany  most  of  the  states  took 
the  religion  under  their  protection.  Many  Jews  be- 
came Christians,  others  set  up  reformed  synagogues 
(as  in  Cassel  and  Hamburg).  Yet  in  1819  there 
broke  out  a  new  popular  uprising  against  the  Jews, 
in  which  life  and  property  were  destroyed.  Against 
the  reform  tendency  in  Judaism  and  the  movement 
toward  Christianity  arose  an  orthodox  party  foster- 
ing the  early  ideals.  Jewish  consciousness  of  its 
past  and  a  new  awakening  of  Jewish  spirit  was 
brought  about  by  the  Oesckichte  der  Isradtten  (9 
vols.,  1820-29)  of  I.  M.  Jost  (q.v.),  while  works 
on  Jewish  history,  poetry,  and  philosophy,  and  on 
the  linguistics  of  the  Hebrew  tongue  further  stim- 
ulated the  newly  awakened  interest.  While  Abrar 
ham  Geiger  (q.v.)  had  a  leading  part  in  this  move- 
ment, the  political  support  gained  in  France 
through  the  help  given  to  Louis  Philippe  in  1830  by 
the  Bothschilds  furthered  the  cause.  The  spirit  of 
liberalism  spread,  the  literary  activities  of  Heine, 
B6me,  and  Gabriel  Rieaser  contributed  to  its  growth 
and  many  Jews  accepted  Christianity.  An  event 
in  the  East  raised  again  the  Jewish  question  in 
Europe.  In  Damascus,  which  reckoned  among  its 
120,000  mhabitanta  5,000  Jews,  Father  Tomaso,  the 
guardian  of  the  Capuchins,  and  his  servants  dis- 
appeared. Seven  of  the  richest  Jews  were  accused 
of  murdering  them,  their  houses  were  attacked  and 


destroyed  in  the  effort  to  find  the  bodies,  while 
the  owners  and  other  Jews  were  slain  or  arrested. 
The  Jewish  financial  houses  of  Europe  interested 
Fnmce,  Eng^d  and  Austria  in  protecting  the 
Jews,  and  an  international  court  under  Mohammed 
Ali  of  EigTpt  was  established  to  investigate  the  case. 
The  genend  result  was  a  unification  of  feeling  among 
the  Jews  of  Europe,  and  this  was  extended  to  the 
East  by  the  establishment  there  of  schools  to  raise 
the  level  of  knowledge  among  the  Jews  of  the 
Orient.  A  specially  important  movement  was  the 
founding  of  the  Alliance  Israelite  Universelle  at 
Paris  under  the  leadership  of  Adolphe  Cr^mieux, 
who  had  been  a  guiding  spirit  during  the  entire 
course  of  events.  The  result  of  the  revolutionary 
movements  of  1848  in  Paris,  Vienna,  Berlin,  Italy, 
and  elsewhere  was  the  triumph  of  liberalism  with 
the  advancement  of  the  Jews  as  an  inevitable  con- 
sequence. A  reaction  occurred,  beginning  in  1870, 
and  anUsemitism  expressed  itself,  especially  in 
Germany,  in  attacks  upon  the  Jewish  quarters, 
while  this  feeling  and  its  consequent  riots  and  legal 
limitations  spread  into  Russia,  Rumania,  Austria, 
and  France.  The  consequence  of  the  feeling  of  in- 
security thus  awakened  among  Jews  was  the  estab- 
lishment in  Vienna  by  Theodor  Hersl  of  the  Zionist 
movement,  the  object  of  which  is  the  founding  of 
a  Jewish  state  in  Palestine  in  which  all  persecuted 
Jews  may  find  a  secure  refuge.  (F.  Hbicam.) 

6.  Jews  In  America.  After  the  expulsion  of 
Jews  from  Spain  in  1492,  and  from  Portugal  in 
1497,  a  considerable  number  of  them  nominally 
adopted  Christianity  but  retained  their  Jewish 
creed  and  practises  in  secret.  Colum- 
k^a  ^^^'  ^^  ^*  voyage,  was  accom- 
manU.  P^^^^  ^7  several  of  these  Maranos, 
or  secret  Jews;  many  Maranos  virited 
or  settled  in  Spanish  or  Portuguese  America,  and, 
when  their  creed  was  discovered,  became  victims 
of  the  Inquisition.  By  their  wide  connection  with 
the  Spanish  Jews  who  had  settled  in  Holland  and 
the  Levant,  they  contributed  to  international  trade 
across  the  Atlantic.  Owing  to  a  natural  sympathy 
with  Holland,  those  of  Brazil  took  the  part  of  the 
Dutch  in  the  conflict  between  Holland  and  Portu- 
gal for  the  possession  of  that  country,  and  when  the 
Dutch  were  expelled  from  Pemambuco  and  Rio 
Janeiro  in  1654  a  considerable  number  of  Jews  left 
with  them  and  went  to  the  West  India  Islands. 
Some  twenty-three  of  these  emigrated  to  New  York 
in  the  summer  of  that  year,  and  obtained  a  footing 
there  through  the  influence  of  the  Dutch  West 
India  Company,  among  the  founders  and  members 
of  which  were  a  number  of  Amsterdam  Jews.  Four 
years  later  fifteen  Jewish  families  arrived  at  New- 
port, R.  I.,  and  established  a  congregation  there, 
under  the  direction  of  Aaron  Lopes,  one  of  the 
leading  merchants  of  the  country,  about  1650.  It 
is  possible  that  Jews  had  appeared  even  earlier  in 
Maryland;  but  the  first  of  importance  there  was 
Jacob  Lumbroso,  a  physician  of  distinction.  These 
places  and  Philadelphia,  Savannah,  and  Charlea- 
ton  constituted  the  chief  seats  of  Jewish  settlement 
in  the  latter  half  of  the  seventeenth  and  the  fint 
part  of  the  eighteenth  century;  the  settlers  were 
mostly  of  the  Sephardic,  or  Spanish  branch  of  the 


68 


RELiaiOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Israeli  History  of 


Jewish  people,  though  ooeasionally  a  few  EngUsh 
Jews  were  found  among  them.  Toward  the  close 
of  the  colonial  period  Jews  had  spread  to  Lancas- 
ter, Philadelphia,  and  Leicester,  Mass.,  and  the 
majority  of  them  took  the  revolutionary  side  in 
the  struggle  with  England,  some  of  them  fighting 
in  the  ranks,  twenty-four  of  whom  held  commis- 
sions. Robert  Morris  was  helped  to  finance  the 
Revolution  by  the  aid  of  Haym  Salomon. 

It  has  been  calculated  that  at  the  beginning  of 
the  nineteenth  century  there  were  about  2,000 
Jews  in  the  United  States,  of  whom  800  were  in 

Charleston,  500  in  New  York,  150  in 

^TM*^^  Philadelphia,  and  the  remainder  scat- 

BtetM      ^^^'    The*r  numbers  were  soon  in- 

1800-'     cteased  by  migrations  from  England 

1880.      '^^  Germany,  the  latter  chiefly  after 

the  failure  of  the  Liberal  movement  in 
1848.  These  were  among  the  first  of  Austin's  col- 
onists in  Texas  in  1821,  and  the  cities  of  Waco  and 
Castroville  still  testify  to  the  important  position 
held  in  early  Texas  by  Jacob  de  Cordova,  who  laid 
out  the  former,  and  Henxv'  Castro,  who  founded 
the  latter.  The  Jews  also  helped  in  the  earlier  de- 
velopment of  California,  Solomon  Heydenfeld  be- 
ing chief  justice  of  that  state  up  to  1857,  while 
among  the  pioneers  in  the  conuneroe  of  that  state 
Jews  were  numbered.  The  period  from  1848  to 
1880  marked  the  immigration  of  German  Jews  who 
had  taken  part  in  the  liberal  movements  in  Ger- 
many in  1848  and  had  come  to  America  to  escape 
the  reaction  which  followed  it.  These  to  the  nimi- 
ber  of  not  less  than  7,000  showed  their  devotion 
to  their  adopted  country  by  taking  part  on  both 
sides  of  the  fraternal  strife  of  the  Civil  War.  Mean- 
while, Jews  had  been  in  various  directions  estab- 
lishing their  positions  as  American  citisens  and 
claiming  the  rights  thereof.  Even  in  the  early 
days  of  the  eighteenth  century  several  of  the  col- 
onies passed  laws  permitting  Jews  to  become  nat- 
uralised without  the  oath  on  **  the  true  faith  of  a 
Christian  "  still  demanded  in  the  mother  country. 
The  English  act  of  1740  permitted  this  through- 
out the  colonies.  In  Maryland  between  1776  and 
1825  the  political  diaabilities  of  the  Jews  were  en- 
tirely removed,  mainly  by  the  activity  of  Jacob  I. 
Cohen  and  Solomon  Etting.  The  Board  of  Dele- 
gates of  American  Israelites  had  been  formed  for 
activity  where  religious  discrimination  was  brought 
against  Americans  on  account  of  their  creed  as 
Jews.  Several  American  Jews  in  this  early  period 
served  abroad  as  diplomatic  agents  of  the  United 
States. 

Internally,  movements  for  reform  in  the  ritual 
took  place  among  American  Jews  as  among  their 
European  brethren,  the  first  being  at  Charleston  as 

early  as  1825,  but  the  chief  movements 

8.  Boform,  in  this  direction  came  with  the  migra- 

Bduoa.     |;|on  ^f  German  Jews  in  1848.    Under 

cSStJbia  *^  leadership  of  Babbis  David  Ein- 

22^^      horn  and  Isaac  Mayer  Wise,  a  wave  of 

meats*     reform  spread  throughout  American 

Jewry,  though  a  laige  number  of  the 
older  established  congregations  still  retained  the 
older  and  more  orthodox  ritual.  Two  colleges  were 
founded  by  the  opposite  parties  to  train  ministers. 


the  Maimonides  Coltage  at  Philadelpbift,  foimded 
in  1867,  by  Isaac  Leeser,  the  leader  of  the  more 
conservative  Jews,  and  the  Hebrew  Union  College 
in  1876  in  Cincinnati,  O.,  by  I^iac  Mayer  Wise, 
who  had  likewise  established  the  Union  of  Amer^ 
ican  Hebrew  Congregations,  which  combined  the 
ministers  of  the  more  radical  direction  and  unified 
the  reform  ritual  by  a  standard  "  Union  Prayer 
Book."  A  more  extreme  development  of  the  re- 
form position  was  founded  by  Felix  Adler  (q.v.)  in 
New  York  in  1883,  and  is  known  as  the  Etldcal 
Culture  movement  (see  Ethical  Culture,  So- 
asTiBB  for).  Among  the  most  characteristic  fea- 
tures of  American  Jewry  during  the  period  from 
1848  to  1880  are  the  many  fraternal  oiganisations 
which  combined  educational,  charitable  and  bene- 
fit features  and  served  as  Jewish  centers  in  small 
commimities  where  no  congregations  or  synagogues 
existed.  Most  congregations  had  established  some 
charitable  features,  but  few  specially  philanthropic 
institutions  were  found  necessary.  The  first  Jew- 
ish hospital.  Mount  Sinaf,  was  founded  in  1852  in 
New  York,  and  the  first  orphan  asylum  in  1855  at 
New  Orleans,  under  the  auspices  of  Judah  Touro. 

In  1880  it  was  reckoned  that  there  were  about 
260,000  Jews  in  the  United  States,  of  whom  75,000 
were  in  New  York,  16,000  in  San  Francisco,  12,000 
in  Philadelphia,  10,000  in  Chicago, 
*ii^"^*  8,000  in  Cincinnati,  6,000  in  St.  Louis, 
-  ^f^  and  the  rest  scattered.  In  the  follow- 
^^^^  ing  year  commenced  extensive  migrar 
1880.  ^ouB  from  Russia,  due  to  the  massa- 
cres and  persecutions  which  began 
then  and  have  continued  down  to  the  present.  It 
is  estimated  that  at  least  1,250,000  Jews  have  en- 
tered the  United  States  since  1881,  two-thirds  of 
them  from  Russia.  With  the  advent  of  this  huge 
and  increasing  stream  of  inunigrants,  mostly  ill 
provided  with  means  of  livelihood,  a  total  change 
came  over  the  spirit  of  American  lenrael.  The  older 
Jewish  inhabitants  hastened  to  form  institutions 
to  assist  their  persecuted  brethren  in  settling  in  the 
land  of  liberty.  Baron  de  Hirsch  placed  a  sum  of 
two  and  one-half  millions  of  dollars  at  the  disposal 
of  an  American  conmiittee  in  1890  for  the  special 
purpose  of  providing  for  the  new  arrivals;  this 
fund  has  founded  agricultural  .colonies  and  indus- 
trial schools.  In  New  York  the  Educational  Alli- 
ance has  been  established  to  instruct  the  new- 
comers in  the  English  language  and  in  their  duties 
as  prospective  American  citizens.  Hospitals,  or- 
phan asylums,  and  homes  for  the  aged  have  been 
established  in  all  the  great  Jewish  centers,  and  uni- 
form methods  of  treatment  have  been  developed 
under  the  auspices  of  the  National  Conference  of 
Jewish  Charities  organised  in  Cincinnati  in  1890, 
which  numbers  over  fifty  philanthropic  organisa- 
tions throughout  the  country.  The  various  char- 
itable bodies  have  been  federated  in  Philadelphia, 
Cincinnati,  St.  Louis,  Chicago,  Boston,  Detroit, 
Kansas  City  and  Cleveland,  and  it  is  reckoned  that 
these  bodies,  together  with  the  chief  Jewish  institu- 
tions of  New  York,  distribute  five  millions  of  dollars 
annually  for  relief,  industrial  training  and  other 
philanthropic  objects.  More  recently  the  Russian 
Jews,  who  have  prospered  remarkably,  have  estab- 


Zorael,  Hiotory  of 
Italy 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


64 


lished  independent  institutions  to  care  for  their 
poorer  brethren.  The  majority  of  the  newcomers 
are  of  the  orthodox  wing  of  Judaism,  so  that 
whereas  before  the  "  eighties "  the  majority  of 
American  Jews  were  probably  attached  to  reform 
congregations,  at  least  five-sixths  of  the  1,200  con- 
gregations now  in  the  United  States  are  of  the 
more  conservative  section.  In  order  to  supply 
these  with  rabbis,  the  Jewish  Theological  Seminary 
of  America  was  established  by  Sabato  Morals  in 
New  Yoric  in  1895,  and  was  reorganised  in  1002 
under  the  presidency  of  Solomon  Schechter  (q.v.). 
This  institution  has  now  one  of  the  laigest  Hebrew 
libraries  in  the  world. 

Jews  have  their  own  press,  the  first  periodical 
being  The  Jew  in  New  York  1823-25,  the  next  im- 
portant one  being  The  OceiderUf  Phila- 
^^*  delphia,  edited  by  Isaac  Leeser,  1843- 
^^^^^  1869.  The  more  important  weeklies 
^j^,^^  are  American  Itradite  of  Cincinnati, 
tions?  established  in  1854;  Jewiah  MeBaen- 
ger,  New  York,  1857-1902;  The  Amer- 
ican Hebrew,  New  York,  1879;  Jewish  Exponent, 
Philadelphia,  1887;  Reform  AdvooaU,  Chicago, 
1891,  and  Jewish  Comment,  Baltimore,  1895.  The 
newcomers  have  also  foimded  a  press  of  their  own 
in  Yiddish,  a  dialect  of  archaic  German  printed  in 
Hebrew  characters.  The  chief  paper  is  the  Jewish 
DaHy  News  of  New  York.  The  Jewish  Publicsr 
tion  Society  of  America,  founded  in  1889,  issues 
works  adapted  for  popular  reading,  its  most  mem- 
orable publications  being  Graets's  History  of  the 
Jews,  Israel  Zangwill's  Children  of  the  Ghetto,  and 
Schechter's  Studies  in  Judaism.  American  Juda- 
ism has  not  hitherto  produced  any  important  con- 
tributions to  Jewish  learning,  though  the  Jewish 
Encyclopedia,  in  twelve  volumes  (New  York, 
1900-06)  summarises  for  the  first  time  the  results 
of  the  Jewish  scholarship  of  Europe  and  is  being 
translated  into  Hebrew  and  Russian.  Owing  to  the 
large  increase  in  the  number  of  American  Jews,  the 
government  has  of  recent  years  taken  action  to 
protest  against  the  persecutions  in  Europe  which 
lead  to  such  burdens  being  cast  upon  America  by 
the  illiberal  and  persecuting  action  of  despotic 
governments.  Meetings  of  protest  have  been  held 
throughout  the  country  against  Russian  tyranny 
in  1881,  1893,  and  after  the  Kishineff  massacres  in 
1903,  when  a  fund  of  over  one  million  dollars  was 
collected  in  America  by  a  Jewish  relief  conunittee. 
In  order  to  take  continuous  action  in  such  cases  an 
American  Jewish  Committee  was  formed  in  1906  of 
representative  Jews  throughout  the  country.  Jews 
have  taken  part  in  the  higher  activities  of  AmcN 
ican  life  in  numbers  far  beyond  their  numerical 
proportions.  They  have  had  eminent  representa- 
tives among  the  officers  of  the  army  and  navy,  in 
the  United  States  Senate,  in  the  learned  professions, 
among  artists  and  inventors,  and  in  literature. 
Altogether,  the  Jews  of  the  United  States  have  per- 
haps the  most  fortunate  and  influential  position 
of  any  Jews  throughout  the  world.  They  number 
nearly  two  millions  (half  of  them  in  New  York), 
about  one-sixth  of  the  whole  number  of  Jews,  and 
they  show  exceptional  capacity  to  enter  into  the 
democratic  life  of  America.  Joseph  Jacobs. 


Bibuooeapht:  On  the  ceneral  history  sbundAnt  literature* 
toiiehinc  the  varioae  phaaee,  will  be  found  cited  under 
Abab;  AncHBOLOoT.  Bxbucaj.;  Bibucal  Tbboloot; 
iNQumnoN;  Cabala;  Talmud;  Ziomxsm.  Snpplementinc 
these  list*  of  literature  the  reader  may  eoneult:  W.  D. 
Horrieon.  Jew9  under  Roman  Rule^  London.  1890;  W.  H. 
Koetera,  Widerher»UUuno  ImtuiU,  Heidelbern.  1806;  J.  P. 
Ptotere,  7%e  Early  Hebrew  Story,  New  York.  1004;  J.  C 
Todd,  PoliHee  and  Raigion  in  Ancient  larael,  ib.  1904; 
H.  FriedlJLnder,  Die  reliai^i^en  Bewegunoen  innerhalh  dee 
Judeniume  im  Zeitalter  Jeeu,  Berlin.  1006;  R.  L.  Ottley. 
ROioion  in  lerael,  London,  1006;  W.  E.  Addim  Hebrew 
R^iaion  to  the  BelaUiehmeni  eS  Judaiem,  ib.  1000;  B. 
Baentfloh,  AUorienialieeker  und  ieraeUHeeker  Monothmemue^ 
TObingen.  1000;  A.  Ixxia,  La  Croyanee  h  la  vie  future  ei 
le  euUe  dee  morte  dane  I'antiquiU  ieraAiie,  2  vols.,  Paris, 
1000;  E.  Meyer,  Die  lenuliien  und  ikre  NaekbareUimme, 
Halle.  1000;  K.  Marti,  Die  Religion  dee  A,  T..  Tttbincen. 
1000,  Eng.  trand.,  London,  1007;  W.  Boueeet,  Die  Rdiffion 
dee  Judeniume  in  neuteetamenUidten  ZeiiaUer,  GdttinBen. 
1007;  T.  K  Gheyne,  Traditione  and  BeUefe  t4  Anamd 
lerael,  London.  1007;  idem,  Dedine  and  FaU  of  (Ae  King- 
dom  oi  JudaK  ib.  1007;  F.  Stihelin.  FrMeme  der  ierad^ 
iHeehen  OeeeMehie,  Baeel.  1007;  P.  Wendland.  Die  keUen^ 
ieti^^&miedte  KuUur  in  ihren  Beeiehungen  mu  Judentum, 
TQbinsen.  1007;  B.  A.  Cook.  The  Religion  ufAndnd  Pid- 
eaUneinthe  Md MHUnnium,  B.C., Edinburgh.  1006;  J.  B.  D. 
Eerdmane.  AUteetamenaiehe  Studien,  II.,  Die  VorgeeekidUe 
lerade,  Qieseeo,  1008;  W.  Fairweather.  The  Background 
eiftheOoepde:  or,  Judaiem  BHween  the  Old  and  the  New 
Teetamenie,  Edinburgh.  1006;  P.  Goodman,  The  Synagogue 
and  the  Church,  London.  1008:  C  H.  H.  Wright,  lAghl 
From  Egyptian  Papyri  on  Jewieh  Hiet.  Before  Chriel^  ib., 
1008;  M.  L6hr.  Dae  Weib  in  Jahwe-Rdigion  und  KuU, 
Leiprio,  1008. 

For  poet-Biblioal  history,  individual  and  general,  the 
best  thesaurus  is  the  JE,  which  has  taken  a  fully 
authoritative  position  on  matters  Jewish.  On  Tarious 
phases  consult:  M.  J.  Jost,  Oeedtiehie  dee  Judeniume  und 
eeinen  Sekten,  3  vols.,  Leipsie,  1867-60;  A.  Neubauer  and 
M.  Stem,  HebriHeehe  Beriehie  Hber  die  Judenverfolgungen 
wShrendderKreuesQge,B«cUn,l802;  H.  J.  M.  Goudenhove, 
Dae  Weeen  dee  Antiaemititmue,  Berlin,  1001;  H.  Oraets. 
Volketamlidte  Geedtichte  der  Juden,  3  vols..  Leipsio,  1006; 
E.  N.  Adler.  Jewe  in  Many  Lands,  Philadelphia.  1005; 
8.  Funk,  Die  Juden  in  BoMomen  $00^600,  Berlin,  1002; 
M.  Franco.  Hiet.  et  lilUraiure  juivee  paye  par  paye,  Pteis, 
1006;  M.  C.  Peters,  The  Jew  ae  a  Patriot,  New  York.  1002; 

D.  Philipson.  The  Reform  Movement  in  Judaieen,  London. 
1007;  G.  F.  Abbott,  lerael  in  Europe,  New  York.  1007; 
M.  Harris,  HieL  of  Ike  Mediaval  Jewe  from  the  MoOem 
Conquest  of  Spain  to  the  Dieeovery  of  Amsrieo.  ib.  1007. 

For  Judaism  In  different  lands  consult:  On  England: 
J.  Picciotto,  i9JbsleA«i  of  Angh-Jewieh  Hietory,  London, 
1870;  J.  Jacobs.  The  Jewe  <^  Angevin  England,  ib.  1803 
(a  collection  of  sources);  L.  Wolf,  Manaeeeh  ben  lerael* e 
Mieeion  to  .  .  .  Cromwell,  ib.  1001;  Select  Pleas,  Starrs, 
and  Other  Reeordefrom  the  RoOMoftke  Exchequer  eftheJewm, 
inO'lMS4,  ib.  1002:  CaUndar  of  the  Plea  RoUe  of  tha 
Exchequer  of  the  Jewe,  ed.  J.  M.  Rigg,  vol.  L.  1218-1272. 
ib.  1006;  CdebraHon  of  the  iSOth  Annivereary  tfthe  WhitehaU 
Conference,  ib.  1006;  A.  M.  Hyamson.  A  Hiet.  of  the  Jews 
in  Ent^and,  London,  1008.  On  France:  J.  Aronius.  Regem- 
ten  Mur  OeechidUe  der  Juden  im  frSnkieehen  und  deuteehen 
Reiehe  bU  eum  .  .  197S,  Berlin.  1887-1002;  X.  Gasnoe. 
^tude  eur  la  condition  dee  Juife  dane  Vaneien  droit  francaim^ 
Angers.  1807;  8.  Kahn.  Notice  eur  lee  leraOiiee  de  Nimes, 
679-1808,  Ntmes.  1001;  H.  Lueien-Brun,  La  Condition 
dee  Juife  en  France  depute  1780,  Paris,  1001.  On  Germany 
and  Austria:  J.  Aronius.  ut  sup.;  M.  FriedUnder.  Maie- 
rialen  eur  CfeediiehU  der  Juden  in  Bdhmen,  BrQnn,  1888; 

E.  Nuebling.  Die  Judengemeinden  dee  MittekUtere,  Ulm, 
1806;  J.  E.  Bcherer.  Die  ReehteveHuUtnieee  der  Juden  in 
don  deuteek-OeterreidUechen  LSndem,  Leipsie,  1001;  G. 
Liebe,  Dos  Judenium  in  der  deuiedien  Vergangenheit,  Jena, 
1003.  On  Rumania:  El  Sincerus,  Lss  Juife  en  Roumanie 
depute  le  traitS  de  BerUn,  London,  1001;  B.  Lasare,  Lea 
Juife  en  Roumanie,  Paris,  1002;  I.  Lahovarie,  The  Jewish 
QueeOon  in  Roumania,  ib.,  1003.  On  Russia  and  P6land: 
M.  Davitt.  The  Story  <if  AnU-Semitic  Pereeeutione  in 
Rueeia,  London,  1003;  S.  Spinner,  Eiwae  Ober  den  Stand 
der  Cultur  bei  den  Juden  in  Polen  in  16.  Jahrkunderl. 
Vienna,  1003.  On  Spain  and  Portugal:  E.  H.  Lindo,  Hiet. 
cf  the  Jewe  of  Spain  and  Portugal,  London.  1848;    F.  D. 


65 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Zsraal,  History  of 
Itidy 


Moseatta,  J€IM  cf  Spain  and  PortuQol  and  the  Inquitiium^ 
lb.  1877;  A.  Pulido  FernaxideB,  BtpoAoUa  Hn  patria  y  la 
mmSefardi,  Madrid,  1006.  On  the  United  SUtea:  I.  Mark- 
•oa,  Hdntw  in  America,  1885;  Jttdaitm  at  the  World*§ 
Parliament  qf  Rd.ioiona,  Cincinnati,  1894;  C.  8.  Bernheimer, 
7^  Rueeian  Jew  in  the  United  Statee,  Philadelphia,  1905; 
7^  Two  Hundred  and  Fiftieth  Annivereary  cf  the  Jew 
in  the  United  Statee:  Addreeeee  tU  Carnegie  H<M,  Thanke- 
givino  Day,  1906,  New  York.  1906.  B.  A.  EUaa,  Tha  Jew 
ei  South  Carolina,  Philadelphia,  1906;  and  thepublicar 
tions  of  the  Jewish  Historical  Society.  On  other  lands:  G. 
Meynie,  VAlghie  juive,  Paris.  1887;  D.  Cases.  Hi»t.  dee 
leraHitee  de  Tunieie,  ib.  1888;  G.  Corneilhan,  Le  Judaieme 
en  Bgypte  et  en  Syrie,  ib.  1889;  L.  Burieu,  Lee  Juifo 
aigiriene,  ib.  1902;  A.  Steinbeis,  Siudien  ear  OeaehichU 
der  Juden  in  der  Sehweie,  Zurich,  1902;  J.  H.  Lord,  The 
Jewe  of  India  and  ihe  Far  Baet,  Bombay.  1906;  J.  Chalom, 
Lee  leraAitea  de  la  Tunieie,  Paris,  1908. 

On  poet-Biblical  literature  consult:  M.  Steinschneider, 
Dio  arabieche  lAteratur  der  Juden,  Frankfort,  1902;  J. 
Guttmann,  Die  S^olaetic  dee  IS.  Jahrhunderte  in  ihren 
BeeiAunoen  xum  Judentum,  Breslau,  1902;  H.  Brody  and 
K.  Albreeht,  The  New-Hebrew  School  of  Poete  of  the  Span- 
i^Arahian  Epoch,  Leipsic,  1906;  I.  Abrahams,  A  Short 
HieL  of  Jewieh  LUeraturo  from  the  FaU  of  the  Temple, 
London,  1906;  D.  Neumark,  Oee^iehte  der  indieehen 
Philoeophie  dee  MittdaUero,  vol.  i.,  Berlin,  1907;  Nathan- 
id  ibn  al-Fayyumi,  The  Buetan  cdukul,  ed.  and  trand. 
from  a  umquo  MS.  .  .   ,  by  D.  Levins,  New  York,  1908. 

ITALA.    See  Bible  Versions,  A,  II.,  1. 

ITALY. 

I.  Tlie  Roman  Catholic  Church. 
Modem  Sutus  in  the  State  (|  1). 
Pontion  of  the  Pope  (I  2). 
Orsanisation  (|  3). 
The  Old  Catholics  (I  4). 
n.  Protestant  Bodies. 

The  Waldensian  Church  (|  1). 

Hie  Evangelical  Italian  Church  (|  2). 

Foreign  Missionary  Congregations  and  Churches  (|  3). 

Benevolent  Institutions  (|  4). 

Bible  and  Tract  Societies  (|  5). 

Periodicals  (I  6). 

The  present  kingdom  of  Italy,  comprising  besides 
the  main  peninsula  the  islands  of  Sicily  and  Sar- 
dinia, and  a  number  of  smaller  islands,  was  formed 
in  Mar.,  1861.  The  total  area  is  110,659  square 
miles;  population  (1901),  32,475,253,  of  whom 
31,539,863  (99.7  per  cent.)  are  Roman  Catholics, 
65,595  Protestants  (including  20,538  foreigners), 
and  35,617  Jews.  The  capital  is  Rome.  Religious 
liberty  prevails,  and  adherents  of  all  faiths  enjoy 
equal  civil  and  political  rights. 

I.  The  Roman  Catholic  Church:  Until  1848  the 

Roman   Catholic   clergy,    including   the    religious 

orders,  occupied  an  exceptional  posi- 
1.  soaem 


Statofl  in 


tion  in  Italy.  They  were  exempt  from 
tiieState!  ^^'^^"^^^^^  ^ud  from  temporal  jurisdic- 
tion, and  had  the  public  educational 
and  charitable  institutions  entirely  in  their  hands. 
The  kingdom  of  Sardinia  took  the  lead  in  bringing 
about  the  new  order.  By  law  of  Aug.  25,  1848, 
the  Jesuits  were  excluded,  as  also  the  Sisters  of  the 
Sacred  Heart  of  Jesus,  and  a  law  of  Mar.  1,  1850, 
placed  all  ecclesiastical  institutions  of  a  beneficent 
character  under  state  supervision.  Other  statutes 
put  an  end  to  exemption  from  temporal  jurisdiction 
and  taxation,  forbade  religious  institutions  to  re- 
ceive gifts  without  royal  sanction,  and  levied  an 
annual  tax  on  the  receipts  of  the  "  dead  hand  "  (see 
Mortmain).  By  the  law  of  May  29,  1855,  all 
religious  orders  in  Sardinia  not  engaged  in  preach- 
ing, teaching,  or  nursing  the  sick,  were  dissolved 
VI.— 5 


and  their  property  alienated  by  the  State.  On  the 
basis  of  this  law  274  monasteries,  with  3,733  monks, 
and  sixty-one  convents,  with  1,756  inmates,  were 
closed,  and  2,722  chapters  and  private  benefices 
were  disestablished.  In  1861  the  same  principles 
were  carried  out  in  Umbria,  in  the  Marches,  and  in 
Naples.  These  principles  were  applied  to  the  entire 
kingdom  of  Italy  by  the  laws  of  July  7,  1866, 
Aug.  15,  1867,  and  June  19,  1873.  The  property 
thus  acquired  by  the  State  was  formed  into  an 
ecclesiastical  fund  (Fondo  per  U  cuUo)  for  the  sup- 
port of  religious  worship  and  public  education,  and 
for  the  payment  of  pensions  to  monks  and  nuns  of 
closed  monasteries.  Since  the  suppressed  orders 
might  continue  to  exist  as  private  associations, 
there  are  still  about  40,000  monks  in  Italy.  Up  to 
June  30,  1898,  44,376  ecclesiastical  foimdations  had 
come  into  the  {)os8ession  of  the  State.  The  annual 
income  from  this  property  is  about  33,000,000  lire. 
All  chapels  and  churches  used  for  public  worship 
are  exempt  from  confiscation,  as  also  episcopal  resi- 
dences, together  with  the  official  buildings  con- 
nected with  them,  clerical  seminaries,  and  such 
cloisters  as  were  turned  over  to  the  provinces  or 
communes  for  public  purposes,  educational  or  char- 
itable. All  the  Roman  Catholic  theological  faculties 
in  the  seventeen  state  universities  were  abolished 
by  law  in  1873. 

The  temporal  power  of  the  pope  was  quietly 
brought  to  an  end  Sept.  20,  1870,  but  on  May  13, 

1871,  a  law  was  passed  guaranteeing 
f  Sl  "*  ^^  independence,  and  making  his  per- 
Popa.       ^^^  sacr«d  and  inviolable,  like  that  of 

the  king.  The  honors  of  sovereignty 
are  due  to  him,  and  he  is  allowed  to  keep  a  body- 
guard. The  State  grants  him  annually  a  pension 
of  3,225,000  lire,  which,  however,  he  has  hitherto 
declined  to  receive;  and  the  palaces  of  the  Vatican 
and  the  Lateran,  and  the  viUa  of  Castel  Gandolfo 
(near  Albano),  with  their  libraries  and  collections, 
are  declared  to  be  the  property  of  the  holy  see,  in- 
alienable, free  of  taxation,  and  exempted  from 
expropriation.  The  Italian  Government  further- 
more guarantees  the  freedom  and  independence  of 
the  conclave,  and  of  all  ecclesiastical  officers  in  the 
execution  of  their  official  functions.  In  the  city  of 
Rome,  all  seminaries,  academies,  and  colleges  for 
the  education  of  the  clergy  remain  under  the  spe- 
cial authority  of  the  pope;  and  the  State  has  re- 
nounced its  right  of  appointment  and  nomination 
to  the  higher  ecclesiastical  benefices.  No  Italian 
bishop  is  compelled  to  take  the  oath  to  the  king, 
and  no  royal  placet  is  necessary  to  the  execution  of 
a  purely  ecclesiastical  act.  Meanwhile  the  pope 
resides  in  the  Vatican,  keeping  a  court  of  about 
1,800  persons,  and  maintaining  the  Curia  (q.v.)  for 
the  government  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  at 
large.  Foreign  countries  represented  at  the  Vatican 
are:  Austria-Hungary,  Bavaria,  Belgium,  Bolivia, 
^Brazil,  CMe,  Colombia,  Monaco,  Nicaragua,  Peru, 
Portugal,  Prussia,  Russia,  San  Domingo,  and  Spain. 

The  Roman  Catholic  Churoh  in  Italy  numben  49  aroh- 
bishoprics,  221  biihoprios,  and  aome  25,000  pariabea.  Hier- 
arehieally,  the  Church  in  Italy  is  divided  into  (1)  the  diocese 
of  Rome,  with  the  sue  subtirban  cardiud-biahopricp  of  Al- 
bano, Fraaoati,  Ostla-Velletri.  Palestrina,  FoUiO.  and  Sabina; 


Italy 

Italy,  the  Beformation  in 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


66 


(2)  exempt  bishoprics  and  «rehbishoprics,  i.e.,  those  that  are 
immediately  under  the  pope;  and  (3)  metropolitan  bishoprics, 
with  their  suffnisan  bishoprics.  The  exempt  archbishoprics 
and  bishopries  are  as  follows:  in  LJcuria, 
8*  Organl-  the  bishopric  of  Luni-Sarsana;  in  Venice,  the 
■atlon.  archbishopric  of  Udine;  in  the  former  Papal 
States,  the  archbishoprics  of  Camerino,  Ferrara, 
Perugia,  and  Spoleto,  and  the  bishoprics  of  Aquapendente, 
AJatri,  Amelia*  Anacni,  Ancona,  Ascoli,  Assisi,  Bacnorea. 
CitU  di  Gtotello.  CitU  della  Pieve.  QviU  Gastellana,  Cometo, 
Fabriano.  Fano,  Ferentino,  Foligno,  Oubbio,  Jesi,  Monte- 
fiasoone,  Nami,  Nooera.  Norda,  Orvieto,  Osimo,  Poggio 
Mirteto,  Racanati,  Rieti,  Segni,  Sutri-Nepi,  Temi.  Terradna, 
Tivoli,  Todi,  Treja,  Veroli,  and  Viterbo;  in  Tuscany,  the 
archbishopric  of  Lucca,  and  the  bishoprics  of  Aresso,  Cortona, 
Montaldno,  and  Montepuldano;  in  Emilia,  the  bishoprics 
of  Borgo  San  Donnino,  Parma,  and  Piaoenxa;  in  the  province 
of  Naples,  the  archbishoprics  of  Amalfi.  Aquila,  Gosensa 
Qaeta.  and  Roosano.  and  the  bishoprics  of  Aquino,  Aversa, 
Gava-Samo,  Foggia,  Gravina,  San  Marco,  Marsi,  Melfi, 
Mileto,  Molfetta,  Monopoli,  Naidd,  Penne-Atri,  Teramo, 
Trivento,  Troja,  and  Sulmona;  in  Sicily,  the  archbishopric 
of  Catania,  and  the  bishopric  of  Acireale.  The  metropolitan 
seats  with  their  suffragans  are:  AcerensarMatera  (suffragans: 
Anglona-Tursi,  Potenza,  Tricarioo,  Venosa);  Bari-Canosa 
(Gonversano,  Ruvo-Bitonto);  Benevent  (Alife,  Ariano, 
Asooli-Cerignola,  AveUino,  Bojano,  Bovino,  Larino,  Lucera, 
San  Severo,  Sant'  Agata  de'  Goti,  Teleee,  Termoli);  Bologna 
(Faensa,  Imola);  Brindisi  (Ostunl);  Cagliari  (Galtelli-NuoTo. 
Iglesias,  Ogliastra);  Capua  (Cajacso,  Calvi-Teano,  Caserta, 
Isemia-Venafro,  Sessa);  Chieti  (Vasto);  ConsarCampagna 
(Laeedonia,  Muro,  Sant'  Angelo  de'  Lombardi);  Fermo 
(Maoerata-Tolentino.  Montalto,  Ripatranaone,  San  Severino); 
Florence  (San  Sepolcro,  Colle,  Fiesole,  Modigliana,  Pistoja- 
Prato,  San  Miniato);  Genoa  (Albenga,  Bobbio,  Brugnato, 
Savona-Noli,  Tortona,  Ventimiglia);  Landano  (Ortona); 
Manfredonia  (Viesti);  Messina  (Lipari,  Nicosia,  Patti); 
Milan  (Bergamo,  Bresda,  Como,  Oema,  Cremona,  Lodi, 
Maotua,  Pavia);  Modena  (Carpi.  Guastalla,  Massa  di  (3arrara« 
Reggio  Emilia);  Monreale  (Caltanisetta,  Girgenti);  Naples 
(Accra,  Ischia,  Nola,  PossuoU);  Oristano  (Ales-Terralba); 
Otranto  (GalUpoli,  Lecoe,  Ugento);  Palermo  (Ofalu,  Mas- 
■bra,  Trapani);  Pisa  (Livomo,  Pescia,  PontremoU.  Volterra); 
BaTenna  (Bertinoro,  (Tervia,  Cesena,  (3omaochio,  Forli, 
Bimini,  Sanina);  Reggio  di  (>alabria  (Bova,  Cassano,  Catan- 
laro,  Cotrone.  (3erace,  Nicastro,  Niootera,  Oppido,  Squillace); 
Gtalerao-Acemo  ((3apaccio-Vallo.  Diano,  Marsioo,  Noceradei 
Iftkgani,  Nusco,  Policastro);  Santa  Severina  (Cariati);  Sassari 
(Alghero,  Ampurias,  Bisarchio,  Bosa);  Siena  (Ghiusi, 
Grosseto,  Massa  Marittima,  Savana-Pitigliano);  Syracuse 
(Oaltagirone,  Noto,  Piassa);  Sorrent  (Castellamare);  Taranto 
(Osstellaneta,  Oria);  Turin  (Acqui,  Alba,  Aosta,  Asti,  Cuneo, 
Fossano,  Ivrea,  Mondovi,  Pinerolo,  Salusso,  Susa);  Trani 
(Andria,  Bisoeglie);  Urbino  (Cagli,  Fossombrone,  Monte- 
feltro,  Pesaro,  Sinigaglia,  Urbania-Sant'  Angelo  in  Vado); 
Venice  (Adria,  Belluno.  Ceneda,  Chioggia,  Ck>ncordia,  Padua, 
Treviso,  Verona,  Vioenza);  and  Vercelli  (Alessandria  della 
Paglia,  Biella,  (>asale,  Novara,  Vigevano).  There  are  also 
eleven  abbeys  and  prelaturpn  without  dioceses,  vis.:  Alta- 
mura,  Monte  (}assino,  Monte  Oliveto  Maggiore.  Monte  Ver- 
gine,  Nonantola,  Santa  Luda  del  Mela,  San  Marttno  al  Monte 
Cimino,  San  Paolo  fuori  le  Mura  di  Roma,  Sanctissima 
TriniU  della  Cave  dei  Tirreni,  SS.  Vicenso  ed  Anastasio  alls 
tre  Fontane  (near  Rome),  and  Subiaoo.  There  are  Uniat 
Greek  congregations  in  Naples,  Mesmna,  and  Barletta. 

The  Old  Catholics  in  Italy  number  about  1,(XX). 

They  have  a  bishop,  and  less  than  a  dozen  ministers. 

.    f^.        Their  largest  parishes  are  Arrone,  in 

Old         ^^  province  of  Perugia;    Dovadola, 

Oatholloa.  ^^  *^®  province   of  Florence;    Sant' 

Angelo  de'  Lombardi,  in  the  province 

of  Avellino;    and  San  Remo,  in  the  Riviera  di 

Ponente.    The  sect  was  founded  in  Italy  by  Count 

Enrico  de  Campello  (q.v.). 

n.  Protestant  Bodies:  The  Protestant  cause  in 
Italy  is  represented  by  the  old  and  celebrated 
Church  of  the  Waldenses  (q.v.);  by  the  Evangelical 
Italian  Church;  and  by  congregations  of  Baptists, 
Wesleyans,  and  (American)  Methodists; 
When  religious  liberty  was  established  in  the 


kingdom  of  Sardinia  by  the  decree  of  Feb.  17, 1848, 

the  Waldenses  (q.v.)  in  Italy  had  eighteen  ministers 

and  fifteen  congregations,  all  in  the 

^*  J™*]^*^"  Piedmont  region.    The  congregations 

Ohnroh  Pmerolo  and  Turm  were  established 

later.  The  number  of  Waldenses  in 
Piedmont  and  the  adjacent  valleys  is  about  13,000. 
In  1898  the  Waldensian  College, established  at  Torre 
Pellice  in  1835,  was  placed  upon  an  equal  footing 
with  similar  state  institutions.  It  has  about  a 
dozen  teachers  and  about  100  pupils.  The  Walden- 
ses also  maintain  high  schools,  orphan  asylimis,  and 
a  hospital.  Their  theological  school,  founded  at 
Torre  Pellice  in  1835,  was  removed  to  Florence  in 
1860.  The  Waldensians,  by  sixty  years  of  mission- 
ary activity,  have  now  established  new  congregar- 
tions  throughout  Italy,  some  fifty  in  number,  with 
as  many  more  mission  stations,  comprehending 
about  6,000  communicants.  The  affairs  of  the 
entire  Church  are  administered  by  a  board  of  five 
members,  elected  by  the  synod,  which  meets  yearly 
at  Torre  Pellice,  in  September.  Since  1861  the  mis- 
sion field,  with  the  new  congregations,  has  been  ad- 
ministered by  an  Evangelization  Committee  of 
eight  members,  also  elected  by  the  synod.  The 
Church  maintains  elementary  and  Sunday  schools, 
and  employs  some  two  dozen  colporteurs  for  the 
distribution  of  Bibles  and  evangelical  writings. 

The  Evangelical  Italian  Church  was  fotmded  at 

Milan,  in  1870,  by  twenty-three  separate  congrega- 

tions  that  had  been  formed  here  and 

Svmnsn^fiai  *^^  independently  of  the  Waldensian 

^J2Sim     evangelization.     To  show  clearly   its 

Ohnroh.  separation  from  the  papacy  and  the 
Roman  hierarchy  this  church  called 
itself  the  "  Free  Italian  Church.''  [Its  most  eminent 
leader  was  the  eloquent  Gavazzi.]  A  general  con- 
vention in  1870  adopted  eight  fundamental  articles 
of  faith,  and  the  next  assembly  at  Florence  in  1871 
adopted  a  constitution  of  twenty-one  articles.  By 
royal  decree  of  July  2,  1891,  this  church  was  recog- 
nized by  the  Italian  government  as  a  juristic  person, 
under  the  name  "  Evangelical  ItsJian  Church " 
(Chieaa  Evangdica  lialiana),  the  name  by  which  it 
has  since  then  been  known.  The  affairs  of  the 
church  are  in  the  hands  of  an  Evangelization  Com- 
mittee, composed  of  five  members  elected  by  the 
general  convention,  which  meets  annually  at 
Florence.  The  entire  church  is  divided  into  ten 
districts,  viz..  Piedmont,  Liguria,  Lombardy,  Venice, 
Emilia,  Tuscany,  Rome,  Naples,  Apulia,  and  Sicily. 
These  embrace,  all  together,  some  forty  congrega- 
tions, forty-five  stations,  and  about  2,000  com- 
municants. The  church  maintains  elementary  and 
Sunday  schools,  and  a  theological  school  at  Florence. 
The  church  also  employs  a  number  of  colporteurs 
for  the  sale  of  Bibles  and  evangelical  works.  In 
connection  with  the  Evangelical  Italian  Church 
may  be  mentioned  the  Free  Christian  Church,  which 
resembles  the  Plsrmouth  Brethren.  [The  Evan- 
gelical Italian  Church  and  the  Free  Christian 
Church  are  now  for  the  most  part  allied  with  the 
Waldensians  and  the  Methodists.] 

The  English  Wesleyans,  who  have  been  repre- 
sented in  Italy  since  1861,  have  in  their  northern 
district  twenty-five  churches  and  stations,  and  in 


67 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Italy 

Italy,  the  Bafbrmatlon  In 


their  southern  district  twenty-five  churches  and 
stations,  numbering  all  together  some  2,000  com- 
municants.  They  maintain  elemen- 
^^orei^n  ^^y  schools,  and  an  orphan  asylum 
^J~J*J*j[J  at  Intra.  The  Methodist  Episcopal 
tlona  and  ^^'^^  (^^  America)  began  missionary 
Olrarohea.  '^^^^  ^  Italy  in  1873.  It  now  num- 
bers twelve  churches,  forty  mission  sta- 
tions, and  about  1,500  oonmiunicants.  It  has  day 
and  evening  schools  employing  upward  of  forty 
teachers,  and  also  a  theological  school  at  Rome. 
The  United  Baptists,  American  and  English,  have 
been  in  Italy  since  1870  and  1871.  All  together, 
they  have  eighty-one  stations,  some  forty  ministers, 
five  colporteurs,  and  about  1,500  conununicants. 
[George  B.  Taylor  (d.  at  Rome  in  1906)  was  for 
forty  years  at  the  head  of  the  American  Baptist 
Mission.]  An  independent  missionary  work  is  car- 
ried on  by  the  Englishman  Clarke  in  Spezia, 
Areola,  Belluno,  Levanto,  Marola,  Pordenone,  and 
Seren. 

There  are  English  churches  in  Florence,  Genoa, 
Milan,  Naples,  Rome,  and  Venice,  American  Prote&- 
tant  churches  in  Florence  and  Rome,  and  Scotch 
Presbyterian  churches  in  Genoa,  Naples,  Rome, 
and  Venice.  The  Germans  in  Italy  have  formed  a 
number  of  congregations  at  various  places.  They 
maintain  schools  in  Florence,  Genoa,  Messina,  Milan, 
Naples,  Palermo,  and  Rome,  and  hospitals  in  Flor- 
ence, Genoa,  Milan,  Naples,  and  Rome.  Since  1880 
the  German  ministers  in  Italy  have  had  their  annual 
conference. 

Perhaps  the  most  flourishing  Evangelical  congre- 
gation in  Italy  is  the  Evangelical  Military  Associa- 
tion in  Rome,  which  was  founded  by  L.  Capellini 
(d.  1898). 

Of  other  educational  and  charitable  institutions 
under  Evangelical  control  may  be  mentioned  the 
high  schools  for  girls  in  Florence  and 
Naples;  the  Anglo-American  Institute 


4.  Benevo- 
lent Instl- 


tntlons. '  *^  Rome;  the  elementary  schools  of 
Miss  Camithers  at  Pisa,  S.  Michele 
degli  Scalsi,  and  Cisanello  di  Ghezzano;  Dr.  Co- 
noandi's  orphan  asylum  for  boys  at  Florence;  the 
Feretti  orphan  asylum  for  girls  at  Florence;  the 
Gould  Institute  at  Rome,  an  educational  institu- 
tion for  boys  and  girls;  the  work-school  for  women 
at  Turin;  the  Boyce  Memorial  Home  at  Vallecrosia, 
an  asylum  for  orphans,  both  boys  and  girls;  and 
the  Evangelical  Rescue-Mission  of  Mrs.  Hammond 
in  Venice. 

There  are  three  Bible  societies  working  in  Italy,  viz., 
the  Italian  Bible  Society,  which  was  founded  in  Rome 
in  1871,  the  British  and  Foreign  Bible 
anSli^t  Society,and  the  National  Bible  Society 
Jj^^^JI^^  of  Scotland.      Since  1860  the  British 
and  Foreign  Bible  Society  has  distrib- 
uted in  Italy  more  than  3,000,000  Bibles  and  New 
Testaments.     The  Italian  Tract  Society,  founded 
at  Florence  in  1855,  has  a  printing-establishment  at 
Florence  and  salesrooms  in  a  dozen  Italian  cities. 
To  this  tract  society  the  entire  Protestant  Church 
in  Italy  is  indebted  for  the  great  bulk  of  its  polem- 
ical and  educational  literature.    This  society  also 
publishes  L* Italia  Evangeluxi,  an  illustrated  fam- 
ily weekly;    L*Amico^  dei  /andulUj  an  illustrated 


monthly  for  children;  and  L'Amico  di  caaa,  a  popu- 
lar calendar  (annual  edition,  35,000).  Of  less  im- 
portance is  the  Baptist  Tract  Society  in  Turin. 

Other  Evangelical    periodicals  are    La  Rivista 
Christiana,  a  scholarly  monthly;    Le  Timoin,  the 

weekly  organ  of  the  French-spealdng 

6.  Periodi-  Waldensians;  La  Luce,  a  Waldensian 

oals.       weekly;    II   Chriatiano,    the    monthly 

organ  of  the  Free  Christian  Church; 
La  CivQtd  Evangdica,  a  monthly  published  by  the 
Wesleyans;  II  Piccolo  Mesaaggiercy  the  monthly  of 
the  Evangelical  Italian  Churdii;  U  Evangelista,  a 
weekly  issued  by  the  Methodists;  II  Teslimonio,  a 
Baptist  monthly;  and  II  Labaro,  a  monthly  pub- 
lished by  the  Old  Catholics.  (K.  R5nnbke.) 

Bibxjoobaphy:  The  oflSdal  Roman  Catholic  record  is  given 
in  the  annual,  Oerarchia  eaUolioa.  More  general  works  are: 
C.  Hemana,  Catholic  Italy,  2  yoIs.,  Florence,  1861;  J.  H. 
Eager,  Romanism  in  its  Home,  Philadelphia,  1899;  A. 
Robertson,  The  Roman  Catholic  Church  in  Italy,  Ix>ndon, 
1903.  On  the  Old  Catholic  movement  in  general  consult: 
A.  M.  Scarth,  Story  of  the  Old  Caiholic  and  Kindred  Move- 
menta,  London,  1809;  C.  J.  Loyson,  Catholic  Reform,  ib. 
1874;  F.  Meyrick,  The  Old  Catholic  Movement,  ib.  1877. 
On  Protestantism  in  general  consult:  R.  Baird,  SkHchee  cf 
Proteetantiem  in  Italy,  Boston,  1847;  J.  A.  Wylie.  The 
Awakening  of  Italy,  London,  1866;  H.  H.  FarreU.  Italy 
Strumling  into  Light,  Cincinnati,  1880;  J.  Stoughton, 
FoUprinte  of  Italian  Reformer;  London,  1881;  J.  W. 
Brown,  An  Italian  Campaign,  ib.  1890  (the  Evangelical 
movement  1845-1887);  E.  Gebhardt,  L'ltalie  myetique, 
Paris,  1890;  A.  R.  Pennington,  The  Church  in  Italy, 
London,  1896;  G.  B.  Taylor,  Italy  and  the  Italiane,  Phila- 
delphia, 1898.  On  the  Free  Churches  consult  the  Reports 
of  the  General  Assembly,  usually  published  under  the 
titles  Verbali  della  .  .  .  Aeaemblea  OeneraU  deUa  Chieee 
Crietiane  in  Italia;  The  Free  Chrietian  Church  in  Italy, 
Evangelitation  Report,  Florence,  1874.  For  the  Wald«»es 
see  the  literature  under  Wai.denbx8. 

ITALY,  THE  REFORMATION  IN. 


Two  Periods  (|  1). 
Venice  (|  2). 
Naples  (f  3). 

The  Inquisition  in  Naples 
(§4). 


In  South  and  Central  Italy 

(16). 
The  Later  Period  in  Venice 

(§6). 
Italian    Refonnation     Wri- 

tin««  (I  7). 

This  article  is  concerned  with  the  Reformation 
in  Italy  only  in  its  general  features.  Its  more  im- 
portant characters  are  treated  in  sep- 
z.Two  arate  articles  (see  Caraccioli,  Gal- 
Periods.  eazzo;  Curione,  Celio  Secondo; 
MoBATA,  Olimfia;  Ochino,  Bebnar- 
DiNo;  Palbario,  Aonio;  RsNiiB  of  France; 
Spisra,  Francesco;  VALDi»;  Vergerio,  Pietro 
Paolo;  Vermigli,  Pietro  Martire).  The  first 
noteworthy  traces  of  the  Reformation  in  Italy 
appear  in  the  north,  at  Venice,  but  the  culmina- 
tion was  reached  in  the  south,  at  Naples.  The 
first  and  rising  period  lies  between  1520,  when  wri- 
tings of  the  German  Reformation  are  first  known  to 
have  crossed  the  Alps,  and  1540  or  1541,  the  year 
marking  the  death  of  Vald^,  who  wrought  in  an 
elect  circle  at  Naples,  as  the  most  strongly  intellec- 
tual and  original  of  the  Italian  Reformers.  Almost 
simultaneously  with  the  breaking-up  of  the  Evan- 
gelical circle  at  Naples,  there  set  in  (1542)  the 
deliberate  and  systematic  reaction  instigated  from 
Rome;  the  bull  of  Paul  III.,  Licet  ab  initio  (see 
Inquisition,  II.,  (  1),  by  the  terms  of  which  the 
Inquisition  was  organised  after  the  Spanish  model, 
and  extended  over  all  Italy  (Naples  excepted),  is 


Italy,  the  Beformation  in 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


68 


the  stonn  signal.  With  unremitting  activity  until 
about  1570,  this  tribunal,  personally  directed  by 
the  popes,  utilizing  the  entire  political  influence  of 
the  Curia,  accomplished  its  work  by  driving  a  num- 
ber of  the  chief  advocates  of  reform  to  flight,  by 
dungeon  and  fire  and  water,  and  smothered  the 
movement.  What  still  remained  in  the  way  of 
Evangelical  tendencies  during  the  later  years  of 
this  second  period  had  become  divested  of  aU 
efforts  at  internal  church  reform  and  stands  in 
deliberate,  most  trenchant,  opposition  to  Rome, 
falling  in  with  certain  radical  tendencies  which 
manifested  themselves  in  Germany,  but  particularly 
in  the  Netherlands,  where  the  leaders  of  a  conserv- 
ative Evangelical  reformation  steadily  resisted  them 
with  force. 

In  Venice  down  to  1527  there  is  no  evidence  of 

repressive  measures  beyond  repeated  burning  of 

reformatory  writings  of  German  origin; 

3.  Venice,  but  toward  the  close  of  1530  the  papal 
nuncio,  Caraffa  (later  Paul  IV.),  intei^ 
posed  against  the  "  heretics  "  with  greater  strict- 
ness, and  even  sentenced  a  Franciscan,  Girolamo 
Galateo  (b.  in  Venice,  1490),  to  death  without  ob- 
taining confirmation  for  the  act  from  the  Senate. 
They  kept  him  in  prison  seven  years,  then  set  him 
free,  but  in  1540  arrested  him  again,  and,  broken 
by  his  earlier  sufferings,  he  died  in  the  year  follow- 
ing. His  "  Apology,"  dedicated  to  the  Senate, 
printed  at  Bologna  in  1541,  outlines  a  noteworthy 
plan  of  internal  church  reform,  which  betrays  the 
influence  of  German  doctrines,  and  on  the  question 
of  free  will,  the  sacraments,  the  veneration  of  saints, 
and  other  points  is  truly  Biblical.  In  a  report 
which  Caraffa  prepared  for  the  Curia  (printed  in 
RivUta  Cristiana,  Florence,  1878),  two  other  leading 
heretics  are  mentioned.  Bartolomeo  Fonzio  was 
a  Venetian,  incurred  suspension  from  the  priestly 
office  in  1529,  escaped  to  Gennany,  and  was  present 
at  Augsburg  in  1530.  He  was  in  correspondence 
with  Butzer  in  1531.  It  was  probably  Fonzio, 
despite  his  subsequent  denial,  who  translated  Lu- 
ther's tract  An  den  chrMichen  Add  into  Italian 
(of.  ZKGy  iv.,  1880,  pp.  467  sqq.).  Later  he  was 
again  active  in  Italy,  and  in  1558  was  arrested  in 
Cittadella,  not  far  from  Venice;  he  was  sentenced 
to  death  and  drowned,  for  forty-four  "  erroneous 
doctrines,"  extracted  from  his  writings.  When 
Caraffa  prepared  his  report,  mentioned  above,  in 
1532,  there  lived  also  at  Venice  the  Florentine 
fugitive,  Antonio  Bniccioli,  who  rendered  the  move- 
ment of  the  Reformation  great  service  by  elucidating 
and  printing  Biblical  writings  in  the  Italian  lan- 
guage. He  was  under  suspicion,  and  so  continued; 
and  notwithstanding  occasional  retraction,  he  was 
repeatedly  brought  to  trial.  He  died  in  prison  in 
15i36.  As  in  his  case,  so  with  others,  such  as  Fra 
Baldo  Lupetino  of  Albona  in  Istria,  and  Baldassare 
Altieri,  of  Aquila  in  Neapolitan  territory,  their 
religious  development  and  its  sequel  belong  both 
to  the  first  and  the  second  period  of  Italian  Refor- 
mation history. 

Meanwhile  the  reforming  doctrine  had  found  its 
real  and  vital  center  in  Italy,  in  the  drde  of  Juan 
de  Vald^  at  Naples.  The  biogmpher  of  Caraffa 
(CcaracetoUf  VUa  di  Papa  Paob  IV.,  MS.  in  British 


Museum)  with  good  reason  declares  that  Naples  was 
the "  nest  of  heresy  ";    but  the  tradition  is  false 

that  would  have  it  that  the  Lutheran 
3.  Naples,   belief  was  carried  thither  by  German 

soldiers  after  the  sack  of  Rome  in  1527. 
From  about  1536  onward  a  company  is  found  there — 
scholars  of  Vald^,  himself  devoted  to  the  funda- 
mental doctrines  of  the  German  Reformation  and 
influenced  by  mysticism — ^which  includes  the  most 
important  vehicles  of  the  Italian  Reformation: 
Bernardino  Ochino,  Pietro  Martire  Vermigli,  Pietro 
Camesacchi,  Benedetto  di  Mantua  (reviser  of  the 
little  book  "  Of  the  Benefit  of  Christ's  Death," 
probably  by  A.  Palerio  (q.v.);  Eng.  transl.,  Lon- 
don, reprint,  1855,  also  in  W.  M.  Blackburn, 
Aonio  PaleriOf  Philadelphia,  1866),  Mario  Galeata, 
Francesco  d'Alvise  of  C^aserta,  Giovanni  Bugio, 
Galeazzo  Caraccioli,  Marcantonio  Flaminio,  and 
others,  who  partly,  it  is  true,  never  went  beyond 
the  attempt  at  a  reform  from  within  the  Church. 
The  central  article  about  which  all  converge  in  the 
matter  of  doctrine  is  the  tenet  of  justification  by 
faith.  Furthermore,  it  was  inunaterial  to  a  Vald&s 
what  the  external  structure  of  the  Church  might  be, 
provided  it  did  not  abridge  this  religious  condition. 
He  was  far  from  intending  to  raise  the  standard  of 
revolt  against  church  institutions,  and  he  was  no 
organizer;  his  teachings  foimd  their  way  beyond 
the  circumference  whose  center  was  marked  by  his 
ideal — ^pure  character,  illumined  with  profound  piety 
— only  by  the  accident  that  his  writings  were  pre- 
served as  dear  legacies  by  his  friends.  The  chief 
service  in  this  regard  was  rendered  by  the  noblest 
of  his  pupils,  Giulia  Gonzaga,  duchess  of  Traetto 
(see  Vald^). 

Among  the  pupils  of  Vald^  who  did  not  exceed 
the  boundary  of  a  reform  attempted  from  within 

the  Church  was  Marcantonio  Flaminio 

4.  The      of  Imola,  highly  endowed  as  a  poet; 

Inquisition  it  was  he  who  gave  to  the  book  "  Of 

in  Naples,   the  Benefit  of  Christ's  Death  "  the  form 

under  which,  according  to  the  testi- 
mony of  Vergerio,  it  became  circulated  through  the 
land  in  more  than  forty  thousand  copies,  though  to- 
day not  a  single  library  of  Italy  has  one  impression 
from  that  period.  The  first  blows  of  the  reaction, 
when  it  was  introduced  in  1542  through  the  reor- 
ganization of  the  Inquisition  at  Rome  (see  Inquisi- 
tion), struck  the  two  most  eminent  members  of  the 
circle  surrounding  Vald^s,  Ochino  and  Vermigli. 
Ochino  was  suspended  from  the  preaching  oflioe;  and 
he  escaped,  by  flight,  a  sununons  to  appear  at  Rome 
to  give  an  account  of  himself.  At  the  same  time, 
Vermigli,  who  had  risen  to  high  rank  in  the  order 
of  the  Augustinian  canons,  took  to  flight,  whence 
he  despatched  to  his  doctrinal  associates  a  testi- 
monial of  evangelistic  faith  in  the  guise  of  his 
Semplice  dichiaraffiane  aopra  %  dodiei  artUxli  deUa 
/ede  criatiana.  Presently  the  reaction  directed  its 
attention  to  a  third  member  of  the  Neapolitan  circle; 
viz.,  Pietro  Camesecchi  (b.  in  Florence  1508),  who 
had  held  high  stations  under  the  Curia.  After  he 
had  avoided  the  Inquisition  during  a  sojourn  of 
many  years  abroad  and  in  Venice,  he  was  brought 
to  trial  by  Pope  Paid  IV.,  and  escaped  for  the  time, 
after  having  been  summoned  twice,  through  the 


69 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Italy,  the  Bafomuktion  in 


pope's  death,  and  the  destruction  of  the  documen- 
tary charges  against  Camesecchi,  on  occasion  of  the 
storm  upon  the  Inquisition's  building  in  1559. 
Pius  V.  retrieved  the  matter  and  Camesecchi,  whose 
correspondence  with  Giulia  Gonzaga  formed  the 
basis  of  a  second  trial,  was  executed  with  other 
*•  heretics  "  on  Oct.  1,  1567.  Among  the  victims 
of  the  Inquisition,  not  a  few  were  of  Neapolitan 
origin;  and  they  all  belonged  to  the  very  great 
numbers  whom  the  viceroy's  complacency  delivered, 
year  in,  year  out,  to  the  Curia,  though  the  Spanish 
Inquisition  was  not  allowed  to  operate  in  the  king> 
dom  proper,  and  an  attempt  to  introduce  it  in  1547 
had  been  frustrated  by  a  sanguinary  insurrection 
of  the  populace.  The  viceroy's  complacent  dis- 
position was  also  proved  at  the  death  of  Giulia 
Gonzaga  in  1566,  when  he  seized  her  correspondence 
and  despatched  it  to  Rome.  By  his  long  years  of 
superintending  the  Inquisition  Pius  V.  acquired 
the  most  exact  acquaintance  with  the  situation, 
and  he  renewed  and  intensified  the  tribunal's  ac- 
tivity so  that  he  won  the  name  of  Fra  Michele  dell' 
Inquisisione.  A  storm  of  persecution  covered  all 
parts  of  Italy  in  the  years  of  his  pontificate  (1566- 
1572).  Concerning  the  victims  only  defective  in- 
formation remains,  but  it  put  an  end  to  the  reform- 
ing movement. 

With  reference  to  the  additional  victims  appre- 
hended in  the  south,  some  information  is  given  in 

Luigi  Amabile's  //  tanio  offizio  della 

5.  In       inquigiziane  in  Napoli  (2  vols.,  Citt& 

South  and  di  Castello,  1892).     Nothing  short  of 

Central     wholesale  murder  was  perpetrated  in 

Italy.       that  quarter  in  1560  and  1561  upon  the 

Evangelical  inhabitants  of  San  Sisto 
and  La  Guardia.  Moreover,  the  Holy  Ofi^ce's  barge 
plied  regularly  back  and  forth  between  Naples  and 
Ostia,  incessantly  bringing  new  "  suspects  "  before 
the  tribunal.  The  numbers  of  emigrants — or  rather 
fugitives — for  the  faith  from  Sicily  and  the  kingdom 
continually  increased — so  far,  at  least,  as  this  item 
can  be  checked  at  Geneva,  where  many  sought 
refuge  (cf.  J.  Galiffe,  Le  Refuge  italien  de  Oenh)e, 
Geneva,  1881).  For  southern  and  central  Italy, 
some  acceptable  information  is  fiunished  by  a 
protocol-book  of  the  Roman  Inquisition  for  the 
years  1564-67,  which  contains  the  sentences  decreed 
against  heretics  during  that  period  (cf.  Revista 
Crittiana,  187^-^).  How  matters  looked  and  fared 
in  the  Roman  Inquisition's  prison  is  reported  by  the 
younger  Camerarius,  who  was  himself  under  arrest 
there,  in  1565,  whose  Relaiio  vera  was  printed  by 
J.  G.  Schelhom  (De  vito,  faUa  ac  merUis  PhUippi 
Camerariij  Nuremburg,  1749).  Camerarius  was  con- 
fined in  the  upper  story, ''  where  one  is  in  the  bake- 
oven  ";  others  were  below,  ''  in  so  damp  a  hole 
that  it  is  past  understanding  how  men  can  exist  in 
that  grave."  Frequently  monks  came  in  to  make 
attempts  at  conversion,  Dominicans  for  the  most 
part,  once  Petrus  Canisius,  the  Jesuit.  Among  their 
fellow  captives  were  spies.  Camerarius  and  his 
fellow  countryman,  Peter  Rieter,  were  liberated 
through  the  rigorous  intercession  of  Emperor 
Maximilian  II.,  to  whom  appeal  had  been  made. 
On  June  23,  1566,  there  was  '*  public  abjuration  " 
of  twenty-three  who  were  xmder  chaige,  who,  for 


the  most  part,  had  been  sentenced  to  perpetual 
confinement,  or  to  the  rigor  of  the  galleys.  After 
that,  sentence  was  pronounced  upon  the  Neapolitan 
nobleman,  Pompeo  de'  Monti,  who  was  beheaded 
near  the  bridge  of  Sant'  Angelo,  on  July  4,  1566. 
Still  other  victims  who  were  executed  in  Rome  are 
named  in  the  roll  of  Italian  Reformation  martyrs; 
three  of  them  so  early  as  under  Julius  III.,  Fanino 
of  Faenza,  Domenico  of  Bassano,  and  the  Augustin- 
ian  Giuliano;  later,  two  others,  Giovanni  Buzio 
(also  named  MoUio),  of  Montalcino,  and  an  unknown 
of  Perugia;  under  Paul  IV.,  the  noble  youth  Pom- 
ponio  Algieri  of  Nola  was  burned,  and  how  many 
at  that  time  were  still  confronted  with  a  similar 
fate  may  be  inferred  from  the  fact  that  on  the  death 
of  this  pope  in  1559,  when  the  people's  rage  broke 
open  the  prison  doors,  no  fewer  than  seventy  heretics 
were  set  free. 

Better  information  exists  as  to  what  occurred 
from  the  beginning  of  the  energetic  reaction  at 
Venice  and  in  its  dominion,  than  with 
6.  The  reference  to  events  and  the  scope  of 
Later  repression  in  southern  and  central 
Period  in  Italy.  At  Venice,  the  outcome  of  the 
Italy.  movement  was  connected  with  the 
general  political  situation,  and  the 
senate,  from  the  time  of  the  downfall  of  the  Protes- 
tant party  in  Germany  through  the  Schmalkald 
War,  waived  whatever  considerations  it  had  pre- 
viously conceded  to  their  wishes,  and  showed  itself 
much  more  amenable  to  the  Curia  than  was  formerly 
the  case.  Meantime  a  new  religious  movement  had 
sprung  up  in  Venice.  In  1550,  Julius  III.  affirmed 
that  1,000  Venetians  might  be  counted  as  belonging 
to  the  Anabaptist  sect.  A  new  group  thus  comes  to 
the  light,  inasmuch  as  the  earlier  advocates  of  the 
Reformation  belonged  not  to  the  radical,  but  to 
the  conservative  Reformation,  as  espoused  by  Lu- 
ther. Both  currents  are  in  collateral  progress  from 
the  middle  of  the  century,  and  both  command 
eminent  names;  but  the  attitude  of  mutual  antag- 
onism on  the  part  of  their  champions  contributed 
even  more  than  the  brute  force  of  their  common  foe 
to  nullify  the  movement  itself.  Among  advocates 
of  the  conservative  Reformation  are  to  be  named 
men  such  as  Pietro  Speziali  (in  Cittadella)  and 
Francesco  Spiera  (q.v.).  Now,  too,  the  previously 
mentioned  Fra  Baldo  Lupetino  was  seized  by  his 
fate;,  and  only  for  a  little  while  longer  could  Bal- 
dassare  Altieri  of  Aquila,  who  had  been  in  corre- 
spondence with  Luther,  Bullinger,  and  others,  still 
work  in  the  wake  of  the  Schmalkald  party's  defeat 
after  he  was  compelled  to  leave  Venice  in  1549.  A 
transition  to  the  steadily  growing  Anabaptist  party 
is  afforded  by  Francesco  Negri  of  Bassano;  in  a 
measure,  as  well,  by  Celio  Secondo  Curione.  The 
proper  father,  however,  of  the  Italian  Anabaptists 
was  Camillo  of  Sicily,  who,  after  his  conversion, 
styled  himself  "  Renato."  His  system  is  quite 
spiritualistic;  whoever  is  elected  receives  the 
"  spirit  ";  the  children  of  the  "  spirit  "  merely 
slumber  in  death,  to  enter  upon  a  higher  form  of 
being  thereafter;  the  rest  fall  away  to  destruction. 
The  sacraments  are  only  emblems;  Christ  is  above 
all  a  divinely  favored  man;  and  more  of  the  same 
sort.    Their  theological  foxmdations  were  fixed  in  a 


Italy,  the  Befoniuttion  In 
Ivo  of  OhartroB 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


70 


"  council/'  organized,  by  sixty  of  their  represent- 
atives, at  Venice  in  1660;  though  not,  indeed, 
without  the  separation  of  a  more  moderate  from 
the  radical  faction,  so  that  henceforth  there  are 
three  distinct  groups,  instead  of  two,  as  previously, 
of  Protestantism  in  Italy.  In  the  subsequent  fate 
of  the  Anabaptist  congregations,  which  became 
closely  affiliated  with  t^  center  of  the  moderate 
Anabaptist  cause  at  Nikolsbuig  in  Moravia,  two 
brilliant  martyr  names  are  encountered  in  the  period 
when  the  storm  began  to  rage:  Giulio  Gherlandi 
and  Francesco  della  Saga,  who  fell  a  sacrifice  to 
the  Venetian  Inquisition  in  1666.  Among  advocates 
of  the  Reformation  in  Venetian  territory  may  lastly 
be  named  Bishop  Pier  Paolo  Vei^rio,  because,  ac- 
cording to  his  own  acknowledgment,  the  truth  of 
the  Gospel  indelibly  impressed  itself  upon  him  at 
Padua,  by  the  sick-bed  of  the  unfortunate  Spiera; 
and  because  the  Inquisition  at  Venice  subjected 
him  to  a  tedious  course  of  trial.  This  disputatious 
battler  wielded  an  inexhaustible  store  of  fresh 
weapons  against  the  Roman  Church  out  of  the 
armory  of  his  own  experience  and  exact  knowledge 
of  the  hierarchy;  although  he  did  not  equal  the 
men  of  the  first  generation  in  disinterested  devotion 
to  truth,  in  courage  and  joy  of  sacrifice.  Neither 
can  his  writings  be  justly  compared  with  the  other 
products  of  the  movement,  as  some  of  them  are 
revealed  in  the  Biblioteoa  deUa  Riforma  Italiana 
(6  vols.,  Florence,  1881-86). 

Among  the  writings  of  the  Italian  Reformation, 

besides  the  invaluable  yield  of  Juan  de  Vakite,  the 

previously  cited  little  book  "  Of  the 

7.  Italian    Benefit  of  Christ's  Death  "  fills  an  hon- 

Reforma-  orable  place.  There  may  also  be  men- 
tun        tioned  the  fact  that  the  Sommario  della 

Writings.  Sacra  ScriUura  was  no  less  effective,  al- 
though it  was  not  Italian  originaUy,  but 
a  recast  Middle  Low  German  (Dutch)  work,  dating 
from  the  decade  1620-30.  A  collection  of  the  litera- 
ture of  the  Reformation  in  Italy  after  the  plan  fol- 
lowed by  E.  Bdhmer  for  the  Spanish  Reformation  in 
the  BibUotheca  Wiffeniana  is  much  to  be  desired. 
Rich  contributions  toward  the  project  would  be  sup- 
plied by  the  serial  volumes  of  Rivista  Cristiana  from 
1873;  and  a  considerable  portion  of  the  original 
issues  are  to  be  found  collected  in  the  library  accu- 
mulated by  Count  Piero  Guicciardini,  and  made  over 
to  the  national  library  of  Florence.  Long  forgotten 
and  concealed,  hardly  discoverable  in  their  own 
country,  these  writings  bear  witness  to  the  high 
mental  significance  of  that  minority  which  once 
existed  in  the  land  of  the  popes  and  fought  under 
the  banner  of  reform.  K.  Benrath. 

Bibuoorapht:  The  best  suide  to  the  Bouroes  is  K.  Ben- 
nth,  Ueber  die  QtteUen  der  iUUieniechen  Reformationtoe- 
achiehte,  Bonn.  1876;  idem,  in  ZKO,  I  613-626,  iv.  394- 
413.  Riviata  criatiana,  a  periodicaJ  published  in  Florence, 
1873  sqq.,  contains  much  material  of  the  first  importance. 
Instructive  hints  as  to  sources  are  given  in  F.  H.  Reusch, 
Der  Index  der  verbotener  BUcher,  i.  373  sqq.,  Bonn,  1883. 
Consult  further:  J.  Bonnet,  Vie  de  Olympia  Morata,  Paris. 
1850,  new  ed.,  1862,  Eng.  transl.,  London,  1852;  idem, 
Aonio  Paleario,  Paris,  1862,  Eng.  transl..  London,  1864; 
idem,  RScita  du  xvi.  aiide,  Paris,  1864;  idem,  N<m»eaux 
and  Demiere  Ricite,  ib.  1876;  idem,  many  contributions  to 
Bulletin  du  proteetaniieme  francaiee;  D.  Erdmann,  Die 
Reformation  und  ihre  M&riyrer  in  ItaUen,  Berlin,  1855; 
J.  Stoughton,   Footprinte  of  Italian  Reformere,   London, 


1881;  K.  Benrath,  GteekiekU  der  Reformation  in  Venadig. 
Halle.  1887;  idem.  Bernardino  Ochino  von  Siena,  ib.  1802; 
B.  Fontana,  Renata  .  .  .  di  Ferrara,  3  vols.,  Rome,  1880- 
1800;  A.  R.  Pennington.  The  Church  in  Italy,  London. 
1805;  E.  Comba,  /  noetri  proteetanii,  vol.  ii.,  Florence  (un- 
finished, deals  only  with  Venice);  A.  Agostini,  Pielro  Car- 
neeecehi  e  il  mcvimenio  Waldeeiano,  ib.  1800;  Cambridge 
Modem  Hietory,  vol.  ii..  The  RtformoHon,  pp.  578-609. 
New  York,  1004;  E.  H.  Walshe.  Under  the  InQuisUion, 
TheBeformaiionin  Italy,  London,  1904;  C.  Dejoh,  La Foire- 
liffiouee  en  Italie  au  xiv,  eiMe,  Paris,  1006;  C.  von  Klenze. 
The  InierpreUUion  of  Italy,  Chicago,  1007;  and  the  litera- 
ture under  the  articles  on  the  Reformers  mimed  in  the  text. 

ITHACinS  CLARUS.     See  Prisciluan,    Pris- 

CILLIANIflTS. 

ITUREA:  A  region  named  In  Luke  iii.  1.  The 
name  of  a  people, "  the  Itureans,"  is  older  than  "  Itu- 
rea  "  as  the  name  of  a  region,  and  is  to  be  connected 
with  the  Jetur  of  Gen.  xxv.  15,  a  son  of  Ishmael  deno- 
ting a  nomadic  stock  of  the  Syro- Arabian  desert, 
whose  home,  according  to  the  Genesis  passage,  was  in 
the  neighborhood  of  Teima  on  the  western  border  of 
Najd,  between  Medina  and  the  oasis  of  Jauf.  I 
Chron.  v.  18-22  tells  of  a  victorious  campaign  of 
the  Hebrews  of  the  East^Jordan  land  against  Jetur 
and  other  nomads  in  pre-exilic  times,  which  shows 
that  Jetur  must  have  changed  its  place  of  abode 
to  the  neighborhood  of  the  Jabbok;  but  the  men- 
tion in  Luke  iii.  1  can  have  nothing  to  do  with  this 
passage.  Aristobulus  I.  (106-104  b.c.)  fought  the 
Itureans  and  annexed  part  of  their  territory 
(Josephus,  Ant.  XIII.,  xi.  3),  and  Strabo  (XVI., 
ii.  10,  18)  in  Roman  times  locates  them  on  the  plain 
of  Massyas  (Marsyas)  between  Laodicea  and  Chalcis, 
i.e.,  in  GGele-Syria  (q.v.),  and  he  is  corroborated  by 
an  inscription  of  Quirinius  (Mommsen  in  Ephemeris 
epigraphica,  iv.  537-542,  Berlin,  1881).  It  is  to  be 
concluded  therefore  that  Jetur  and  the  Itureans 
are  the  same  stock,  and  that  they  came  north  with 
the  migrations  of  the  Arab  tribes,  settled  down,  and 
adopted  the  manners  of  the  people  of  the  region. 

Iturea  as  the  name  of  a  region  is  connected  with 
this  last  phase  of  the  people's  history.  The  first 
ruler  of  whom  mention  is  made  is  Ptolemy,  son  of 
Menneus,  who  reigned  85-40  b.c,  and  had  a  king- 
dom of  considerable  sise,  including  some  cities  on 
the  coast,  and  the  region  about  the  sources  of  the 
Jordan  as  far  east  as  the  neighborhood  of  Damas- 
cus (Josephus,  AfU,  XIII.,  xvi.  3).  This  Ptolemy 
paid  Pompey  1,000  talents  in  order  to  make  his 
rule  secure  with  the  Romans  (Josephus,  Ant.  XIV., 
iii.  2),  and  he  protected  the  last  of  the  Hasmo- 
neans.  His  son  Lysanias  is  called  king  of  the  Itu- 
reans by  Dio  Cassius,  and  was  executed  by  order 
of  Antony,  36  b.c.  (Josephus,  Ant.  XV.,  iv.  1). 
Later  there  were  only  renmants  of  the  great 
Iturean  kingdom,  with  Chalcis  as  the  capital,  one 
of  which  was  Abilene,  ruled  by  the  tetrarch  Ly- 
sanias (Luke  iii.  1);  another  was  the  region  of 
So^mus,  north  of  HeliopoUs;  still  another  was  the 
region  of  Chalcis,  given  by  Claudius  to  Herod, 
grandson  of  Herod  the  Great;  and  finally  the  terri- 
tory of  Zenodorus,  which  came  into  the  possession 
of  Herod  the  Great  (Josephus,  Ant.  XV.,  x.  1). 
After  the  death  of  Herod,  Augustus  joined  a  por- 
tion of  the  territory  of  Zenodorus  to  the  territory 
of  the  tetrarch  Philip  (4  B.C.-34  a.d.),  that  part 
which  included   Batanea,  Trachonitis,  and  Aura- 


71 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Italy,  the  Beforamtloii  in 
Ivo  of  Ohartras 


nitis;   thus  Philip  ruled  a  part  of  the  Iturean  ter- 

ritoiy,  a  fact  which  partly  justifies  the  statement 

in  Luke  iii.  1.  (H.  Guthe.) 

Bibuoorapht:  G.   A.   Smith,   Hiatorieal  Oeogruphy  of  the 

Holy  Land,  pp.  544  aqq.,  London,  1897;    F.  M  Outer,  De 

rebua  ituraeorum,  Copenhagen,  1824;  M.  Krenkel,  Joatpkua 

U9»d  Lukat,  pp.  9(M)5,  Leipsie,  1804;   SohOier,  GeediichU, 

L  707-725.  Eng.  tnnal.,  I.,  u.  32&-344:   DB,  IL  521-522; 

EB,  U.  2296-2297. 

IVERACH,  iv'er-OH,  JAMES:  United  Free  Pres- 
byterian Churchy  Scotlfljid;  b.  in  Caithness  June  1, 
1S39.  He  was  educated  at  the  University  of 
Edinbui*gh  (1859-63)  and  New  College,  Edinburgh 
(1863-67),  and  was  ordained  to  the  ministry  in 
1869.  He  held  pastorates  at  West  Calder,  Edin- 
burgh (1869-74),  and  Ferryhill,  Aberdeen  (1874- 
1887);  was  professor  of  apologetics  and  dogmatics 
in  United  Free  Church  College,  Aberdeen  (1887- 
1907),  and  principal  (1905-07);  and  has  been  pro- 
fessor of  New-Testament  language  and  literature 
(since  1907).  He  has  written  Life  of  Moses  (Lon- 
don, 1881);  Is  God  Knawablef  (1884);  St.  Paul, 
his  Life  and  Times  (1890);  Christianity  and  Evo- 
lution (1894);  The  Truth  of  Christianity  (1895); 
Theisniy  in  the  Light  of  Present  Science  and  Phi- 
losophy (1900);  Descartes,  Spinoza,  and  the  New 
Philosophy  (1904);  and  Other  Side  of  Greatness,  and 
Other  Sermons  (1906). 

IVES,  aivz,  LEVI  SILLIHAN:  Roman  Catholic; 
b.  at  Meriden,  Conn.,  Sept.  16,  1797;  d.  in  New 
York  Oct.  13,  1867.  He  served  for  about  a  year  in 
the  War  of  1812  and  subsequently  studied  at  Hamil- 
ton College.  He  was  originally  a  Presbyterian,  but 
joined  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  1819. 
After  taking  orders  in  1822,  he  held  charges  at 
Batavia,  N.  Y.,  Philadelphia,  and  Lancaster,  Pa., 
and  in  New  York,  till  1831,  when  he  became  bishop 
of  North  Carolina.  He  displayed  great  zeal  and 
ability  in  the  religious  education  of  the  slaves,  but 
his  Tractarian  views  brought  him  into  serious 
difficulties.  While  in  Rome  in  1852  he  formally 
submitted  to  the  pope  and  became  a  Roman  Cath- 
olic. The  following  October  he  was  solemnly  de- 
posed from  his  episcopal  office.  On  his  return  to 
New  York  he  became  professor  of  rhetoric  in  St. 
Joseph's  Seminary,  Yonkers,  N.  Y.,  also  lecturer 
on  English  literature  and  rhetoric  in  the  Convent 
•  of  the  Sacred  Heart.  He  was  prominent  in  the 
charitable  work  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church. 
He  published  New  Manual  of  Private  Devotions 
(New  York,  1831);  The  Apostles'  Doctnne  and 
Fellowship:  Five  Sermons  {IM^);  On  the  Obedience 
qf  Faith  (1849);  and  The  Trials  of  a  Mind  in  its 
Progress  to  Catholicism  (Boston,  1853;  London,  1854). 
Bibuographt:  W.  8.  Perry,    The  Epiaeopate  in  Amenoa^ 

p.  57.  New  York,  1895. 

IVDfEY,  JOSEPH:  English  Baptist  historian; 
b.  at  Ringwood  (17  m.  w.s.w.  of  Southampton)  May 
22,  1773;  d.  in  London  Feb.  8,  1834.  In  early  life 
he  followed  his  father's  trade,  that  of  a  tailor,  at 
Lymington  and  Portsea;  becune  a  church-member 
in  1790,  an  itinerant  minister  in  1794,  assistant  min- 
ister at  Wallingford,  Berkshire,  in  1803;  and  pas- 
tor of  the  Baptist  church  in  Eagle  Street,  Holbom, 
Ix>ndon,  in  1805.  He  was  a  pronounced  opponent 
of  Roman  Catholicism,  and  so  denounced  the  re- 
peal of  the  Test  and  Corporation  Acts;  he  was  also 


interested  in  the  abolition  of  slavery  and  in  mission- 
ary operations.  His  chief  significance  is  as  historian 
of  his  denomination,  by  his  History  of  the  English 
Baptists  (4  vols.,  London,  1834),  which,  however, 
is  criticised  as  to  be  used  with  caution  on  account 
of  its  mistakes.  He  wrote  on  other  subjects  quite 
voluminously,  his  works  including  Brief  Sketch  of 
the  History  of  Dissenters  (1810),  and  John  Milton, 
his  Life  and  Times  (1833). 

BiBuoaRAPBT:  Q.  Pritchard,  Memoir  of  the  Life  and  Wri- 
tinge  of  .  .  »  Joetph  Ivimey,  London,  1835;  DNB,  rrix. 
81-82. 

IVO,  !"v6',  OF  CHARTRES  (TVO  or  YVO  CAR- 
NQTENSIS):  Bishop  of  Chartres  (47  m.  s-w.  of 
Paris);  b.  in  the  district  of  Beauvais  c.  1040;  d. 
Dec.  23, 1116.  He  studied  under  Lanfranc  at  Bee, 
became  a  canon  at  Nesle  in  Picardy,  then  provost 
of  the  abbey  of  St.  Quentin  in  Beauvais  c.  1078,  and 
bishop  of  Chartres  in  1090.  As  the  bishop  before 
him  had  been  deposed  for  simony,  and  oonmianded 
some  support,  Ivo's  election  was  contested;  but  his 
cause  was  espoused  by  Pope  Urban  II.,  who  had 
given  him  consecration.  The  same  pope  protected 
him  when  subjected  to  arrest  by  King  Philip  I.  of 
France,  because  Ivo  had  not  acquiesced  in  the  repu- 
diation of  Queen  Bertha,  and  the  king's  liaison  with 
Countess  Bertrada  of  Anjou.  In  the  investiture 
strife  (see  Investiture),  Ivo  took  a  stand  of  saga- 
cious mediation  between  the  rights  of  the  State 
and  the  (^uroh  (cf.  his  Epist.  ad  Hugonem  areki- 
episcopum  Lugdunensem  in  MGH,  Lib,  de  lite,  ii., 
1893,  pp.  642,  649,  and  his  letter  of  1106  to  Pope 
Paschal  II.  in  MPL,  cbdi.  19).  When  subsequently 
Paschal  II.  was  sharply  attacked  for  his  attitude 
to  Emperor  Henry  V.,  in  the  year  1111,  Ivo  vin- 
dicated him,  and  frustrated  the  design  of  Arch- 
bishop Joscerannus  of  Lyons,  who  aimed  to  have 
Paschal's  concessions  to  Henry  adjudged  heretical 
by  means  of  a  great  French  council  (MGH,  ut  sup., 
pp.  649  sqq.).  Ivo  was  highly  esteemed  in  France, 
and  was  also  on  friendly  terms  with  Anselm  of 
Canterbury.  The  date  of  his  canonization  is  un- 
certain;  his  day  is  May  20. 

The  most  important  among  Ivo's  writings  are  his 
collections  of  canons,  wherein  he  anticipated  Qrar 
tian,  the  CoUectio  tripartita,  the  Decretum,  and  the 
Panormia.  Both  as  reflecting  his  own  life  and  as 
bearing  upon  the  history  of  his  time,  his  letters  are 
of  weight;  and  there  are  also  twenty-four  of  his 
sermons  preserved,  some  of  which  are  detailed 
treatises  on  dogmatic  and  litui^cal  questions.  He 
also  wrote  against  Berengar  of  Tours.  Certain  his- 
torical works  of  his  friend,  Hugo  of  Fleuiy,  have 
been  attributed  to  him  erroneously.   Cabl  Mirbt. 

Bxbuoorapht:  The  works,  first  printed  Paris,  1647,  are 
reprinted  with  a  life  in  MPL,  elzi-dxii.  Consult:  A. 
Abry,  Foes  de  Chartree,  eavie  el  eee  ouvragee,  Strasburg, 
1841;  F.  Ritske,  De  Ivone,  epiecopo  Camoterm,  Wratis- 
law,  1863;  J.  Dombrowski,  Ivo,  Bieehofvon  Chartres,  eein 
Leben  uni  Wirken,  BresUu,  1881;  A.  Sieber,  Bieehaf  Ivo 
von  Chartree,  Kftnigsbers.  1895;  R.  von  Scherer,  Handhuth 
dee  KtrdunreeMe,  vol  i..  53,  Oras,  1886;  C.  Mirbt,  Die 
PuhliMietik  im  Zeiialier  Gregore  VII.,  pp.  512  sqq.,  Leipsio, 
1894;  F.  Foumier,  Lee  CoUectione  eanoniquee  aUrituSee  h 
Yvee  de  Chartree,  in  Biblioth^que  de  Vieole  dee  Chartree, 
vols.  lvii.-lyiii.  1896-97;  idem,  Yvee  de  Chartree  et  U 
droit  canonique,  in  Revue  dee  queetione  hietoriquee,  bcviL* 
1898;  Hauek,  KD,  iil  862.  904,  914;  and  Utentura  indi- 
cated in  Richardson,  Eneydopadia,  p.  515. 


THE  NEW   SCHAFF-HERZOG 


72 


J :  The  ssrmbol  employed  to  designate  the  Jeho vis- 
tio  (Yahwistic,  Judean)  document  which,  according 
to  the  critical  school,  is  one  of  the  components  of 
the  Hexateuch  (q.v.).  See  Hbbrew  Languaqb 
AND  Literature,  II.,  §  4. 

JABAL.    See  Cain,  Kenitbs. 

JABIN,  jd^bin:  A  Canaanitic  king  who  appears  in 
two  narratives  in  the  Old  Testament  (Josh.  zi.  1-15, 
and  Judges  iv.  1  sqq.).  In  the  first  he  appears  as 
overlord  of  the  Canaanitic  kings  of  the  region  of 
Mt.  Naphtali,  with  his  capital  at  Hazor,  and  as 
conquered  by  Joshua  at  the  "  waters  of  Merom." 
This  narrative  purports  to  give  the  account  of  the 
conquest  of  northern  Canaan  as  Josh.  x.  to  give 
that  of  the  south.  In  Judges  iv.  the  history  of 
Jabin  is  peculiarly  bound  up  with  that  of  Sisera 
in  the  narrative  of  Deborah  and  Barak's  campaign. 
Verses  2  and  7  make  Sisera  Jabin 's  general,  though 
in  the  song  in  chap.  v.  Sisera  is  king  and  in  com- 
mand of  kings.  Similarly  in  iv.  12-22  Sisera  is 
the  chief  personage,  while  Jabin  hardly  appears, 
verse  17b  being  an  editorial  addition,  so  that  the 
narrative  concerning  Sisera  is  in  chap.  iv.  the  basis 
of  the  story.  Two  hypotheses  have  been  held  con- 
cerning this  Jabin:  that  the  two  accounts  refer  to 
different  persons,  and  that  they  refer  to  the  same 
person.  Judges  iv.  still  retains  a  trace  of  the 
correct  tradition  that  after  the  time  of  Joshua  a 
war  was  conducted  against  Jabin,  king  of  Hazor. 

(H.  Guthb.) 

Bibuoorafht:  Bandes  H.  Guthe,  Oeachiehte  de§  VoUcea 
IwraO,  pp.  51HS2,  Fraiburg.  1890;  DB,  ii.  524;  EB,  ii. 
2302-03,  2036-37;  and  C.  F.  Kent,  StudMea  Old  TeUa- 
mtiUt  vol.  i.,  1904,  the  oommentariea  on  Joshua  and  Judges 
should  be  consulted,  particularly  those  on  Judges  by  Budde 
and  Moore,  and  the  works  on  the  history  of  Israel,  espe- 
cially those  of  Ewald,  Kittel  and  Wellhausen. 

JABLOITSKI,  yfl-blen'ski,  DARIEL  ERNST:  Biflhop 
of  the  Moravians;  b.  at  Nassenhuben,  near  Danzig, 
Nov.  20,  1660;  d.  at  Berlin  May  25,  1741.  He  was 
educated  at  the  gynmasium  of  Lissa  and  studied 
theology  at  Frankfort-on-the-Oder  and  at  Oxford. 
In  1683  he  was  appointed  Reformed  preacher  in 
Magdeburg,  and  in  1686  became  pastor  of  the  Polish 
congregation  and  rector  of  the  gsnnnasium  at  Lissa. 
In  1691  he  went  to  Prussia  and  became  court 
preacher  at  K6nigsberg;  but  he  always  remained 
faithful  to  the  Moravians  in  their  exile  and  used  his 
political  influence  to  assist  them  in  every  way. 
At  the  synod  of  Lissa  in  1699  he  was  chosen  senior 
of  the  Unity  and  received  their  episcopal  ordination. 
In  1737  he  consecrated  Count  Zinsendorf  bishop, 
and  thus  he  formed  the  transition  from  the  old 
stock  of  the  Moravian  Brethren  to  the  younger 
branch  of  the  Hermhuters.  EUs  influence  upon  the 
development  of  the  Prussian  state  is  still  more 
important.  Since  Sigismund  of  Brandenburg  had 
adopted  the  Reformed  creed  (1613;  see  Siois- 
MUND,  Johann),  a  union  of  the  evangelical  denomi- 
nations had  become  a  necessity  for  the  Hohenzol- 
lems,  and  Jablonski  was  the  man  to  give  this 
tendency  a  concrete  form  and  a  theological  basis. 
Similar  efforts  were  made  at  the  court  of  Hanover 


by  Leibnitz  and  by  Molanus  (qq.v.).  Anthony 
Ulrich  of  Brunswick  and  the  court  of  Gotha  also 
sympathized  with  these  unionistic  movements.  In 
the  meantime  Jablonski  had  become  court  preacher 
at  Berlin  (1697),  and  as  Brandenbuiig  was  being 
transformed  about  this  time  into  the  state  of 
Prussia,  he  considered  it  his  mission  to  unite  all 
Protestants  under  the  leadership  of  Prussia.  He  en- 
tered into  negotiations  with  Leibnitz  and  Molanus, 
but  the  undertaking  failed  on  account  of  the  oppo- 
sition of  the  deigy.  Another  ideal  which  Jablonski 
tried  to  realize  was  the  introduction  of  the  episco- 
pate into  the  Evangelical  Church,  which  met  a  re- 
sponse in  King  Frederick's  appointment  of  his  court 
preacher's  bishops.  But  failure  resulted  in  1713  when 
Frederick  William  I.  ascended  the  throne.  Against 
the  demoraliEation  of  church  life  Jablonski  at- 
tempted to  introduce  ethical  societies  after  the 
model  of  the  English  societies  for  the  reformation  of 
manners.  The  Berlin  Academy  of  Sciences  owes 
its  existence  to  his  advocacy  with  that  of  Leibnitz. 
Jablonski  was  its  first  vice-president  and  director  of 
the  philologico-historical  class,  and  in  1733  he  be- 
came its  president.  His  literary  activity  was  not 
less  important.  He  made  a  careful  edition  of  the 
Old-Testament  text  which  J.  H.  Michaelis  adopted 
as  the  basis  of  his  well-known  KammentaHfibel 
(1720);  at  Jablonski's  instigation  the  Berlin  edition 
of  the  Babylonian  Talmud  was  printed.  He  trans- 
lated Bentley's  Confviation  of  Atheism  into  Latin 
(Berlin,  1696);  his /ftstorm  cofwenvu^iSefKiomirtefwis 
(Berlin,  1731)  is  important  in  the  sphere  of  church 
history,  likewise  his  Jura  et  Itbertatea  dissidentxutn 
in  regno  Poloniae  (1708).  (P.  Kleinert.) 

Bibuoorapht:  J.  E.  Kapp,  Sammluno  vertratUer  Britfe  des 
Preiherm  wm  LeibniU  und  Hofpndii/era  Jablontki^  Leip- 
ric  1747;  C.  W.  Hering,  OtuhiekU  dm-  XrircMicAe  Unions- 
verniehe,  ii.  313  sqq..  ib.  1838;  O.  E.  Guhrauer,  O.  W. 
Freiherr  von  LeibnitM,  ii.  177  sqq.,  Breslau,  1846;  A.  L. 
Riohter,  OetdiidUe  der  evanoeliadten  KirchenverfoMuno  in 
DmtUdUand,  Leipsic.  1851;  F.  Brandes.  Oe§ehiehU  der 
kirehliehen  PolitUc  dea  Hauaet  Brandenburg,  vol.  i.,  Gotha, 
1872;  A.  Ritsohl.  OMchidUe  dea  Pieiiamua,  iii.  302  sqq.. 
Bonn,  1886;  J.  Kvacala,  FCnfzig  Jahra  im  preuaaiaehen 
Hofprediifardienaiet  Dorpat,  1806;  idem,  Neua  B^trikge 
Mum  Briefweehaal  swiachen  D.  B.  JahUmaki  und  G.  W.  , 
LeibniU,  ib.  1800. 

JACKSON,  FRBDERICK  JOHN  FOAKES:  Church 
of  England;  b.  at  Ipswich  (18  m.  s.e.  of  Bury  St. 
Edmunds),  Suffolk,  Aug.  10,  1855.  He  was  edu- 
cated at  Eton  and  at  Trinity  College,  Cambridge 
(B.A.,  1879),  and  was  curate  of  Ottershaw,  Win- 
chester (1879-181),  St.  QUes,  Cambridge  (188^-84), 
and  St.  Botolph's,  Cambridge  (1884-91).  He  was 
appointed  lecturer  on  divinity  in  Jesus  College, 
Cambridge,  was  elected  fellow  in  1886,  and  made 
dean  in  1895  and  tutor  in  the  following  year.  Sinoe 
1897  he  has  been  examining  chaplain  to  the  bishop 
of  Peterborough,  since  1901  honorary  canon  of 
Peterborough  cathedral,  and  was  Hulaean  lec- 
turer in  1902.  Theologically  he  is  an  orthodox 
member  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  heartily 
accepts  her  dogmatic  teachings.  He  has  written 
History  of  the  Christian  Church  (London,  1891); 
Biblical  History  af  the  Hebrmoa  (Cambridge,  1903); 


78 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


i 


'aokflon 


and  Christian  DifficuUiea  in  the  Second  and  Twen- 
tieth Centuries  (Hulsean  lectures  for  1902;  Lon- 
don, 1903). 

JACKSOH,  GEORGE  ANSOH :  Congregationalist; 
b.  at  North  Adams,  Mass.,  Mar.  17,  1846;  d.  at 
Swampscott,  Mass.,  May  8,  1907.  He  was  gradu- 
ated from  Yale  (Ph.B.,  1868)  and  Andover  Theolog- 
ical Seminary  (1871) ;  was  pastor  at  Leavenworth, 
Kan.  (1871-73),  Southbridge,  Mass.  (1873-78), 
and  Swampscott,  Mass.  (1878-97),  and  librarian 
of  the  Genera]  Theological  Library,  Boston,  after 
1897.  He  wrote:  The  Christian  Faith  (Boston, 
1875);  The  Apostolic  Fathers  (New  York,  1879); 
Faiherso/the  ThirdCerUury  (1881);  Post-Nicene  Greek 
Fathers  (1883);  and  Post-Nicene  Latin  Fathers  (1883). 

JACKS01f,SHBLD01f:  Presbyterian;  b.  atMina- 
ville,  N.  Y.,  May  18,  1834;  d.  at  AsheviUe,  N.  C, 
May  2,  1909.  He  was  graduated  at  Union  College 
in  1855,  and  Princeton  Theological  Seminary  in 
1858.  He  was  a  colporteur  of  the  Presbyterian 
Board  of  Publication  in  1856,  and  agent  of  the 
American  Systematic  Beneficence  Society  in  1857. 
In  1858  he  was  ordained  to  the  Presbyterian  min- 
istry, and  in  the  same  year  was  appointed  mission- 
ary to  the  Choctaw  Indians  at  Spencer  Academy, 
I.  T.  From  1859  to  1869  he  was  a  missionary  in 
western  Wisconsin  and  southern  Minnesota,  being 
also  pastor  at  La  Crescent,  Minn.,  from  1859  to  1863, 
and  an  agent  of  the  United  States  Christian  Com- 
mission to  the  Army  of  the  Cumberland  for  three 
months  in  1863,  as  well  as  associate  pastor  with 
Geoige  Ainslee  at  Rochester,  Minn.,  and  principal 
and  professor  of  higher  mathematics  at  Rochester 
Female  Institute  from  1864  to  1869.  Throughout 
this  time  be  itinerated  constantly,  and  in  these  ten 
years  organized  over  twenty  churches.  He  de- 
clined the  superintendency  of  Presbyterian  mieh 
sions  in  Minnesota  in  1864,  but  in  1869  he  accepted 
an  appointment  as  superintendent  of  Presbyterian 
missions  for  northern  and  western  Iowa,  Nebraska, 
Dakota,  Idaho,  Montana,  Wyoming,  and  Utah. 
Colorado,  New  Mexico,  Arizona,  eastern  Nevada, 
and  Alaska  were  later  added  to  his  district,  thus 
giving  him  Presbyterian  supervision  over  nearly 
half  the  territorial  area  of  the  United  States  at 
that  time.  It  was  largely  through  his  efforts  that 
the  Woman's  Board  of  Home  Missions  was  organ- 
ized in  1878.  In  1879  and  1880  he  was  commissioned 
by  the  Government  to  collect  Indian  children  from 
the  Pueblo,  Apache,  Pima,  and  Papago  tribes  for 
education  in  the  Indian  Training  Schools  at  Carlisle, 
Pa.,  and  Hampton,  Va. 

After  1877  his  main  interests  were  connected 
with  Alaska,  and  in  1879  he  was  commissioned  by 
President  Hayes,  together  with  Rev.  Dr.  Henry 
Kendall,  to  prepare  a  special  report  on  the  native 
tribes  of  BOUthcAstem  Alaska  as  a  basis  for  legis- 
lation. Six  years  later  he  established  the  first 
canoe  mail  service  in  Alaska,  and  in  the  following 
year  secured  the  enactment  of  a  law  giving  limited 
territorial  government,  and  providing  for  the  es- 
tablishment of  public  schools  in  the  same  territory. 
In  1885  he  was  appointed  General  Agent  of  Edu- 
csiticxL  in  Alaska.  In  1891  he  began  the  successful 
introduction  of  Siberian  reindeer  into  Alaska  to 


provide  the  Eskimos  with  food,  and  in  1897  was  a 
special  agent  of  the  United  States  Government  in 
transporting  a  colony  of  Laplanders  with  their 
reindeer  to  Alaska.  In  1897  he  was  commissioned 
by  the  Secretary  of  Agriculture  to  report  on  the 
agricultural  possibilities  of  the  Yukon  River,  and 
in  1899  established  the  first  reindeer  post-office 
routes  in  America. 

He  was  a  member  of  the  executive  committee 
of  the  International  Sunday  School  Association 
since  1887,  and  in  1893  was  appointed  an  advisory 
member  of  the  religious  congress  held  in  connec- 
tion with  the  Chicago  World's  Fair.  He  furnished 
exhibits  of  Alaskan  ethnology  to  every  national 
exposition  from  1885  to  1905,  and  presented  a 
valuable  collection  of  ethnological  material  to 
Princeton  Theological  Seminary,  which  was  later 
transferred  to  Princeton  University.  He  was  one 
of  the  founders  of  Westminster  College  at  Salt 
Lake  City.  He  edited  the  Rocky  Mountain  Pres- 
byterian at  Denver  from  1872  to  1882,  when  he 
presented  it  to  the  Board  of  Home  Missions  and 
edited  it  in  New  York  City  as  The  Pretbyterian 
Home  Missionary  from  1882  to  1885.  He  also 
edited  the  illustrated  missionary  monthly  North 
Star  at  Sitka,  Alaska,  from  1887  to  1894.  In  addi- 
tion to  assisting  in  editing  The  World's  Best  Orations 
(11  vols..  St.  Louis,  1899)  and  The  World's  Best  Es- 
says (10  vols.,  1900),  he  prepared  for  the  United 
States  Government  twenty  annual  reports  on  edu- 
cation in  Alaska  since  1881  and  fifteen  on  the  intro- 
duction of  domestic  reindeer  into  Alaska  since 
1890,  and  wrote  Alaska  and  Missions  on  the  North 
Pacific  Coast  (New  York,  1880). 
Bibuoorapht:  R.  L.  Stewart,  Shddon  Jaekaon,  Pathfindar 

and  ProMpedor  of  the  Muaumary  Vanowxrd  in  the  Rocky 

Mountaina  and  Alaaka,  New  York.  1908. 

JACKSOH,  THOMAS:  The  name  of  two  English 
theologians. 

1.  Church  of  England  divine;  b.  at  Witton-on- 
th&-Wear  (10  m.  s.w.  of  Durham)  Dec.  21,  1579; 
d.  Sept.  21,  1640.  He  studied  at  (Queen's  and  at 
Ck)rpus  Christi  College,  Oxford  (B.A.,  1599;  M.A., 
1603;  B.D.,  1610;  D.D.,  1622),  where  he  was  made 
probationer  fellow  in  1606  and  subsequently  re- 
peatedly elected  vice-president  of  Corpus  Christi. 
At  Oxford  he  won  a  reputation  for  his  theological 
learning  and  delivered  weekly  lectures  on  theology 
both  at  Corpus  Christi  and  at  Pembroke.  In  1623 
he  was  instituted  to  the  living  of  St.  Nicholas,  New- 
castle-on-Tyne,  and  in  1625  he  was  presented  to  the 
living  of  Winston,  Durham,  which  he  held  with 
Newcastle.  About  the  same  time  he  was  made  a 
royal  chaplain.  In  1630  he  became  president  of 
(Corpus  Christi,  a  post  which  he  filled  till  his  death. 
In  1632  he  was  presented  to  the  crown  living  of 
Witney,  Oxfordshire,  which  he  resigned  in  1637. 
He  became  prebendary  of  Winchester  in  1635,  and 
dean  of  Peterborough  in  1639.  He  was  originally  a 
Calvinist  of  Puritan  leanings,  but  later  became  an 
Arminian.  He  ranks  high  as  a  theologian,  and  his 
theology  has  particularly  conmiended  itself  to  mod- 
em High-churchmen.  EUs  great  work  was  his  Com- 
mentaries on  the  Apostles*  Creed  (12  bks.,  London, 
1613-57),  of  which  books  ten  and  eleven  were  edited 
by  Barnabas  Oley.     Book  twelve  first  appeared  in 


JaokBOA 
Jaoob 


THE  NEW  8CHAFP-HERZ0G 


74 


complete  fonn  in  Jackson's  Works  (3  vols.,  1672-73). 
Jackson  also  published  three  collections  of  sermons, 
Naxareth  and  Bethlehem  (Ozfoid,  1617);  Chriil*9 
Antwer  unto  John* a  Quution  (London,  1625);  and 
Divene  Sennon$  (Oxford,  1637).  His  Theological 
Works,  with  the  Life  of  Jackson  by  Edmund 
Vaughan,  have  been  reprinted  at  Oxfonl  (12  vols., 
1844). 
Uiblzoobapbt:    A.  k  Wood,   Athenae  OxonUnaeB,   ed.   P. 

Blin,  u.  664.  and  FaaH,  i.  281.  299.  339.  401.  4  vols.. 

London,  1813-20;  DNB,  ttix.  107-106  (when  notices  of 

Bcattereid  referenoea  are  given). 

2.  English  Wesleyan;  b.  at  Sancton,  near  Market 
Weighton  (18  m.  e.s.e.  of  York),  Yorkshire,  Dec.  12, 
1783;  d.  at  Shepherd's  Bush,  London,  Mar.  10, 1873. 
He  joined  the  Methodist  Society  in  1801.  his  educa- 
tion having  been  attained  through  reading.  From 
1804  till  1824  he  was  an  itinerant  in  the  Wesleyan 
connection,  occupying  important  circuits.  He  was 
editor  of  the  connectional  magazines,  1824-42,  and 
professor  of  divinity  in  the  Tlieological  College  at 
Richmond,  Surrey,  1842-61.  His  more  important 
works  are:  The  lAfe  of  John  Ooodwin  (London, 
1822);  Memoirs  of  the  Life  and  Writings  of  the  Rev. 
Richard  Watson  (1834);  The  Centenary  of  Wesleyan 
Methodiem  (1839);  The  Life  of  the  Rev.  Charles 
Wesley  (2  vols.,  1841);  The  Life  of  the  Rev.  Robert 
Newton  (1855);  The  Institutions  of  Christianity 
(1868);  and  Recollections  of  My  Oum  Life  and  Times 
(ed.  B.  Frankland,  1873).  Jackson  also  edited 
numerous  works,  including  The  Works  of  the  Rev. 
John  Wesley  (14  vols.,  1829-31);  A  Library  of 
Christian  Biography  (12  vols.,  1837-40);  The  Lives 
of  the  Early  Methodist  Preachers  (3  vols.,  1837- 
1838;  3d  ed.,  6  vols.,  1866-66);  Anthony  Farindon's 
Sermons  (4  vols.,  1849);  and  The  Journal  of  the 
Rev.  Charles  Wesley  (2  vols.,  1849). 
Biblioobapht:    Consult,  besides  the  Aeeottseftons.  ut  sup., 

DNB,  zxix.  108-109. 

JACOB    (or  ISRAEL),  THE  PATRIARCH. 

The  Names  and  Their  Meaning  (§  1). 
Jacob's  Youth  (|  2). 
His  Life  in  Haran  (§  3). 
His  Later  Life  (§  4). 
Characteristics  of  the  Sources  (|  5). 
Jacob's  Character  (|  6). 
Historicity  of  the  Narratives  (|  7). 

Jacob,  or  Israel,  the  son  of  Isaac,  was  the  ancestor 

who  gave  his  name  to  the  covenant  people.     Jacob 

means  "  one  who  holds  the  heel "  or 

z.  The      "  one  who  treads  on  the  heel  "  (Gen. 

Hames  and  xxv.  26),  and  is  also  explained  as  "  one 

Their       who  overreaches  "  (cf.  Jer.  ix.  4)  by 

Meaning,    means  of  his  practised  cunning  (Gen. 

xxvii.  36).    Israel,  on  the  other  hand, 

which  became  the  designation  of  the  people,  was 

given  him  by  God  as  a  special  distinction  after  he 

had  proved  his  courage  and  gained  a  victory  (Gen. 

txzii.  28).    Jacob  is  probably  an  abbreviation  of 

Jacob-el,  for,  among  the  Palestinian  towns  captured 

by  Thothmes  III.  and  mentioned  in  his  inscriptions 

at  Kamak,  names  appear  which  may  be  recognized 

as  Ya'kobh-^  and  Yoseph-d,  a  conclusion  aU  the  more 

probable  since  the  name   Ya'hubh-Uu  appears  in 

Babylonian  contract-tablets.    The  inference  usually 

drawn  from  this  inscription  that  in  the  sixteenth 

century  the  Jacob  or  Joseph  tribes  were  already 


established  in  CJanaan  is  over- hasty,  since  the  anal- 
ogy of  the  other  names  indicates  rather  that  com- 
munities are  meant.  B&thgen  explains  Jacob-el  as 
"  £1  recompenses  **\  an  alternative  is  ^'  £1  wrestles  " 
(Gen.  xxxil.  24  sqq.). 

Jacob's  youth  was  one  untiring  effort  to  secure 

for  himself  the  birthright  which  belonged  to  his 

twin-brother  Esau.    This  struggle  had 

2.  Jacob's    even   a  prenatal    origin    (Gen.   ^^xv. 
Youth.       22-23).     In  contrast  with  the  coarse 

and  violent  Esau,  Jacob  was  quiet  and 
peaceable  (Gen.  xxv.  27),  but  shrewd,  and  able  to 
use  cleverly  the  weaknesses  of  his  more  sensuous 
brother  (verse  29).  In  this  he  was  aided  by  his 
mother,  while  the  hunter  found  favor  in  the  eyes 
of  his  father.  Isaac,  deceived  by  his  wife,  unwit- 
tingly bestowed  the  blessings  of  birthright  upon 
Jacob  (Gen.  xxvii.;  see  Isaac),  who  in  consequence 
was  forced  to  abandon  for  a  time  the  land  of  promise, 
and  transferred  his  abode  to  Haran,  the  native  land 
of  his  mother.  In  the  course  of  his  wanderings 
Jacob  came  to  Bethel,  where  Yahweh  appeared  to 
him  in  a  dream. 

The  second  period  of  Jacob's  life  was  passed  with 

his  kindred  in  Haran,  where  he  founded  his  house. 

He  asked  of  Laban  as  a   reward  for 

3.  His  Life  seven   years'  labor  the  hand  of  his 
in  Haran.    beautiful  daughter,   Rachel;  but  ber 

sister  Leah  was  substituted  by  the 
mercenary  father,  and  Jacob  was  forced  to  serve 
seven  years  longer  to  gain  his  beloved  Rachel 
The  latter,  however,  was  unfruitful,  while  Leah 
brought  him  four  sons:  Reuben,  Simeon,  Levi,  and 
Judah.  As  a  result  of  a  substitution  of  slaves  for 
their  mistresses,  Jacob's  family  was  fiuther  increased 
by  four  sons,  Dan,  Naphtali,  Gad,  and  Asber. 
These  were  followed  by  two  sons  of  Leah,  Issachar 
and  Zebulun.  At  last  Rachel  bore  her  husband's 
favorite  son,  Joseph.  As  God's  blessing  seemed  to 
be  attached  to  Jacob's  person,  Laban  was  loath 
to  lose  his  services;  to  his  own  disadvantage,  how- 
ever, for  although  the  recompense  which  Jacob  re- 
quired might  seem  small,  it  always  turned  out  to 
be  unexpectedly  large,  and  though  Laban  fre- 
quently changed  the  conditions  (Gen.  xxxi.  7),  the 
advantage  was  always  with  Jacob.  The  tense  rela- 
tions between  them  hastened  Jacob's  secret  depar- 
ture with  his  wives  and  goods.  Laban  pursued  and 
overtook  him  at  the  mount  of  Gilead,  but,  although 
embittered  by  the  loss  of  his  household  gods,  which 
Rachel  had  carried  off  without  her  husband's  knowl- 
edge, he  was  forced  to  settle  the  strife  amicably. 
The  name  Gilead  (explained  as  Gal*edh,  "  hill  of 
witness,"  Gen.  xxxi.  48)  was  from  this  time  a  re- 
minder of  the  treaty  thus  concluded. 

A  third  phase  of  Jacob's  history  began  with  his 
reentranoe  into  the  promised  land  and  his  settle- 
ment in  the  heart  of  the  country.  But 
4.  His      first  an  understanding  with  Esau  was 
Later  Life,  necessary,  and  then  to  take  possession 
of  the  disputed  heritage,  for  which  a 
severe  struggle  was  required.    Jacob  succeeded  by 
the  help  of  spiritual  powers  (Gen.  xxxii.  24  sqq.). 
After  such  a  victory  no  human  being  could  do  him 
harm.    The  dreaded  Esau  received  him  kindly  and 
retired  again  to  the  desert  land  of  the  Edomites, 


75 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jaokflon 
Jacob 


whOe  Jacob  established  himself  in  Shechem,  with 
whose  inhabitants,  however,  his  sons  became  in- 
volved in  bloody  quarrels.  This  induced  Jacob  to 
depart  at  first  toward  Bethel,  where  he  made  drink- 
offerings,  according  to  his  vow,  where  also  the  Lord 
appeared  to  him  and  gave  him  the  covenant  bless- 
ings. On  their  further  journey,  the  last  stage  of 
which  was  Hebron,  Rachel  bore  Benjamin  and  died 
in  giving  him  birth.  In  Hebron  Isaac,  who  died  at 
an  advanced  age,  was  buried  by  Jacob  and  Esau. 
After  residing  for  some  time  in  Hebron,  while  his 
sons,  with  their  flocks,  wandered  through  the  land 
north  of  Shechem,  Jacob,  in  his  old  age,  transferred 
his  abode  to  £!gypt,  where  his  son  Joseph  (q.v.) 
had  attained  great  honors.  In  Beersheba  the 
patriarch  received  a  last  favorable  message  from 
his  God  (Gen.  xlvi.  1  sqq.).  In  Egypt  he  was  re- 
ceived with  favor  by  the  Pharaoh,  and  lived  in 
Goshen  (according  to  Gen.  zlvii.  28,  P)  for  seventeen 
years,  djing  at  the  age  of  147.  He  was  embalmed 
after  the  Egyptian  method,  and  brought  to  the 
famOy  tomb  and  buried  there  by  his  children. 

The  three  sources,  J,  E,  and  P,  appear  in  the  part 
of  Genesis  which  contains  the  Jacob  narratives,  to 
which  P  contributed  the  least.  J  and 
S  Chaxac-  E  do  not  always  easily  separate,  since 
teristics  they  followed  practically  the  same  trsr 
of  the  ditions;  but  in  J  the  cunning  of  Jacob 
Sources,  seems  the  motive  of  action,  while  in 
E  miraculous  interpositions  and  ap- 
pearances in  dreams  are  more  common.  In  JE  the 
hatred  of  Esau  because  of  his  exclusion  from  his 
father's  blessing  is  given  as  the  cause  of  Jacob's 
emigration  to  Haran;  in  P  the  reason  assigned  is 
dissatisfaction  on  the  part  of  lus  parents  with  the 
Hittite  marriages  of  Esau  (xxvii.  46-xxviii.  9). 
The  two  blessings,  xxvii.  27  sqq.  (JE)  and  xzviii.  3 
(P),  are  independent,  as  are  the  accounts  of  Esau's 
departure  to  Seir,  xxxvi.  6-7  (P)  and  xxxii.  3  sqq. 
(JE),  and  of  the  time  of  the  change  of  name,  xxxii. 
28  (J)  and  xxxv.  10  (P).  These  diveigenoes  show 
that  independent  traditions  were  transmitted  which 
are  followed  by  the  different  sources.  The  chro- 
nology of  Jacob's  life,  derived  mostly  from  P,  offers 
some  difficulties.  Thus,  if  from  the  130  years  of 
xlvii.  9  (Jacob's  age  when  presented  to  Pharaoh) 
be  deducted  the  seven  fruitful  and  two  unfruitful 
years,  the  thirty  years  of  Joseph  when  the  fruitful 
years  began  (xli.  46)  and  the  fourteen  years  passed 
by  Jacob  in  Haran  before  Joseph's  birth,  it  would 
appear  that  when  he  left  his  father's  house  he  was 
about  seventy-seven  years  of  age,  though  chaps, 
xxviii.  sqq.  evidently  regard  him  as  a  young  man. 
The  three  elements  of  the  patriarchal  blessing  in 
xlviii.-xlix.  combine  supplementary  details:  xlvii. 
3-6  is  assigned  to  P,  xlviii.  15-16,  20-22  to  E,  and 
xlix.  to  J.  The  post-Mosaic  authorship  assigned  to 
xlix.  (time  of  Samson  by  Bleek  and  Ewald,  time  of 
David  by  Knobel,  much  later  than  this  by  Stade) 
does  not  take  account  of  the  way  in  which  the 
Levites  are  treated. 

Jacob's  character  is  best  illustrated  by  his  double 
name.  He  is  called  Jacob  because  of  his  dexterity 
and  cunning,  which  always  give  him  the  advantage 
over  the  physically  stronger  Esau  and  over  the 
shrewd  Laban.    On  account  of  his  weakness  and 


his  subordinate  position  Jacob  accommodates  him- 
self to  the  will  of  the  stronger,  yet  always  succeeds 
in  attaining  his  end  by  courage  and 

6.  Jacob's   tenacity.  However  much  dissimulation 
Character,   there  was  in  his  conduct,  Jacob  did 

not  employ  it  for  sordid  gain.  As 
Israel  he  strives  for  the  blessing  of  God  because 
he  has  recognized  therein  the  highest  good.  He 
devotes  his  whole  energy  to  obtaining  the  blessings 
of  the  covenant  (Hos.  xii.  4-^5).  It  is  true  that 
Jacob's  character  does  not  show  the  comparative 
straightforwardness  of  Abraham,  and  therefore  he 
can  not  be  regarded  as  a  model  for  all  time.  He  is 
not  an  ideal,  even  according  to  the  standard  of 
Israelitic  ethics,  but  a  man  whose  sinful  nature 
struggles  against  his  better  self;  but  he  was  purified 
by  the  suffering  which  made  his  life  a  sadder  one 
than  that  of  his  forefathers  (xlvii.  9).  What  raises 
Jacob  above  himself  is  his  reverent,  indestructible 
longing  for  the  salvation  of  his  God,  which  after 
long  struggles  attains  complete  satisfaction. 

Whether,  and  in  what  sense,  Jacob  is  historical 

may  be  a  subject  of  debate.   The  simplicity  and  the 

unconventional  sincerity  of  these  re- 

7.  Historic-  citals  speak  in  favor  of  genuine  tradi- 
ity  of  the    tion   rather    than    of   heroic   poetry. 

ITanatives.  Some  of  the  alleged  facts  would  surely 
never  have  been  invented  in  later  times, 
as,  for  example,  the  contemporaneous  marriage  with 
two  sisters  (cf.  Rev.  xviii.  18),  or  the  distinction 
awarddd  to  Bethel  and  the  sanctuary  there  which 
was  such  an  object  of  aversion  to  the  prophets  of 
the  eighth  century.  The  attempt  to  derive  the  his- 
tory of  Jacob  from  nature-myths  has  proved  a  total 
failure.  While,  in  general,  only  the  episode  on  the 
Jabbok  (Gen.  xxxii.)  is  looked  upon  as  a  possible 
survival  of  this  nature.  Popper  has  undertaken  to 
show  that  Jacob-Israel  is  the  Asiatic  Herakles- 
Melcarth  Palaemon,  i.e.,  the  victoriously  striving 
s\m-god,  and  has  vainly  endeavored  to  bring  all 
the  details  of  the  Biblical  narrative  into  accord 
with  this  myth.  More  probable  is  the  hypothesis 
of  an  eponymous  ancestor.  In  this  way  Ewald 
saw  in  Jacob  a  vigorous  Hebrew  people  which  had 
emigrated  from  Mesopotamia  (cf.  Aram,  Arambans; 
I>eut.  xxvi.  5,  R.V.,  maigin),  coalesced  with  those  of 
the  same  race  who  had  settled  in  Canaan  at  an 
earlier  period,  and  then  proceeded  to  dominate  them, 
while  elements  of  common  ancestry  (Esau),  which 
had  entered  Canaan  at  an  earlier  period,  gradually 
withdrew  farther  and  farther  toward  the  south. 
With  the  Aramean  neighbors  to  the  north,  behind 
the  mountains  of  Gilead  (Laban) ,  the  tribe  of  Jacob 
had  many  clashes,  which  are  described  in  the  history 
of  Laban.  Stade  considers  that  Israel  was  a  tribe 
which  lived  on  the  Jabbok,  and  that  their  chief  city 
was  Mahanaim;  Jacob,  on  the  other  hand,  was  a 
tribe  of  the  country  west  of  the  Jordan,  which  lived 
in  the  neighborhood  of  Bethel.  According  to  him 
Rachel,  Leah,  Isaac,  Joseph,  and  his  brothers  were 
so  many  different  clans,  while  the  combination  of 
two  tribes  was  represented  as  a  marriage,  etc.  Ac- 
cording to  the  dominant  opinion,  later  conditions 
are  reflected  in  the  stories  of  the  patriarchs.  Well- 
hausen  believes  that  the  popular  recitals  in  regard 
to  Jacob  and  Esau  must  have  taken  form  in  the 


Jaoob  the  Patriaroh 
Jaoob  of  Bltm 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


76 


earlier  period  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  after  the 
subjugation  of  Edom.  For  Bernstein,  the  patriarch 
Jacob  and  his  history  were  invented  after  the  separa- 
tion of  the  kingdom  in  order  to  glorify  Bethel; 
and  Seinecke  even  sees  in  the  despondency  of  the 
returning  Jaoob  a  reflex  of  the  fear  of  the  exiles 
on  their  return  from  Babylon,  and  in  the  treatment 
of  the  Shechemites  by  Simeon  and  Levi  (xxxiv.) 
the  reproof  of  the  Samaritans  by  Ezra.  Apart 
from  such  fancies,  it  would  never  be  possible  to 
transform  the  natural  and  characteristic  figures  of 
an  Abraham  or  a  Jaoob  into  national  experiences 
or  the  disappointments  of  a  tribe.  Mere  invention 
being  out  of  the  question,  the  alternative  is  to 
assume  that  the  stories  deal  with  real  persons. 
Names  such  as  Jaoob-el  and  Isnirel,  which  include 
the  name  of  a  divinity,  should  be  regarded,  like 
the  name  of  Abraham,  as  originally  individual 
rather  than  ethnic.  In  this  way  Kittel,  Kloster- 
mann,  and  Ewald  have  looked  upon  the  bearers  of 
these  names  as  chiefs  who  stood  at  the  head  of 
nomadic  tribes.  In  the  traditions  of  that  far-away 
time  only  a  few  prominent  personalities  stand  out, 
while  the  tribe  which  accompanied  them  in  their 
wanderings  appears  only  in  details  of  the  narrative. 
The  historical  standard  used  in  reference  to  later 
periods  may  not  be  applied  to  primitive  traditions; 
but,  just  as  little  should  their  essentially  historical 
character  be  denied  as  being,  in  the  main,  faithful 
pictures  of  the  time  of  the  first  residence  of  the 
fathers  in  the  land  of  promise.     C.  von  Orelli. 

Bibuoorapbt:  J.  A.  Eiwnmencer,  BtUdecktea  Judenlhum, 
i.  942-043,  KenigsbetK.  1711;  C.  yon  Lengerke,  Kenaan, 
pp.  200  aqq..  ib.  1844;  L.  Diestel.  Der  Segen  JakoU, 
Brunswick.  1853;  H.  Ewmld,  GeKhidiU  dsa  VoUcm  Itrad, 
i.  412  sqq.,  489  sqq..  Hanover.  1864,  Eng.  transl..  i.  341- 
362,  London,  1883;  K.  Kohler,  Der  Segen  JakoU,  Berlin. 
1867;  A.  N.  Obbaid,  Th*  ProphBcy  of  Jacob,  Gambridce. 
1867;  A.  Bernstein,  Urgprung  der  Sagen  von  .  .  .  Jakob, 
Berlin,  1871;  J.  Hamburger,  Roal-Encyklop(kiit  dsa  Ju^ 
donihunu,  i.  643  sqq.,  Neustrelits.  1874;  A.  K6h]er,  Bib- 
lUch€  Oetehiehie  AUet  TeaUtmenU;  i.  136  sqq.,  Erlangen, 
1876;  L.  Seinecke,  (hatMAU  dsa  VoUcm  IbtoO,  I  40  sqq., 
G6ttingen,  1876;  J.  Popper.  UrBprung  dsa  Monolheia- 
mua,  pp.  346  sqq.,  Berlin,  1879;  C.  von  Orelli.  O.  T. 
Prophecy,  Edinburgh.  1885;  R.  Kittel.  Oev^idiU  der 
HttrUer,  i.  122  sqq..  Gk>tha,  1802.  Eng.  transl.,  London, 
1805;  W.  Btaerk,  Studien  tur  Religione-  und  Sprachgo- 
Khid^U  dee  A,  T.,  i.  77-83.  il  1-13,  Berlin,  1800;  C.  A. 
Briggs.  Meeeianu:  Prophecy,  New  York,  1002;  DB,  U. 
526-535;  BB,  ti.  2306-12;  JS,  vu.  10-24.  and  in  geneml 
the  works  on  the  history  of  IitmI  aa  given  under  Ahab. 

JACOB  aACOBUS)  BARADiBUS  or  ZAHZALUS. 
See  jACOBrrss. 

JACOB  CHRISTOPH  AHD  THE  COUKTER-REF- 
ORMATION  III  SWirZERLAUD:    The   Countei^ 
Reformation  found  centers  in  Switser- 
Relations   land   at    Lucerne   (see  Ctsat,  Rsn- 
Between    wabd),  and,    somewhat  later   in  the 
City  and    bishopric  of  Basel.    The  more  difficult 
Bishop,     task   presented   itself  in  Basel,  since 
here  the  issue  was  not  merely  to  re- 
store Romanism  in  a  district  ahieady  half  conquered 
by  the  Calvinists;  there  was  also  a  political  conflict 
with  the  city  of  Basel,  still  striving  after  complete 
independence  and  extension  of  its  boxmdaries.    The 
rights  of  bishop  and  municipality  often  conflicted 
even  before  the  Reformation;  within  the  episcopal 
domain,   in  the  modem  Bernese  Jura,    the  city 


possessed  sovereign  rights  at  a  good  many  places; 
the  bishop,  on  thi  other  hand,  was  not  only  the 
spiritual  lord  of  the  city,  but  was  endowed  with 
comprehensive  rights  of  sovereignty,  being  empow- 
ered to  nominate  mayor  and  council,  and  the  city 
was  pledged  to  pay  him  various  taxes  and  the 
temporal  domain  of  the  diocese  extended  up  to  the 
city  gates.  Before  the  ecclesiastical  agitation,  the 
city  of  Basel  was  striving  to  enlarge  its  possessions 
at  the  expense  of  the  bishopric  and  of  the  episcopal 
rights.  In  1521  the  municipality,  without  opposi- 
tion, relegated  all  rights  of  the  bishop  to  the 
nomination  of  mayor  and  counciL  The  introduc- 
tion of  the  Reformation  dissolved,  in  1529,  the  last 
bond  between  bishop  and  city,  and  the  chapter 
moved  over  to  Freiburg  im  Breisgau.  In  a  treaty 
with  the  city,  in  1530,  Bishop  Philip  of  Gundels- 
heim  (1527-53)  permitted  the  exercise  of  the  new 
doctrine  in  certain  districts  of  the  diocese.  The 
total  dissolution  of  the  bishopric  appeared  now  to 
be  merely  a  question  of  time.  The  city  pursued  its 
goal  quietly  but  persistently;  more  and  more  par- 
ishes were  united  with  it  in  various  ways,  but 
without  assuring  the  status  of  the  Reformation 
within  the  diocese;  the  bishopric  was  imperial  soU, 
and  the  religious  peace  of  1555  expressly  excluded 
the  adherents  of  Zwingli. 

From  1560  a  more  vigorous  church  life  was  astir 
in  Switzerland  on  the  Roman  Catholic  side;  follow- 
ing Borromeo's  visit  to  St.  Gall,  Ein- 
Jacob      siedeln.    and    Liueme    in    1571,    the 

Christoph  Counter-Reformation  distinctly  begins 
Introduces  to  be  perceptible  in  the  original  cantons, 

the  Coun-  and  even  the  neglected  diocese  of  Basel 

ter-Ref6r«  was  reached.  On  the  death  of  Bishop 
mation.  Melchior,  in  1575,  the  time  of  com- 
pliance came  to  a  dose.  At  the  ensuing 
election,  the  yoimgest  of  the  canons,  Jaoob  Chris- 
toph Blarer  of  Wartensee  (b.  1542),  with  urgent  ad- 
monitions, elicited  from  his  colleagues  the  promise 
to  labor  to  restore  the  right  belief,  and  then  became 
the  electors'  choice  (June  22,  1575).  It  was  no  easy 
task  that  he  set  for  himself;  the  bishopric  was  in- 
volved in  debt  and  ecclesiastically  in  confusion,  and 
the  dty  imquestionably  had  the  ascendancy.  At 
first  Jacob  Christoph  acted  in  a  friendly  manner 
toward  the  dty,  but  he  inquired  into  the  patronal 
privileges  of  the  diocese  and  their  legal  bases.  Rela- 
tions to  the  instigator  and  promoter  of  the  Swiss 
Coxmter-Reformation  became  visible;  it  was  Carlo 
Borromeo  of  whom  Jacob  Christoph  requested 
synodical  by-laws,  and  the  decrees  of  the  Council 
of  Trent  were  proclaimed  in  the  diocese.  The 
decisive  step  which  he  ventured  was  the  conclusion 
of  a  league  with  the  Roman  Catholic  cantons  of 
the  confederacy,  Sept.,  1579.  This  league  was  a 
significant  fact;  the  Roman  Catholic  d^ricts  of 
western  Switserland,  Fribourg,  and  Soleure,  until 
then  isolated  between  Protestant  districts,  gained 
a  territorial  connection  with  these  new  allies;  the 
passage  to  France,  a  matter  of  great  importance  for 
the  Roman  Catholic  Swiss  mercenaries,  was  thereby 
secured;  and  against  the  dty  of  Basel  and  its  de- 
mand for  the  conversion  of  the  diocese  to  the  Protes- 
tant cause  stood  henceforth  the  combined  Roman 
Catholic  federation.    Indeed,  the  treaty  of  alliance 


77 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jacob  the  Patrlar^ 
Jacob  of  Bits 


was  framed  expressly  for  reciprocal  protection  in 
religious  concerns,  even  against  members  of  the 
confederacy,  and  for  the  recovery  of  apostate  sub- 
jects; only  the  bishop  was  not  to  use  force  without 
the  allies'  consent.  In  1580  he  came  out  openly 
with  his  designs;  he  solenmly  excommunicated  the 
prominent  adherents  of  the  Reformation  in  Pruntrut, 
summoned  the  Protestant  congregations  of  the 
diocese  to  return  to  the  Roman  Church,  dismissed 
the  Protestant  preachers,  reinstated  Roman  worship 
in  certain  places,  and  even  preached  himself,  at 
the  most  endangered  spots.  The  Jesuit  Canisius 
devised  a  catechism  for  the  bishopric;  a  synod, 
attended  by  two  hundred  priests,  convened  at 
Delsbeig,  in  Apr.,  1581,  and  conferred  concerning 
a  diocesan  visitation,  the  reform  of  the  hierarchy, 
synodical  by-laws,  and  the  revision  of  the  litur- 
gical books. 

The  city  of  Basel  and  the  Protestant  cantons  had 
not  failed  to  remonstrate  when  the  bishop's  first 
steps  to  repress  the  new  doctrine  be- 
Setdement  came  known.   In  reply  Jacob  Chnstoph 
of  the      affirmed  his   rights.     Disturbances  in 
Contentbn  the  districts   affected  by  the  bishop 
Between    then  moved   the  citizens  of  Basel  to 
City  and    bring  their  grievances  before  the  diet 
Bisfaop.     of  the  confederacy.    A  court  of  arbitra- 
tion was  accordingly  appointed,  which, 
in  the  course  of  two  years'  proceedings,  brought 
about  a  solution  of  the  contention,  in  1585.    Two 
treaties  were  concluded:   the  first  secured  to  the 
city  of  Basel  the  cession  of  all  episcopal  claims  to 
sovereignty,  both  in  the  city  and  in  the  Sissgau 
and  certain  neighboring  districts,  for  200,000  florins; 
on  its  part  the  dty  renounced  all  sovereignty  rights 
within  the  diocese.    The  cathedral  chapter,  in  com- 
pensation for  its  ancient  rights  in  the  city,  was  to 
receive  an  indenmity  of  50,000  florins.     In  the 
second  treaty  it  was  provided  that  the  patronal 
privileges  between  Basel  and  congregations  of  the 
diocese  should  indeed  still  nominally  exist,   but 
that  no  right  of  the  bishop  should  be  thereby  in- 
fringed, and  that  the  dty  should  be  forbidden  to 
protect  subjects  against  the  bishop;   in  return,  the 
bishop  pledged  himself  to  suffer  the  subjects  of 
the  dty  to  adhere  to  their  own  religion,  merely 
reserving  to  himself  the  right  of  reinstating  Roman 
Catholic  worship.    Every  one  was  to  enjoy  freedom 
of  choice  in  religion,  and  neither  side  should  injure 
the  other. 

Although  both  the  cathedral  chapter  and  the  pope 
protested  against  these  treaties,  it  nevertheless 
appeared  that  they  indicated  the  only  proper  course 
of  action.  The  cession  of  imtenable  rights  and  titles 
of  possesdon  made  the  bishop  unlimited  lord  in  his 
domain.  The  dty  lost  its  influence  over  episcopal 
subjects.  The  prosecution  of  church  reform  no 
longer  encoimtered  insurmountable  opposition; 
everywhere  in  the  diocese  the  Roman  Churoh  re- 
covered firm  groimd,  and  the  number  of  Protestants 
continually  decreased.  Although  the  treaty  allowed 
the  Evangelicals  of  Basel  free  exercise  of  religion, 
it  soon  appeared  that  the  bishop,  in  virtue  of  his 
conceded  right  of  instituting  Roman  Catholic  wor- 
ship collaterally  with  the  Evangelical,  possBBsed 
the  nUBaoB  of  ^adiially  abolishing  the  latter.    The 


Evangelical  subjects  were  everywhere  confronted 
with  the  bishop's  Roman  Catholic  officials,  from 
whom  they  could  obtain  justice  only  with  difficulty. 
Though  the  Reformation  maintained  itself  in  most 
places  to  about  1595,  it  was  nevertheless  constantly 
decreasing,  and  at  last  quite  vanished. 

Walter  Goetz. 

Biblioobapht:  P.  Oeh«,  OMcfndUe  der  Stadt  und  Lani- 
•duifl  Baael,  vl.  vi..  Berlin.  1820;  J.  Burokhardt.  Die 
Oeoinnfonnaiian  ...  am  Bnde  dm  10.  JakrhunderU^ 
Basel,  1855;  A.  P.  von  Seceseer,  Ludtmo  Pfvff^  und 
mne  Zeit,  vols.  ii.-iiL.  Bern,  1880-82;  L.  Vautrey,  HUL 
de»  iviquM  d€  Bale,  vol.  ii.,  Einsiedeln,   1884. 

JACOB  (JAXBS)  OF  EDESSA  (Lat.  Jacobus 
Edeaaenus  or  Orrhoenua;  Syr.  Urhaya;  Arab,  al- 
Rahawi) :  The  most  important  of  all  Syriac  writers 
with  the  exception  of  Bar  Hebrseus  (see  Abulfa- 
RAj);  b.  at  Indaba,  near  Antioch,  c.  633;  d.  June  5, 
708.  The  Syriac  and  Arabic  names  are  derived 
from  the  older  name  for  Edessa.  He  began  his 
studies  in  a  monastery  near  Kinnesrin  and  finished 
them  in  Alexandria.  In  684  or  687  he  became  bishop 
of  Edessa,  but  retired  after  four  years;  he  was  too 
severe  for  his  clei^gy  and  burned  the  canons  before 
the  house  of  the  patriaroh  as  useless  because  not 
kept.  For  eleven  years  he  Uved  as  teacher  of  the 
monks  in  the  monastery  of  Eusebona,  and  then  for 
nine  years  in  that  of  Telleda.  On  the  death  of 
Habib,  his  successor  as  bishop  of  Edessa,  he  was 
recalled,  but  died  four  months  later  while  transport- 
ing his  library  to  the  city.  Jacob  belonged  to  the 
monophysitic  branch  of  the  Syrian  Churoh,  but  is 
highly  esteemed  also  by  the  Maronites.  He  was  a 
"  man  of  three  tongues,"  a  theologian,  historian, 
philosopher,  and  grammarian — in  many  respects 
the  Jerome  of  the  S3rrians.  His  numerous  writings 
(see  Bibliography)  are  not  yet  all  published. 

E.  Nestle. 

Biblzoorapht:  The  works  of  Jaoob,  not  all  published,  in- 
clude one  of  the  earliest  of  Syriac  grammars,  the  extant 
fragments  ed.  W.  Wright,  London,  1871,  and  A.  Merx  in 
Hiatoria  artu  grammaHcae  apud  Syro9,  Leipsic,  1871; 
grammatical  tracts,  ed.  J.  P.  Martin,  London,  1869,  and 
G.  Phillips.  2  parts,  Edinburgh,  1860-70;  Scholia  on  the 
Old  and  the  New  Testaments,  ed.  Phillips,  London,  1864; 
an  exegetical  work  on  the  Hexaemeron,  ed.  with  transl., 
A.  Hjelt,  Helsingfors,  1892.  On  his  transl.  of  the  Cate- 
gories and  Analytics  of  Aristotle  S.  SchQler  has  a  disser- 
tation, Erlangen,  1897;  on  his  correspondence.  Journal 
cf  Sacnd  JJUraiure,  new  series,  x  (1867),  430;  ZDMG, 
xxiv  (1870),  261,  xxxii  (1878).  465,  736;  on  the  chrono- 
logical canon,  £.  W.  Brooks,  in  ZDMO,  liii  (1899),  261. 
634,  660;  on  his  translation  of  the  Bible,  Ugolini  in  Orient 
CAHstianus,  ii.  2;  on  his  ecclesiastical  canons,  the  Germ, 
transl.  of  C.  Kayser.  Leipsic.  1886.  The  Carmen  de  fide 
contra  Neetorium  is  not  his,  nor  the  legend  on  the  sons  of 
Rechab.  A.  L.  Frothingham,  The  Bxiatence  of  America 
Known  early  in  the  ChriUian  Sra^  in  the  American  Jour- 
nal cf  ArduieolooVt  iv.  1888,  interprets  a  passage  in  the 
Hexaemeron.  Consult:  J.  S.  Assemani,  Bibliotheca  orien- 
iaHa,  I  46»-494,  Rome,  1719;  W.  Wright.  Catalogue  of 
Syriac  M8S.,  London,  1870-72;  DCB,  iii.  332-335  (quite 
fuU). 

JACOB  OF   ELTZ  AlID  THE  COUKTER-REF- 
ORMATION   IN  TREVES:    The  Reformation  no- 
where gained  firm  footing  in  the  arch- 
AggreasiTe  diocese  of  Treves,  and  the   principal 
Meamsres.    work  of  the  Counter-Reformation  there 
was  to  renovate  the  ancient  regime. 
To  this  Usk  Archbishop  Jacob  III.  of  Eltz  (1567- 
1581)  applied  himself.    Bom  in  1510,  of  tax  old 


Jaoob  of  SltB 
Jaoob  of  BmrvLg 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


TB 


family  of  Treves,  he  rose  early  to  the  rank  of  a  preb- 
endary of  the  cathedral  and,  in  1647,  to  that  of 
dean  of  the  chapter.  After  he  was  elected  archbish- 
op, Apr.  7, 1667,  he  sought  to  secure  his  position  by 
forming  alliances  with  the  strictly  Roman  Catholic 
states;  in  1669  he  proposed  a  Catholic  league  with 
the  Duke  of  Alva  in  Brussels;  and  when,  in  the 
same  year,  by  inspiration  from  the  court  of  Munich, 
n^otiations  began  with  a  view  to  the  extension  of 
the  Landsberg  League,  he  was  one  of  the  most 
zealous  advocates  for  the  admission  of  Alva  to  this 
league.  But,  owing  to  opposition  on  the  Protestant 
and  imperial  side,  the  extensive  plans  made  resulted 
in  no  more  than  the  accession  to  the  league  of  the 
two  electors  of  Treves  and  Mains.  Under  such 
conditions  the  league  could  not  be  what  had  been 
hoped,  and  Jacob  lost  interest  in  it,  although  there 
still  survived  a  close  bond  between  him  and  the 
courts  of  Brussels  and  Munich,  the  two  centers  of 
the  Roman  Catholic  policy  in  respect  to  the  empire. 
He  supported,  as  far  as  possible,  the  Bavarian  hopes 
with  reference  to  Cologne  (see  Gebhabd  II.),  while 
both  in  advance  of  the  imperial  diets  and  pending 
their  sessions  he  resisted  every  concession  to  the 
Protestants  that  overstepped  the  terms  of  the 
religious  peace.  In  1668  Roman  Catholic  worship 
was  restored  under  the  leadership  of  the  Jesuit 
Tyraeus,  in  Neumagen,  where  the  Count  of  Wittgen- 
stein had  procured  an  entrance  for  the  new  doc- 
trines; and  likewise  the  domain  of  the  sometime 
imperial  abbey  of  PrUm  was  cleansed  of  all  heresy 
when,  in  1676,  it  became  incorporated  with  the 
electorate.  In  1671  Jacob  removed  all  non-Catholics 
from  his  court,  a  measure  hitting  mainly  the  nobil- 
ity. In  1672  the  order  was  issued  that  whoever 
desired  to  be  received  as  citizen  or  inhabitant  any- 
where in  the  electorate  must  establish  his  Catholic 
faith.  In  1677  the  papal  nimcio,  Portia,  could 
report  that  the  electorate  was  free  from  all  heresies. 
Jacob's  further  activity  had  to  do  with  the  reform 
of  his  own  Church. 

At  Easter,  1569,  he  was  the  first  in  Germany  who 

solemnly  swore  to  the  decrees  of  Trent.    Between 

Apr.  and  Oct.,  1569,  the  council's  de- 

Refonn  dsions  were  announced  in  all  parishes 
of  the      of  the  electorate.    A  lituigy  elaborated 

Church,  by  Jacob  himself,  with  the  assistance 
of  certain  Jesuits,  was  issued  in  1674, 
as  standard  for  worship,  moral  discipline,  and 
matrimonial  concerns.  Portia's  further  counsels 
show  why  the  previously  attempted  reforms  were 
insufficient — ^there  was  lacking  a  competent  clergy. 
What  ecclesiastics  were  then  available  shared,  for 
the  most  part,  the  general  corruption  of  the  Roman 
priests.  Jacob,  too,  had  directed  his  attention  to 
this  point  at  the  very  outset;  he  had  sent  for  six 
scholars  from  the  Roman  Collegium  Germanicum 
as  assistants  in  1668,  and  these  were  duly  followed 
by  others.  Moreover,  the  Jesuits  of  Treves,  where 
there  had  been  a  Jesuit  establishment  since  1660, 
stood  in  high  honor  with  Jacob;  in  1570  he  fitted  up 
for  them  the  Minorite  cloister  in  Treves,  adding 
wealthy  endowments,  so  that  their  school  soon 
flourished  to  such  a  degree  that  from  1673  to  1589 
the  average  attendance  is  estimated  at  1,000  stu- 
dents annually.  In  1680  Jacob  also  founded  a  ooUejge 


for  them  at  Coblens.  Yet  the  service  rendered  by 
all  these  useful  auxiliaries  became  really  suffi- 
cient only  when  through  their  help  it  became  feasi- 
ble to  train  up  a  suitable  cleigy.  In  vain  did  Portia, 
in  1677,  bespeak  the  institution  of  a  priestly  sem- 
inary, and  the  project  was  first  realized  by  Jacob's 
like-minded  successor,  John  of  Schdnberg,  in  1585. 
Jacob's  reforming  activity  encountered  difi&culties 
in  the  attitude  of  the  Treves  cathedral  chapter, 
which  was  not  inclined  to  comply  with  the  strict 
requirements  of  the  Council  of  Trent;  and  again, 
the  necessary  placetum  regium  from  the  Brussels 
government  for  the  Luxembouig  domains  of  the 
archdiocese  occasioned  contentions  over  the  pre- 
rogatives of  the  spiritual  and  the  temporal  po^'er. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  incorporation  of  the  abbey 
of  Prtim  as  a  part  of  the  archbishopric  of  Treves 
was  a  great  gain;  its  opulent  resources  accrued  to 
the  benefit  of  Jacob's  endeavors  in  the  cause  of 
reform.  The  rejection  in  1680  by  imperial  decision 
of  the  claim  of  the  city  of  Treves  to  hold  charter 
immediately  of  the  empire  likewise  strengthened 
the  cause  of  the  Counter-Reformation. 

Jacob  died  June  4,  1681.    Neither  his  personality 
nor  his  activity  can  be  called  great;   but  the  '^ay 
once   having  been  pointed  out,   even 
Jacob's     lesser  intellects,  led  by  capable  coun- 
Achieve-    selors,  could  carry  through  the  Coun- 
ment      ter-Reformation.     True,  the  status  of 
the  archdiocese  was  not  entirely  sati^^- 
factory  at  the  time  of  Jacob's  death;  but  his  zeal- 
ously Catholic-minded  successor,  John  of  Schoii- 
berg,  continued  the  work  along  Jacob's  lines,    and 
completed  the  reforms  by  him  begun.    Out  of  the 
schools  of  the  Jesuits  there  eventually  grew  up  a 
generation  submissive  to  the  Church;  and  in  many 
channels  of  activity  the  fathers  of  the  Society  of 
Jesus  imparted  their  spirit  to  the  population   at 
large.    In  oormection  with  the  revival  of  church  life, 
Jacob  himself  had  shown  the  best  of  examples; 
the  Roman  nuncios  continually  praise  his  manner 
of  life,  his  zeal,  his  loyalty  to  the  papal  see,  and 
hold  him  up  as  a  pattern  for  all  German  prelates. 
If  he  did  not  succeed  in  accomplishing  the  reform 
completely,  the  decisive  turn  came  to  pass  under 
his  administration.  Walter  Goetz. 

Bibuoobapbt:  C.  von  Stramberg,  Rheiniaeher  ArUig%tariuM 
i.  2.  pp.  295  aqq..  Cobleni.  1863:  J.  Marx,  Ouehiehie  det 
BnatifU  Trier,  voL  i.,  Trier,  1868;  A.  Kluekliohn,  Briefe 
Friedricha  de§  Frommen,  BruiiBwick,  1867-70;  M.  Loosen, 
Der  kdlnUche  Krieg,  Gotha,  1882;  J.  Ney,  Dvb  Reformat 
turn  in  Trier,  1669,  Halle,  1906. 

JACOB  OF  JUETERBOG:  Roman  Catholic  re- 
former; b.  near  JUterbog,  Brandenburg,  1381;  d. 
at  Erfurt  1465.  As  a  youth  he  entered  the  Polish 
Cistercian  monastery  named  Paradise,  and  was 
sent  by  its  abbot  to  the  University  of  Cracow,  where 
he  became  professor  and  university  preacher.  In 
1441,  finding  the  Cistercian  discipline  too  lax,  he 
joined  the  Carthusians,  and  removed  to  the  monas- 
tery Ad  Montem  Sancti  Salvatoris  in  Erfurt.  Here 
he  was  active  not  only  as  a  writer  on  canon  law 
and  theology,  but  also  as  professor  of  law  at  the 
university.  In  1455  he  became  its  rector.  He  was 
intent  upon  a  jregeneration  of  monastic  life.  His 
propositions:  of  reform,  laid  down  in  P.etUiones 
rdigioaorutn  pro  reformatione  dui  atatus  and   De 


79 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jacob  of  Bits 
Jaoob  of  8anv 


msftgentia  pfndatarum,  rest  upon  the  view  that  the 
pope  is  only  the  most  prominent  member  of  the 
fQurch;  the  infallible  presence  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
Es  promiaed  not  to  him,  but  to  the  Church,  which 
has  the  power  to  depose  the  pope.  He  developed 
these  thoughts  in  a  reformatory  memorial  addreaaed 
in  1449  to  Pope  Nicholas  V.,  under  the  title  Avi»- 
amentum  ad  paparn  pro  reformatione  eeclesiae.  A 
later  work,  De  sepUm  sUUibua  eccUsiae,  contains  the 
passionate  lamentation  of  a  hopeless  man;  its  aged 
author  did  not  believe  any  longer  in  the  possibility 
of  a  reform.  In  spite  of  his  attempts  at  moral  re- 
forms, he  did  not  deviate  from  orthodox  Catholi- 
asm.  He  wrote  also  a  great  number  of  works  on 
canoQ  law,  ethics  and  ascetics,  which,  however, 
have  mostly  perished.  The  liberal  tendency  intro- 
duced by  bim  culminated  in  humanism  at  the  time 
of  Luther.  Paul  Tschackert. 

Bibuogbapbt:  F.  W.  Kampachulte,  Die  UnivertiUU  Er- 
fvrt,  i.  15-16.  Treves.  1858  (from  the  Roman  Catholic  point 
of  Tiew;  cf.  Xi,  vi.  1166-71);  C.  Ullmann,  Reformera  he- 
fare  ike  Reformation,  i.  208-216,  Edinbtuish.  1874  (from 
the  Protestant  viewpoint);  Pastor,  Popee,  ii.  45-49.  93, 
94,106. 

JACOB  OF  KIEF.    See  Nestor. 

JACOB  OF  HIES  (called  Jacobelltts,  from  his 
small  stature):  Bohemian  reformer,  oolaborer  of 
John  Huas;  b.  at  Mies  (15  m.  w.  of  Pilsen),  Bo- 
hemia, after  1350;  d.  at  Prague  Aug.  9,  1429.  He 
studied  at  Prague,  receiving  both  the  bachelor's 
and  the  master's  degree  in  theology,  and  became 
pastor  of  the  Church  of  St.  Michael  and  an  outspoken 
supporter  of  John  Huss.  In  1410  he  took  part  in 
the  disputations  regarding  Wyclif,  defending  the 
latter  against  archiepiscopal  condemnation.  His 
study  of  Scripture  and  the  Fathers  had  showed 
him  that  the  withholding  of  the  cup  in  the  admin- 
istration of  the  Lord's  Supper  to  the  laity  was  an 
arbitrary  measure  of  the  Roman  Church.  In  1414 
be  propounded  and  defended  his  views  in  a  public 
disputation;  and  when  Huss,  at  that  time  in  jail 
at  Constance,  accepted  them,  he  began  to  admin- 
ister the  cup  to  his  parishioners,  in  spite  of  the 
remonstrances  of  the  bishop  and  the  imiversity. 
His  example  was  quickly  followed  by  other  pastors 
in  Prague.  The  fathers  of  the  council,  who  were 
much  alarmed,  issued  a  curious  decree,  admitting 
in  theory  as  truth  what  in  practise  they  condemned 
as  heresy.  Though  Jacob  would  by  no  means  sub- 
mit, be  was  not  removed  from  his  office,  perhaps 
because  in  other  points,  as,  for  instance,  in  the  doc- 
trine of  pui^tory,  he  agreed  with  the  Roman 
Church.  During  the  last  decade  of  his  life  Jacob 
vas  regarded  as  one  of  the  foremost  of  the  Utra- 
quist  theologians.  (J.  Loserth.) 

BiBuoGSAjraiT:  E.  H.  GiUett.  Life  and  Timee  of  John  Huae, 
L,  chap.  xviiL.  iL  ehap.  iii.,  Philadelphia,  1861;  KL,  il, 
1315;  Neaoder.  Chriatian  Chwdi,  t.  297.  331.  337.  338. 
367. 

JACOB  QAMES)  OF  NISIBIS:  Bishop  of  Nisibis, 
the  chief  dty  of  Mygdonia,  in  northeastern  Meso- 
potamia; d.  338.  He  is  known  also  as  Jacob  of 
Mygdonia  and  Jacob  the  Great.  After  leading  a 
KYere  life  in  the  mountains  of  Kurdistan  with 
Eugeoius,  the  foimder  bf  Persian  monastidsm,  he 
^>cc&me  first,  or  second,  bishop  of  Nisibis  in  309. 


In  313  he  began  to  build  the  great  church,  the  ruins 
of  which  still  bear  his  name,  and  finished  it  in  320. 
He  attended  the  Council  of  Nicsea  in  325,  and  the 
sudden  death  of  Arius  (q.v.)  is  attributed  especially 
to  his  prayers  (cf .  the  Synaxarium  ecdesiae  Constanr 
tinopolitanae  [^Propylaeum  ad  ASB,  Novembria], 
ed.  H.  Delehaye,  Brussels,  1902,  Jan.  13),  as  is  also 
the  protection  of  Nisibis  against  Sapor  II.  He  was 
also  present  at  the  dedication  of  the  Church  of 
the  Holy  Sepulcher  in  Jerusalem.  No  writings  of 
Jacob's  are  known,  the  great  work  in  twenty-two 
or  twenty-three  parts  ascribed  to  him  being  really 
the  production  of  Aphraates  (q.v.),  with  whom  he 
was  early  confounded.  The  Armenians  mistakenly 
call  him  the  friend  of  Gregory  the  Illuminator. 
His  day,  with  the  Syrians,  is  the  12th  lyar  (May); 
with  the  Armenians,  Dec.  15;  with  the  Copts,  the 
18th  Tobi  (Jan.);  in  the  Greek  Church,  Jan.  13 
(14)  and  Oct.  31;  in  the  Roman  martyrology, 
July  15.  £.  Nbstlb. 

Biblzoorapht:  Ephraem.  Carmine  Niaibena,  ed.  G.  Bickell, 
pp.  11,  20.  97.  Leipaie,  1866;  Eusebiiu,  Vita  ConataTtHni, 
iv.  43.  Ens.  tranol.  in  NPNF,  2d  ser..  i.  651;  Tbeodoret, 
Hiai,  eecL,  i.  7.  ii.  26.  NPNF,  2d  ser..  iii.  44-46,  91-«2; 
PfailoBtorgiiu,  Hiat,  eeel.,  iii.  23;  GennadiuB,  De  vtr.  tl/.. 
i.;  Acta  marivrum  et  aanctorum,  ed.  P.  Bedjan.  iii.  303, 
iv.  262.  Paris.  1890-97;  J.  S.  Aaaemani,  Bibliatheca  orien- 
kUia,  i.  17,  395,  557,  u.  398,  588.  Consult:  CeUIier.  Au- 
tewra  aacria,  iii.  36^372.  525-526;  A.  P.  Stanley.  Leo- 
turea  on  the  Hiat.  of  the  Eaatem  Ckureh,  leot.  v.,  London, 
1884;   DCB,  iii.  325-327. 

JACOB  (JAMES)  OF  SARUG:  Bishop  of  Sarug; 
b.  at  Kurtam  on  the  Euphrates  toward  the  end  of 
451;  d.  Nov.  29,  521.  He  lb  mentioned  about  503 
as  visiting  presbyter  (periodeuUa)  at  the  capture  of 
Amida,  and  became  bishop  of  Batnan  (Batnae)  in 
the  district  of  Sarug  in  519.  He  was  a  most  prolific 
writer,  and  was  called  the  "  doctor  "  (malpana)  of 
the  Syrians  or  of  the  whole  Church,  and  "  the 
channel  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  His  memory  is  cele- 
brated by  Jacobites  and  Maronites  (July  or  Dec.  29) 
and  even  the  Nestorians  recognize  him,  though  he 
was  monophysite  till  his  end.  Seventy  scribes  are 
said  to  have  been  always  busy  copying  his  homilies, 
which  are  all  in  the  dodecasyllabic  meter  which 
bears  his  name.  Seven  hundred  and  sixty-three 
homilies  are  ascribed  to  him,  besides  other  works: 
Bar  Hebrsus  had  182  before  him,  and  there  are 
233  in  the  Vatican.  Four  volumes  of  his  Homiliae 
aeledae  have  been  published  by  P.  Bedjan  (Paris 
and  Leipsic,  1903-08),  but  most  of  his  works  are 
still  in  manuscript.  E.  Nestle. 

Biblxoorapht:  On  his  works  of.  W.  Wright,  Catatogue  of 
Svnac  Mas.  in  the  BriHah  Muaeum,  pp.  502-505.  Lon- 
don, 1877.  The  works  are  not  published  in  collected 
form;  some  are  in:  ^  eta  aanctarum  martvrum  orientalium, 
ed.  S.  E.  Assemani,  ii.  230,  Florence,  1748;  Ada  mariyrum 
et  aanctorum,  ed.  P.  Bedjan.  L  131,  160,  iu.  665,  iv.  471, 
V.  615,  vi.  650,  Paris.  1890-97;  ZDMO,  vols,  xii.-xv.,  xxv., 
xzviii.-xxzi.,  1858  sqq.;  W.  Gureton,  Ancient  Syriac 
Doeumenta,  pp.  86-107.  London,  1864;  his  letter  to 
Stephan  bar  Sudaili,  a  Syrian  msrstie,  is  edited  and  trans- 
hited  by  A.  L.  Frothingham  in  Stephen  bar  Sudaili^  Ley- 
den,  1886;  a  discourse  on  Alexander  is  translated  by  E. 
A.  W.  Budge,  London,  1889;  six  homilies  were  rendered 
into  CSerman  by  P.  Zingerle,  Bonn,  1867;  another  is  pub- 
lished by  Sib'ilani,  Beirut,  1901.  Consult:  J.  B.  Abbe- 
loos.  De  vita  et  ^cripUa  S.  Jaeobi  \  .  .  Sarugi,  Louvain. 
1867;  P.  Martin,  iii  Revue  4m  adeneea  eceUaiaatiquea,  4th 
ser.,  voL  iii..  187^'  Ji  S.-Assemani.  Bibliotheea  orientalia, 
i.  283-340,   Rome,  *]r719:*  DCBi  ut.  327-328. 


^1 


^aoob  of  Tltry 

'MOUtM 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


80 


JACOB  QAMBS)  OF  VTTRT  qACQUES  DE  VIT- 
RT) :  Bishop  of  Akko,  cardinal  bishop  of  Tusculum; 
b.  at  Vitry  (20  m.  B.e.  of  ChAloiui-sur-Manie);  d.  at 
Rome  Apr.  30,  1240.  While  a  student  in  Paris  he 
heard  of  the  miraculous  deeds  of  Mary  of  Nivelles, 
in  Belgium,  who,  from  about  1205,  belonged  to  the 
society  of  Beguines  organised  by  the  mother  of 
^Igidius,  prior  of  Oignies,  on  the  southern  border 
of  the  province  of  Namur.  He  soon  removed  to 
Oignies  as  canon  of  the  Augustinian  chapter.  In 
his  intercourse  with  the  B^guiues,  and  especially 
with  Mary,  he  appropriated  views  and  principles 
which  from  this  time  decided  the  course  of  his  life. 
At  the  wish  of  Bfary,  about  1210,  he  procured 
ordination  as  priest.  About  1211  he  undertook  a 
pilgrimage  to  Rome.  Afterward  he  became,  through 
Bfary,  acquainted  with  Bishop  Fulco,  of  Toulouse, 
who,  in  1213,  adopted  him  as  companion  in  his  agita- 
tion for  a  crusade  against  the  Albigenses.  Jacob  left 
Oignies  after  Bfary's  death  (June  23,  1213),  and 
preached  in  North  France  in  behalf  of  a  crusade 
against  the  heretics.  Soon  he  preached  also  a  new 
crusade  to  the  Holy  Land.  His  success  induced  the 
cathedral  chapter  of  Akko  to  elect  him  bishop,  but 
Jacob  preferred  to  remain  in  France,  and  went  to 
Italy  in  1216  to  try  to  secure  appointment  as 
legate  for  the  crusade  in  that  country.  Honorius 
III.,  however,  consecrated  him  bishop  of  Akko,  and 
Jacob  went  to  his  eastern  see.  Thence  he  traveled 
as  an  itinerant  preacher  through  all  places  that  were 
still  in  the  possession  of  the  Christians,  and  eagerly 
participated  in  the  expeditions  of  the  laige  army  of 
crusaders  that  gathereid  in  Akko.  In  May,  1218,  he 
marched  against  Damietta,  but  the  plan  failed 
and  in  1221  he  was  compelled  to  return  to  Akko. 
From  that  time  he  tried  all  possible  means  to  rid 
himself  of  his  office,  but  the  pope  was  relentless. 
Nevertheless  he  allowed  Jacob  to  return  to  Europe 
in  1226  to  preach  the  crusade  as  he  had  done  in  1214. 
In  this  function  he  appears  in  1227  in  northern 
France,  and  also  in  the  bordering  districts  of  Ger- 
many. Later  he  became  temporarily  vicar  of  the 
bishopric  of  Li^;  and  finally  Gregory  IX.,  his 
intimate  friend  and  protector,  released  him  from 
his  Oriental  office,  and  made  him  bishop  of  Tuscu- 
lum, Frascati,  and  cardinal  (1228). 

Jacob  of  Vitry  was  first  of  all  a  preacher.  His 
whole  literary  activity  was  governed  by  the  habit 
of  gathering  material  for  sermons  and  religious 
devotion.  Two  things  contributed  to  his  success 
and  influence  as  a  preacher:  (1)  his  skill  in  illus- 
trating moral  principles  by  examples,  anecdotes, 
parables,  and  fables;  and  (2)  his  manner  of  ad- 
dressing sermons  to  groups  and  classes,  such  as 
prelates,  secular  and  r^[ular  canons,  scholars, 
lawyers,  monks,  knights,  merchants,  etc.  Both 
were  innovations  and  created  a  new  epoch  in  the 
development  of  the  art  of  preaching.  Encouraged 
by  the  popularity  of  his  sermons,  Jacob  collected 
them  at  the  end  of  his  life.  He  makes  six  divisions 
in  this  collection:  i.-v.,  BermoneB  de  tempore,  ser- 
mons in  the  usual  style  for  the  pericopes  of  the 
church  year;  vi.,  aennoma  mtlgarea,  sermons  for 
different  classes.  The  latter  aie  of  considerable 
valuB  for  the  history  of  Church  and  culture,  depict- 
ing in  realistic  manner  the  conditions  of  West 


European  society  of  his  age.   Jacob's  homiletic  and 

edificatory  tendencies  characterise  him  also  as  a 

historian.    His  most  important  historical  works  are 

the  Liber  de  midieribue  Leodiennbua  and  Viia  S, 

Mariae  Oigniacensia  which  were  composed  between 

1213  and  1216.    The  life  of  Mary  contains  the  most 

valuable  documents  for  the  inner  history  of  the 

older  Beguimsm.     Of  less  importance,  though  of 

greater  renown,  is  his  Historia  arierUalia  or  Hietaria 

Hierosolymitana  abbreviata,  which  he  began  in  1219. 

It  is  largely  copied  from  a  similar  work  of  William 

of  Tyre.    Of  much  greater  historical  value  are  his 

letters  from  1216  to  1221,  which  depict  the  Fifth 

Crusade  with  great  fidelity.  (H.  BdHiiXR.) 

Bibuooeapht:    For  a  guide  to  the  chief  editions  of  Ym 

Letters  and  hia  HiMtoria  orienialU  oonsolt  Potthaat,  Weg^ 

«o0i«er,  pp.  633-634.    For  his  life  consult:    ASB,  June, 

ill.  237-258;    F.  L.  Matsner.  De  Jaeobi  VitriaeengU  .  .  . 

vita  el  rsfriM  getHa,  Munich.  1863;   idem,  in  KL,  ▼.  117»- 

1187:     Hiatoire  UiUrain  de  la  France,    xviiL    20»-246; 

M.  Barroux.  Jaequee  de  Vitry,  Paris.  1885;   T.  A.  Ard^r 

and  C.  L.  Kincsford,  TAe  Cruaadee,  passim.  New  York. 

1805;    and  other  literature  cited  under  Cbusadbb.     On 

hia  writings  consult:    J.  L.  D.  G.  Saini-Genyia.   8ur  lee 

UUrea  inSditee  de  Jaeqyse  de  Vitry,  Brussels,   1847;    G. 

Zaeher.  Die  HiUoria  eriefdalie  dee  Jacob  van  Vitry,  Kdnigs- 

bets.  1885. 

JACOB,  EDGAR:  Church  of  England  bishop  of 
St.  Albans;  b.  at  CJrawley  Rectory,  near  Winchester, 
Nov.  16|  1844.  He  was  educated  at  New  College, 
Oxford  (B.A.,  1868),  and  was  ordered  deacon  in 
1868  and  ordained  priest  in  the  following  jrear.  He 
was  curate  of  Taynton,  Oxfordshire  (1868-69), 
Witney  (1869-71),  and  St.  James',  Bermondsey 
(1871-72),  domestic  chaplain  to  the  bishop  of  Cal- 
cutta (1872-76),  and  conmiissary  to  the  same 
prelate  (1876-88).  In  1877  he  had  charge  of  Wilber- 
foroe  Memorial  Mission,  South  London,  and  was 
vicar  of  Portsea  (1878-06).  In  1896  he  was  con- 
secrated bishop  of  Newcastle,  and  in  1903  was 
translated  to  his  present  see  of  St.  Albans.  He  was 
also  examining  chaplain  to  the  bishop  of  Winchester 
in  1876-79,  honorary  canon  of  Winchester  in  1884- 
1896,  honorary  chaplain  to  the  Queen  in  1887-90 
and  chaplain  in  ordinary  in  1890-96,  rural  dean  of 
Landport  and  chaplain  of  the  Portsmouth  prison 
in  1892-96,  and  select  preacher  at  Oxford  in  the 
same  year.  He  has  written  The  Divine  Society: 
or,  The  Church's  Care  of  Large  Populationa  (Cam- 
bridge lectures  on  pastoral  theology;  London,  1900). 

JACOBI,ya-kda)t,  FRIBDRICH  HEINRICH:  Ger- 
man philosopher;  b.  at  DUsseldorf  Jan.  25, 1743;  d. 
at  Munich  Mar.  10, 1819.  He  studied  at  Frankfort 
and  Geneva,  and  in  1764  became  the  head  of  his 
father's  business  in  DUsseldorf.  After  his  appoint- 
ment to  the  coundl  for  the  duchies  of  jQlich  and 
Berg  in  1772  he  devoted  himself  entirely  to  litera- 
ture and  philosophy.  His  house  at  Pempelfort, 
near  Dtlsseldorf,  became  the  meeting-place  of  dis- 
tinguished literary  men.  Among  his  more  intimate 
friends  were  Wieland,  Hamann,  Herder,  Lessing, 
and  Goethe.  On  account  of  the  political  agitation 
of  the  time  he  went  to  Holstein  in  1794.  During 
the  next  ten  years  he  resided  chiefly  at  Wandsbeck, 
Hamburg,  and  Eutin.  In  1804  he  accepted  a  call 
to  Munich  in  connection  with  the  proposed  Acad- 
emy of  Sciences  there.  He  was  president  of  the 
academy  from  its  openiag  in  1807  till  1812.    His 


81 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jaoob  of  Titiy 

JftOObitM 


writings  are  characterized  by  poetic  fancy  and 
religious  sentiment  rather  than  by  logical  necessity. 
He  held  that  the  understanding  can  only  join  and 
disjoin  given  facts,  without  explaining  them,  and 
that  knowledge  deduced  in  this  way  is  conditioned 
and  relatively  unimportant,  being  always  related 
to  a  background  of  existence  which  forever  remains 
beyond  abstract  thinking.  All  demonstrable  knowl- 
edge, therefore,  is  relative  and  conditioned;  it  does 
not  touch  the  ultimate  natiue  of  things.  The 
faculty  by  which  we  grasp  ultimate  facts  is  not  the 
understanding,  but  faith,  which  Jacobi  identified 
with  reason.  It  was  Jacobi  who  first  pointed  out 
the  fatal  contradiction  involved  in  Kant's  applica- 
tion of  the  category  of  causality  to  the  Ding  an  nek. 
Hub  doctrine  of  the  relativity  of  knowledge  was 
later  exploited  by  Sir  William  Hamilton.  Jacobi's 
principal  works  are  the  two  philosophical  novels, 
Woldemar  (2  vols.,  Flensburg,  1779)  and  Eduard 
AUwiOa  Brief  Bandung  (Breslau,  1781);  Ud)€T  die 
Lehre  dee  Spinoza  (1785;  enlarged  ed.,  1789);  David 
Hume  aber  den  Olavben,  oder  Idealiemue  und  Real- 
iemue  (1787),  containing  his  criticism  of  Kant; 
Ud}€r  dae  Unlemehmen  dee  KriHasiemuef  die  Vemurrft 
xu  Veretande  zu  bringen  (Hambuig,  1801);  and  Von 
den  gdtUichen  Dingen  und  ikrer  Offenbarung  (Leip- 
siCy  1811),  which  was  directed  against  ScheUing. 
Diiring  his  last  years  Jacobi  was  employed  in  col- 
lecting and  editing  his  Werke  (6  vols.,  Leipsic, 
1812-24).  His  Aueerleeener  Briefweched  was  edited 
by  F.  Roth  (2  vols.,  1825-27).  Max  Jacobi  edited 
Briefweched  twiechen  Goethe  und  F.  H.  Jacobi  (1846). 

BnuoGRAniT:  J.  A.  Schmid,  Friedrieh  Heinrich  Jacobin 
Sine  DanMiung  teiner  Peradnkehkeit  und  miner  PhUow- 
-pkie  ali  Beitrag  lu  einer  Cfttehichte  dee  modernenWdtprob' 
leme,  Heidelbers,  1908;  F.  H.  Jacobi  nadh  eeinem  Leben, 
Lekrtn  und  Wirhen,  ed.  Schlichtigroll,  Weiller  and  ThieTSGh. 
Munieh,  1819;  J.  Kuhn,  Jacobi  und  die  PhUoeophie 
eeintr  ZeU,  Mains,  1834;  F.  Deycka,  F,  H.  Jacobi  im  Ver- 
MUniee  eu  eeinen  Zeiigenoeeen,  Frankfort,  1849;  F.  D. 
Maurice,  Modem  Philoeaphy,  pp.  644-661,  London,  1862; 
£.  Zimgiebl,  F.  H,  Jacobi'e  Leben,  Diehten  und  Denken, 
Vienna^  1867;  L.  L^vy-Bnihl,  La  PhUoeophie  de  Jacobi^ 
Paris,  1894;  N.  WUde,  F,  H.  Jacobi:  a  Study  in  the  Origin 
of  Oennan  Rotditm,  New  York,  1894.  Consult  also  J.  E. 
Erdmann,  QoeAidhU  der  PhUoeophie,  2  vols.,  Berlin,  1896- 
1806^  Eng.  transl.,  3  vols.,  London,  1892-98. 

JACOBI,  JUSTUS  LUDWI6:  Professor  in  Halle; 
b.  at  Buig  (14  m.  n.e.  of  Afagdeburg)  Aug.  12, 1815; 
d.  at  Halle  May  31,  1888.  He  studied  in  Halle,  and 
in  Beiiin,  where  in  1841  he  became  privat-docent, 
and  in  1847  professor  extraordinary;  in  1851  he 
went  as  ordinary  professor  of  theology  to  K5nig»- 
berg,  in  1855  to  Halle.  As  representative  of  the 
"  mediating  theology  "  and  advocate  of  the  Evan- 
gelical Union,  he  was  involved  in  various  contro- 
versies with  the  confessional  party.  By  founding 
the  home  for  deaconesses  in  Halle  with  the  wife  of 
Professor  Tholuck,  he  took  a  practical  part  in  the 
charitable  works  of  the  Church.  His  writings  betray 
the  influence  of  Neander.  In  Die  Lehre  dee  Pdagiue, 
ein  BeOrag  zur  Dogmengeechichte  (Leipsic,  1842) 
he  represented  the  standpoint  of  Augustine.  The 
first  part  of  Kirehliche  Lehre  von  der  Tradition  und 
heiUgen  Schrift  appeared  at  Berlin,  1847.  His 
Lehrbueh  der  Kirchengeeehichte  (part  i.,  Berlin,  1850) 
is  characterused  by  a  thorough  presentation  of  the 
sources  combined  with  a  fine  appreciation  of  ex- 
VI.— 6 


temal  conditions  as  well  as  of  internal  development, 
measured  by  the  central  doctrine  of  sin  and  grace. 
He  also  wrote  Die  Lehre  der  IrvingUen  vergliehen 
mU  der  heUigen  Schrtft  (1853;  2d  ed.,  1868);  Pro- 
feesor  Schlottmann,  die  halleeche  FakuUdt  und  die 
Centrumepartei  (2d  ed.,  Halle,  1882),  a  defense  of 
his  colleague  against  the  aggressive  tendency  of 
the  Roman  curia  in  the  so-called  Kulturkampf; 
and  Streiflichter  auf  Rdigion,  Politikf  und  Univer- 
eitdten  der  Centrumepartei  (1883).  He  commem- 
orated his  teachers  in  Erinnerung  an  D,  August 
Neander  (1882),  and  Baron  von  KoUuniz  (1882). 
Biblioobapht:  J.  Jaoobi,  /.  L.  Jacobi  und  die  Fsnmttfl- 
ungetheohgie  eeiner  Zeit,  Gotha,  1889. 

JACOBITES:   The  Jacobites  are  an  offshoot  of 
the  Syrian  Monophysites.    While  the  Syrians  were 

the  bearers  of  Christianity  in  the  East, 

Geneial     nowhere  has  ecclesiastical  cleavage  pr«>- 

Descrip-    duoed  deeper  fissures  than  among  them. 

tion.       And  the  same  might  be  said  also  of 

political  relations.  The  peace  between 
the  Persians  and  Jovinian  in  363  made  a  sharp 
distinction  between  Syrians  of  the  Roman  empire 
and  those  of  Persia,  which  has  continued  to  the 
present.  In  religion  it  was  differences  concerning 
Christology  which  produced  the  deep  rifts,  espe- 
cially those  connected  with  the  names  of  Eutyches 
and  Nestorius.  Hence  one  speaks  no  more  of  '^  an 
Aramaic  nation,"  rather  he  speaks  of  two  peoples 
of  Aramaic  lineage  as  distinct  as  two  nationalities. 
Indeed,  authorities  do  not  use  the  term  Jacobitic 
Church  or  Nestorian  Church,  they  employ  the  terms 
Jacobitic  people,  Nestorian  people.  The  mutual 
dislike  of  these  two  descendants  from  a  common 
stock  is  scarcely  less  intense  than  their  common 
hatred  of  Mohainmedans.  These  peoples  seem  to 
have  lost  consciousness  of  racial  bonds;  they  speak 
and  write  two  dialects  of  a  common  speech,  and 
this  difference  goes  back  to  an  early  time,  since 
the  division  had  its  origin  in  the  fifth  century.  By 
the  term  Jacobites  is  meant  now  the  Syrian  Mon- 
ophysites, though  in  earlier  times  Egyptian  Mon- 
ophysites were  also  included.  How  early  the  term 
came  into  use  is  not  known;  it  occurs  certainly  in 
the  anathemas  of  the  (Council  of  Nice  (787).  The 
emperors  Zeno  and  Anastasius  favored  this  form  of 
teaching,  and  it  was  introduced  among  ^the  Syrians 
by  Barsumas  of  Edessa,  Xenaias  Philoxenus  of 
Mabug,  and  Severus  of  Antioch.  Under  Justinian  I. 
many  Syrian  bishops  were  deposed  and  exiled  for 
refusing  recognition  to  the  deliverances  of  the 
Council  of  Chalcedon.  Under  the  protection  of 
the  Empress  Theodora,  bishops  were  consecrated 
for  the  East  and  South,  and  particularly  Jacobus 
Baradseus,  whose  labors  in  behalf  of  monophydtism 
were  epoch-making. 

Jacobus  Baradceus  (Jacob  Baradai)  was  bom  at 
Telia  Mauzalat  (55  m.  e.  of  Edessa)  toward  the 

close  of  the  fifth  centtiry,  and  died 

Jacobus    at  the  monastery  of  Cassianus,  on  the 

Baxadaeus.  Egyptian  border,  July  30,  578.     He 

was  educated  in  the  monastery  of 
Phasilta  near  Nisibis,  lived  for  fifteen  years  as  a 
monk  in  Constantinople,  and  was  consecrated  bishop 
in  541  or  543.  Clad  in  rags,  he  then  wandered  from 
Egypt  to  the  Euphrates  and  to  the  islands  of  the 


Jacobites 

Jacobus  de  Varsfflne 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


82 


Mediterranean  for  nearly  forty  years,  expounding 
his  doctrines,  ordaining  deacons  and  priests,  and 
consecrating  bishops,  doing  his  work  in  the  day- 
time and  traveling  at  night  sometimes  forty  miles 
to  a  new  place  of  labor.  He  is  said  to  have  con- 
secrated two  patriarchs  and  twenty-seven  bishops, 
and  to  have  created  100,000  priests  and  deacons. 
After  the  death  of  the  patriarch  Severus,  he  at- 
tached himself  to  the  party  of  Seigius  of  Telia, 
and  when  Seigius  died  he  had  Paulus  of  Egypt 
made  patriarch.  He  left  little  in  the  shape  of 
literature.  An  Anaphora  is  ascribed  to  him  (Lat. 
transl.  by  E.  Renaudot,  Liturgiarum  orienUUium 
coUeelio,  ii.,  Paris,  1716,  pp.  333  sqq.),  also  a  con- 
fession extant  in  Arabic  and  Ethiopic,  the  genuine- 
ness of  which  is  doubtful.  A  number  of  encyclicals 
in  a  Syriac  manuscript  in  London  are  thought  to 
be  his. 

It  was  from  Jacobus  BaradsBus  that  the  Jacobites 
took  their  name,  and  not  from  the  Apostle,  as  was 

stated  by  John  of  Ephesus,  nor  from 

Their      the  Hebrew  patriarch.    They  used  to 

System     call  themselves  '^  the  orthodox,"  and 

and       in  Egypt  went  under  the  names  of 

Order.     Theodosians,  Severians,   and  Dioscu- 

rians.  For  the  peculiarities  of  doctrine 
consult  the  articles  Eutychianism,  and  Monopht- 
BITB8.  In  the  propagation  of  this  system  they  were 
peculiarly  sealous.  In  1587  Leonard  Abel  found  the 
agent  of  the  Jacobites  ready  to  acknowledge  the 
Roman  Church,  but  he  absolutely  refused  to  con- 
demn Dioscorus  and  to  recognize  Chaloedon.  In 
the  cultus  emphasis  is  laid  upon  the  making  of  the 
bread  of  the  Eucharist  of  leavened  dough  mixed 
with  salt  and  oil,  and  also  upon  the  addition  to  the 
trisagion  "  who  was  crucified  on  your  account." 
They  make  the  sign  of  the  cross  with  one  finger, 
and  the  lot  is  often  used  at  the  election  of  patriarchs 
and  bishops.  Their  patriarch  takes  his  title  from 
Antioch,  though  he  never  resides  there,  inasmuch 
as  the  Greeks  regard  Jacobites  as  heretics  and  refuse 
to  their  chief  officer  residence  in  Antioch.  His 
seat  is  therefore  not  fixed,  but  is  sometimes  in  a 
monastery,  often  m  Amid  (Diarbekr).  During  the 
Jacobitic  schism,  1364-1494,  there  were  as  many  as 
four  officials  claiming  the  title  of  patriarch  in  as 
many  different  places.  The  jurisdiction  of  the 
Syrian  patriarch  meets  that  of  the  Coptic  patriarch, 
though  Jerusalem  has  both  a  Coptic  and  a  Syrian- 
Jaoobitic  bishop.  In  the  most  flourishing  period 
of  the  Church  it  had  probably  100  bishops.  Under 
the  patriarch  ia  the  Maphrian,  who  is  the  primate 
of  the  East,  and  is  sometimes  called  Catholicus. 
His  office  dates  as  far  back  as  Jacobus  Baradieus, 
though  the  title  is  much  later.  It  is  not  unconunon 
for  a  married  man  to  be  admitted  to  the  order  of 
deacon  or  presbjrter,  though  marriage  after  ordina- 
tion is  not  permitted.  They  have  a  number  of 
monasteries.  The  monks  are  not  reckoned  among 
the  deigy,  yet  the  bishops  are  chosen  from  among 
the  monks,  and  have  chaige  of  the  cloisters.  The 
writers  of  the  Jacobites  include  Jacob  of  Edessa, 
Jacob  of  Sarug,  John  of  Ephesus,  John  of  Dara, 
Isaac  of  Antioch,  George,  bishop  of  the  Arabs,  and 
Philoxenus  (qq.v.),  also  Paul  of  Telia,  Thomas  of 
Heraclea,  Stephen  bar  Sudaili,  Dionysius  of  Tell- 


mahre,  Moses  bar  Kepha,  and  Dionysius  bar 
Salibi. 

The  emperors  of  the  East,  with  the  exception  of 

Zeno  and  Anastasius,  were  opposed  to  the  Jacobitic 

doctrines,  and  Justinian  I.  attempted 

Histoiy  in  vain  to  unite  them  with  the  Cath- 
and        olic   Church.     The   Syrian   Jacobites 

Present     suffered  not  only  under  the  emperors, 

Status,  but  also  under  the  Mohamniedans, 
while  their  brethren  in  Egypt  seemed 
to  be  able  better  to  conciliate  the  followers  of 
Mohanmied.  The  Crusaders  refused  them  access 
to  the  Holy  Sepulcher.  In  the  time  of  Gregory 
XIII.,  the  Jacobites  are  said  to  have  numbered 
50,000  families,  mostly  poor,  scattered  in  the  towns 
and  villages  of  Syria,  Babylonia,  and  Mesopotamia. 
Since  that  time  they  seem  to  have  dwindled,  as  the 
reports  of  different  travelers  are  followed  from  that 
time  to  the  present.  Sachau  reports  that  at  Mosul 
out  of  2,328  Christian  houses,  some  900  were  those 
of  Syrian  Jacobites.  The  most  recent  statistics  give 
22,700  adherents,  twenty-four  parishes,  forty-two 
churches,  eighty-one  priests;  in  Mosul  is  the  largest 
number  of  adherents,  7,000,  and  in  Mardin  the 
next  laigest  number,  4,000.  The  situation  of  these 
people  has  been  the  more  critical  because,  while 
the  most  of  the  other  sects  received  recognition 
from  the  Porte,  they  were  without  it.  Through  the 
interposition  of  the  English  this  disability  was  re- 
moved in  1882.  What  adds  to  the  difficulty  of 
their  position  is  that  they  are  regarded  as  heretics 
by  all  other  sects  in  the  region.  Perhaps  their  most 
flourishing  settlement  is  at  Sadad,  on  the  road  from 
Damascus  to  Palmyra.  In  1653  the  Christians  of 
St.  Thomas  of  India  (see  Nbbtorianb)  seem  to  have 
had  relations  with  them,  though  there  is  no  indi- 
cation of  present  affiliation.  Recently  special  at- 
tempts have  been  made  by  the  Church  of  Rome 
to  have  the  Oriental  churches  come  into  connection 
with  it;  the  encyclical  Pradara  of  Leo  XIII.  of 
June  20,  1894,  and  particularly  the  Orientaltum 
dignitas  eccUnarum  of  Nov.  30,  1894,  are  evidences 
of  this  movement.  Several  periodicals  are  employed 
to  further  these  efforts,  notably  Beasariane  in  Rome, 
the  Reviie  de  Vorient  chrHxen  of  Paris,  with  its  auxil- 
iaries, and  the  Calendarium  ecclenae  tUrituque  of 
Innsbruck.  The  earlier  attempts  of  the  years 
1169,  1237,  1247,  and  1442  produced  no  perma- 
nent results.  (E.  Nbstle.) 

Biblioorapht:  The  chief  work  on  the  Syrian  Jaeobitee  is 
still  J.  8.  Afleemani,  Bibliotheoa  orienialU,  eepedally  vol. 
ii.,  Rome,  1721.  Consult  farther:  £.  Renaudot,  HUt. 
patriarcharum  Al/exandrinorutn  Jaeobiiarum,  Paris,  1713; 
M.  Le  Quien.  Orien$  ChriMlianua,  vols,  ii.-iii.,  ib.  1740; 
J.  M.  Neale,  Hiat.  cf  the  Holy  Eaatem  Church,  2  voln., 
London,  1860  (for  the  Uturgy);  O.  H.  Parry.  Six  MonOu 
in  a  Syrian  Monattery,  ib.  1895;  C.  E.  Hammond,  Lit- 
urgiea  Eaalem  and  Weaiem,  ed.  F.  E.  Brishtman,  L  09- 
110,  ib.  1896;  F.  Diekamp,  Die  orioeniaiiachen  Streitifh 
keiitn  im  0.  Jahrhvndart,  MOnster,  1899;  R.  Duval.  La 
LitUrature  ayriaqye,  Paris.  1900;  £.  Sachau,  Am  Buph^at 
und  Tigria,  Leipsio,  1900;  J.  B.  Chabot,  Chroniqtte  de 
Michel  le  Syrian,  patriard^e  jacoiriguie  d*Antiodu  {1166- 
1199),  2  vols.,  Paris.  1900-04;  F.  C.  Burkitt,  Early  Eaat- 
em Chriaiianity,  London,  1904;  L.  Silbernael,  Verfaa- 
auno  un^  ffegenwOrtiger  Beatand  admtlickar  Kirehen  dea 
Orienta,  Regensburg,  1904;  Hamack,  Dogma,  passim; 
KL,  xi.  1124-34;  the  periodicals  mentioned  in  the  last 
paragraph  above,  together  with  Echoa  d*onmi;  and  the 
literature    under    Euttcbianisii;     Monopbtbiteb.    On 


83 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jaoobites 

Jaoobas  de  "Vanginm 


Jftflob  Bandaua  oonsult  H.  Q.  Kleyn,  JaeabuM  Baradeus, 
L«yden,  18S2;  DCB,  iU.  328-332. 

JACOBS,  HENRY  EYSTBR:  Lutheran;  b.  at 
Gettysburg,  Pa.,  Nov.  10,  1844.  He  was  graduated 
at  Pennsylvania  College,  Gettysburg,  in  1862,  and 
Gettysburg  Theological  Seminary  in  1865.  After 
being  a  tutor  in  Pennsylvania  College  in  1864-67, 
he  was  a  home  missionary  at  Pittsburg,  Pa.,  in 
1867-68,  and  then  pastor  and  principal  of  Thiel 
Hally  Phillipsburg,  Pa.  (now  Thiel  College,  Green- 
ville, Pa.),  in  1868-70.  In  1870  he  returned  to 
Pennsylvania  College  as  professor  of  Latin  and 
history  (1870^80),  dassics  (1880-^1),  and  Greek 
(1881-83).  Since  1883  he  has  been  professor  of 
systematic  theology  at  the  Lutheran  Theological 
Seminary,  Philadelphia,  of  which  he  has  also  been 
dean  since  1894.  Besides  editing  The  Lutheran 
Review  from  1882-96,  he  has  translated  and  edited 
L.  Hutter's  Compend  of  Lutheran  Theology  (in 
collaboration  with  G.  F.  Spieker;  Philadelphia, 
1867);  H.  Schmid's  Doctrinal  Theoloffy  of  the  Lu- 
theran Church  (in  collaboration  with  C.  A.  Hay; 
1875);  The  Book  of  Concord:  or,  Symbolical  Stand- 
ards of  the  Lutheran  Church  (2  vols.,  1882-83) ;  H.  A. 
W.  Meyer's  Commenlary  on  Oalatiane  and  Epheeiane 
(New  York,  1884);  and  F.  Dttsterdieck's  Critical 
and  Exegetical  Handbook  to  the  Revelation  of  John 
(1887).  He  likewise  edited  The  Lutheran  Com- 
mentary (13  vols..  New  York,  1895-99)  to  which 
he  contributed  the  portion  on  Romans  and  I 
Corinthians,  and  The  Lutheran  Cydapaedia  (1899). 
As  independent  works  he  has  written  The  Lutheran 
Movement  in  England  during  the  Reigns  of  Henry 
VI II.  and  Edward  VL,  and  its  Literary  Monuments 
(Philadelphia,  1891);  History  of  the  Evangelical  Lu- 
theran Church  in  the  United  States  (New  York, 
1893);  Elements  of  Religion  (Philadelphia,  1894); 
Martin  Luiher,  the  Hero  of  the  Reformation  (New 
York,  1898);  Qerman  Emigration  to  America^  1709- 
17 40  (Philadelphia,  1899);  and  Summary  of  the 
Christian  Faith  (1905). 

JACOBS,  JOSEPH:  Jewish  folklorist,  histo- 
rian, and  critic;  b.  at  Sydney,  N.  S.  W.,  Aug.  29, 
1854.  He  was  educated  at  Sydney  and  London 
universities  and  at  St.  John's  Coll^,  Cambridge 
(B.A.,  1876),  and  also  studied  at  Berlin.  From 
1878  to  1884  he  was  secretary  of  the  Society  of 
Hebrew  Literature,  and  in  1882-1900  was  secretary 
of  the  Mansion  House  (later  Russo-Jewish)  Fund 
and  Committee,  taking  an  active  part  in  behalf  of 
the  Russian  Jews.  He  has  likewise  devoted  him- 
self to  Jewish  history,  and  for  this  purpose  visited 
Spain  in  1888  to  study  manuscript  sources,  later 
turning  his  attention  to  the  history  of  the  Jews  in 
England.  He  helped  found  the  Jewish  Historical 
Society  of  England,  of  which  he  was  president  in 
1898-99,  and  also  assisted  in  establishing  the  Mac- 
cabeans;  and  he  was  long  a  member  of  the  execu- 
tive committee  of  the  Anglo-Jewish  Association. 
In  1900  he  settled  permanently  in  New  York,  being 
revising  editor  of  the  JE  (1901-06),  and  in  1906  was 
appointed  professor  of  English  literature  and  rhetoric 
in  the  Jewish  Theological  Seminary,  also  becoming 
editor  of  the  American  Hdrrew.  As  a  folklorist  he 
occupies  a  foremost  rank,  and  was  for  some  years 


editor  of  Folk-Lore  and  honorary  secretary  of  the 
International  Folk-Lore  Society.  Among  his  pub- 
lications special  mention  may  be  made  of  the  fol- 
lowing: Studies  in  Jewish  Statistics,  Social,  Vital, 
and  Anthropometric  (London,  1891);  Jews  cf  Anr 
gevin  England,  Documents  and  Records  (1893); 
Studies  in  Biblical  Archceology  (1894);  Sources  of 
the  History  of  the  Jews  in  Spain  (1895);  Jewish 
Ideals,  and  other  Essays  (1896);  and  As  Others  Saw 
Him  (an  imaginative  life  of  Christ  from  a  Jewish 
point  of  view;  New  York,  1903). 

JACOBUS:  The  Latin  form  of  James  (q.v.);  see 
also  Jacob. 

JACOBUS  DE  VARAOINE,  OIACOMO  DA  VA- 
RAZZE,  JACOPO  DA  VARAZZE  (often  caUed 
Jacob,  or  James,  of  Viraggio):  Archbishop  of  Ge- 
noa; b.  at  Casanuova  in  Varazze  (on  the  coast,  18 
m.  s.w.  of  Genoa)  c.  1228  (or  1230);  d.  in  Genoa  July 
16  (?),  1298.  He  entered  the  Dominican  order 
in  1244,  probably  studied  at  (Cologne,  Paris,  and 
Bologna,  became  prior  at  Genoa  (or  Asti)  about  1258, 
was  provincial  prior  for  Lombardy  1267-76,  1281- 
86,  and  archbishop  of  Genoa  1292-98.  He  fulfilled 
several  quasi-diplomatic  missions  and  as  archbishop 
exercised  feudal  authority  over  San  Remo  and  gov- 
erned certain  churches  in  the  Levant.  As  arch- 
bishop he  promoted  efforts  for  the  reform  of  the 
clergy,  intervened  successfully  to  promote  peace 
between  Guelph  and  Ghibelline,  and  transferred 
the  government  of  San  Remo  to  the  civil  authority. 
He  was  beatified  by  Pius  VII.  in  1816,  and  is 
popularly  reverenced  in  Liguria  as  the  promoter  of 
peace. 

Jacobus  is  best  known  for  his  writings,  especially 
the  "  Golden  Legend,"  which  was  possibly  the 
most  popular  book  of  the  Middle  Ages.  This  work, 
known  also  as  "  Lives  of  the  Saints  "  and  as  Historia 
Lombardica,  consists  of  readings  from  the  lives  of 
the  saints  for  the  festivals  of  the  church  year.  It 
was  probably  written  before  1260,  and  was  very 
early  translated  into  at  least  French,  German, 
English  (by  WUliam  Caxton,  1484?),  Italian,  and 
Dutch.  Within  about  fifty  years  after  the  inven- 
tion of  printing  more  than  100  editions  of  original 
and  translations  had  been  printed.  Besides  the 
*^  Golden  Legend  "  Jacobus  wrote  several  series  of 
sermons  "  On  the  Saints,"  "  On  the  Blessed  Virgin," 
etc.,  only  less  popular  than  the  Legend,  and  also 
known  as  "  Golden  "  on  account  of  their  popularity. 
His  "  Chronicle  of  Genoa  "  is  a  somewhat  hetero- 
geneous mass,  but  not  without  some  historical  value. 
He  is  alleged  also  to  have  made  the  first  translation 
of  the  Bible  into  Italian  and  there  are  reasons  for 
supposing  that  he  wrote  the  **  Game  of  Chess," 
which,  like  the  "  Golden  Legend,"  is  best  known 
in  English  under  the  name  of  Caxton.  Several 
other  hitherto  disputed  or  lost  writings,  an  "  Art 
of  Preaching,"  a  "  Sunmiary  of  Vices  and  Virtues," 
Sermanes  in  visitationibus  rdigiosorum,  etc.,  have 
recently  been  discovered  or  established  as  his. 

E.  C.  Richardson. 

Bibuoobafbt:  For  editions  of  the  works  of  Jacobus  con- 
sult: Potthost,  Wegtoeuer,  pp.  634-635.  An  incomplete 
text  of  the  Chronicle  is  in  Muratori,  Scriptorea,  ix.  5-56; 
the  moot  conTsnient  text  of  the  Sermons  is  that  of  Ant- 
werp, 1712,  in  6  vols.;  the  standard  edition  of  the  Qolden 


JlMOl 

JahB 


^Ima 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


84 


L^md  b  fay  J.  O.  T.  GraMM.  Ldprie,  184^  new  ed.. 
Wratiilaw,  1800;  the  Eoc.  tntnal.  of  the  Qoldra  Legmd 
1^  Caxton.  with  introduction  and  notM  by  Ealea,  wm 
publiahed  London.  1888,  nnd  a  tumptuona  edition,  ed. 
W.  Morrifl  and  F.  8.  ElliB,  3  voU..  ib.  1802.  Tba  prafaoM 
to  tho  many  editions  and  tranalations  contain  biographical 
and  bibliographical  material.  The  atandard  monographa 
an:  P.  Anfoaai.  Memoris iatoriehe  appartemnH  aUaviiatUl 
.  .  .  Jaeopo  da  Voraoin^,  Genoa;  O.  Spotomo.  NotuU 
ttorieo^riUeo  del  ,  .  .  Oiaeomo  da  VarauB,  Genoa,  1823; 
and  V.  M.  Palaaaa.  Viia  del  .  ,  ,  Giaeomo  da  Varazee, 
Genoa,  1867.  Conault  alao  M.  Wareaquiel,  La  Bienhtuerux 
JacquM  de  VcroffinM,  Faria,  1002;  J.  C.  Brouaaole.  Preface 
hlaLigend dareie,  Faria.  1007.  The Prineekm,  Thftologieal 
JUvimv  for  April,  1008,  oontaina  an  article  on  the  Golden 
Legend,  and  for  July,  1004.  one  on  **  Voragine  aa  a  praaeh- 
er."  Conault  farther:  J.  Qu4tif  and  J.  Echard.  Bcripioree 
ordinU  pnudieatorum,  i.  454-450.  ii.818,  Faria.  1710-21; 
ASB,  Jan..  i..  pp.  adx.-xx.;  JCL.  yL  1178-82. 

JACOBUS,  MELANCTHOH  WILLIAMS:  The 
name  of  two  American  divines. 

1.  Presbyterian  pastor  and  educator;  b.  at 
Newark,  N.  J.,  Sept.  19,  1816;  d.  at  AUegbeny,  Pa., 
Oct.  28,  1876.  He  was  graduated  from  the  College 
of  New  Jersey  (Princeton)  in  1834,  and  from  the 
Princeton  Theological  Seminary  in  1838.  The 
following  year  he  was  instructor  in  Hebrew  at  the 
seminary.  In  Sept.,  1839,  he  entered  upon  a  pas- 
torate of  twelve  years  at  the  First  Presbyterian 
Church,  Brooklyn.  In  1851  he  became  professor  of 
Orientfld  and  Biblical  literature  in  the  Western 
Theological  Seminary,  Allegheny,  Pa.,  and  retained 
this  position  till  his  death.  He  was  also  pastor  of 
the  Central  Presbyterian  Church,  Pittsbiu-g,  1858- 
1870.  In  1870  he  presided,  conjointly  with  Philemon 
H.  Fowler,  at  the  opening  of  the  first  General 
Assembly  of  the  reunited  Presbyterian  Church,  old 
and  new  schools.  His  principal  works  are  Notes 
on  the  New  Testament  (4  vols.,  1848-59);  Notes  on 
the  Book  of  Oenesis  (2  vols.,  1864-65);  and  NoUs 
on  the  Book  <^  Exodus  (1874). 
Bibliograprt:   Preetn/terian  Reunion:  a  Memorial  Volume, 

pp.  530-532.  New  Yorli.  1871;   R.  E.  Thompaon.  in  Amer- 

lean  Church  Hieiory  Seriee,  vL  144.  178.  181.  ib.  1806; 

J.  H.  Patton.  Popular  Hiet,  of  the  Preebyterian  Church,  p. 

407.  ib.  1000. 

8.  Congregationalist,  son  of  the  preceding;  b.  at 
Allegheny  City,  Pa.,  Dec.  15,  1855.  He  was  grad- 
uated from  Princeton  College  in  1877,  and  from 
Princeton  Theological  Seminary  in  1881;  studied  at 
Gdttingen  and  Berlm  (1881-84).  He  was  pastor  of 
the  Presbyterian  Chureh  at  Oxford,  Pa.  (1884-91), 
and  since  1891  has  been  professor  of  New-Testament 
exegesis  and  criticism  in  Hartford  Theological  Semi- 
nary, where  he  has  been  dean  of  the  faculty  since 
1903,  and  acting  president  in  1902-03.  He  was  also 
acting  pastor  of  Center  Congregational  Church, 
Hartford,  Conn.,  in  189^1900,  and  was  Stone  lec- 
turer in  Princeton  Theological  Seminary  in  1897-98, 
and  lecturer  on  the  New  Testament  in  Mount  Holy- 
oke  College  in  1901  and  1903-04.  He  has  written 
A  Problem  in  New  Testament  Criticism  (Stone  lec- 
tures; New  York,  1900),  and  has  edited  Roman 
Catholic  and  Protestant  Bibles  Compared  (New  York, 
1905);  and  A  Standard  Bible  Dictionary  (1909). 

JACOBY,  HERMANN  KARL  JOHANN:  German 
Protestant;  b.  at  Berlin  Dec.  30,  1836.  He  was 
educated  at  the  University  of  Berlin  and  the 
preachers'  seminary  at  Wittenberg,  and  after  being 


a  teacher  in  the  gymnasium  of  Laadsbeig,  deacon 
at  Heldrungen  castle,  and  g3rmnasial  teacher  and 
assistant  cathedral  preacher  at  Stendal  imtil  1868, 
was  appointed  professor  of  homiletics  in  the  Uni- 
versity of  KOnigsberg,  a  position  which  he  still 
occupies.  He  has  written  Zwei  evangdische  Lebens- 
bilder  aus  der  kathoUschen  Kirche  (Bielefekl,  1864); 
Liturgik  der  Reformatoren  (2  vols.,  Gotha,  1871-76); 
Beitrdge  tur  ehrisUichen  Erkenntnis  (GQtersloh, 
1871);  Christi  Tugenden  (Gotha,  1883);  LiUhers 
vorreformaUrrische  Predigt  (KOnigsbetg,  1883);  AH- 
gemeine  Pddagogik  auf  Grund  der  ehrisUichen  Eihik 
(Gotha,  1883) ;  Der  erste  Brief  des  Apostels  Johannes 
(Leipsic,  1891);  Neutestamentliche  Ethik  (Kdnigs- 
berg,  1899);  and  Die  Evangelien  des  Markus  und 
Johannes,  homiletische  Betrachtungen  (Leipsic,  1903). 

JACOPONB  DA  TODI,  y(i"co-p6'n6  da  to'di 
(properly  Jaeopo  de'  Benedetti,  Lat.  Jacobus  de 
Benedictis):  Franciscan  poet;  b.  at 
Life.  Todi  (24  m.  s.  of  Perugia),  c.  1240; 
d.  at  the  monastery  of  CoUazone  (near 
Perugia)  on  Christmas  night,  1306.  Highly  en- 
dowed by  nature,  he  won  both  degrees  in  law  at 
Bologna,  and  beoame  respected  and  prosperous  in 
his  profession  in  his  native  city.  He  had  a  beau- 
tiful, noble,  and  virtuous  wife,  whose  death  from 
the  fall  of  a  gallery  in  a  theater  in  1268  changed 
his  entire  life.  He  renounced  all  that  had  formerly 
appeared  to  him  great  and  splendid,  gave  up  his 
business,  divided  his  property  among  the  poor, 
and  joined  the  Franciscan  tertiaries.  To  express 
contempt  of  the  world  and  self  he  went  to  absurd 
extremes  of  fanaticism  and  sought  to  realize  literaUy 
the  "  foolishness  "  described  m  I  Cor.  i.  20-29,  so 
that  he  received  the  nickname  Jacopone  ("  silly 
James  "),  which  he  accepted  as  a  badge  of  honor. 
In  1278  he  sought  to  enter  the  Franciscan  order, 
but  they  would  not  receive  him  until  he  proved 
the  soundness  of  his  mind  by  a  LibeUus  de  mundi 
contemtu.  Becoming  a  monk  did  not  change  his 
eccentric  habits,  and  those  who  judged  him  most 
mildly  pronounced  him  spiritu  ebrius.  The  condi- 
tions of  the  time  drew  Jacopone  into  the  storm  of 
political  life.  His  love  of  truth  could  not  endure 
the  Church's  abuses,  and  many  a  judgment  full  of 
bitter  earnestness  did  he  hurl  in  the  days  of  popes 
CelestineV.  and  Boniface  VIII.  He  attacked  the  lat- 
ter personally,  and,  in  May,  1297,  joined  the  league 
of  Roman  magnates  that  aimed  to  bring  about 
the  pope's  deposition,  thereby  incurring  the  ban 
of  the  Church.  When  Boniface  VHI.  conquered 
Praeneste,  in  1298,  Jacopone  was  imprisoned.  After 
the  death  of  Boniface  he  was  liberated,  Dec,  1303. 
and  spent  his  closing  years  in  the  monastery  of 
Collazone. 

Jacopone's  literary  products  include  sententious 

maxims  of  the  sort  found  in  the  Liber  oonformi- 

taJtum  compiled   by  Bartholomew  of 

Writings.    Pisa,  which  were  gratefully  preserved 

The  Stabat  and  circulated  in  the  Franciscan  order. 

Mater.      But  a  much  latger  drde  of  devotees 

was  won  by  his  Italian  and  Latin  lyrics. 

The  Florentine  edition  by  Bonaocorsi  (1490)  gives 

100  Italian  poems;  the  Venetian  edition  by  Trrasati 

(1614)  no  fewer  than  211  satires,  odes,  penitential 


85 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jaoolms 
Jahn 


hymns,  and  spiritual  love-songs.  He  sinks  himself 
as  a  mystic  into  Christian  metaphysics,  and  cele- 
brates the  exalted  flight  of  the  soul  to  Qod  and  its 
nuptials  with  the  divine  love;  he  relates  the  con- 
flict between  the  penitent  spirit  and  the  body  still 
rebelliously  striving  under  the  rod.  In  other  poems 
he  scourges  with  holy  zeal  the  wrongs  of  the  time — 
popular  customs,  luxury  of  the  women,  worldliness 
of  the  nuns,  the  papieJ  Antichrist.  Finally  he 
brings  before  the  people  the  life  of  Jesus,  to  teach 
them  holy  living  after  the  rule  of  Christ,  and  cele- 
brates poverty  most  highly. 

The  question  of  authenticity  is  much  more  diffi- 
cult in  case  of  the  Latin  hymns  which  bear  Jaco- 
pone's  name,  and  they  have  been  ascribed  to  various 
authors.  Apart  from  Ctur  mundu8  miliUU  (cf.  H.  A. 
Daniel,  Tkesatirus  hymnologiciLSf  ii.,  Leipsic,  1S44, 
379;  S.  W.  Duffield,  Latin  HymnrWriters,  New 
York,  1889,  279-280)  the  most  important  is  the 
renowned  sequence  Stabat  mater  dolorosa,  beside 
which  the  manuscripts  contain  also  the  parody 
Stabat  mater  speciosa  juxia  foenum  ga%idio9a,  dum 
jacebat  panmlua.  The  hynm  undoubtedly  originated 
in  the  Franciscan  order*  but  who  the  actual  author 
was  is  open  to  many  hypotheses.  Gregory  the  Great, 
Bernard  of  Clairvaux,  Innocent  III.,  and  others 
have  been  suggested.  The  hynm  is  anonymous  in 
manuscripts  of  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  cen- 
turies, and  it  is  tradition  of  the  Franciscan  order 
which  names  Jacopone  as  its  author.  It  was  sung  by 
the  Flagellants  who  traversed  Italy  in  1398  (see 
Flagellation,  Flagellants)  and,  according  to 
the  Summa  historialis  of  Antoninus  Florentinus  (d. 
14M),  sang  "  hymns  in  Latin  and  the  vemacuJar, 
and  especially  that  Stabat  mater  dolorosa  which  they 
say  Gregory  gave  forth."  The  sequence  was  used 
in  the  Church  as  early  as  the  fourteenth  century, 
and  eighty-three  German  translations  alone  are 
known.  Of  musical  settings  for  this  celebrated 
hynm,  the  compositions  of  Palestrina  and  Peigolese, 
Astorga,  and  Haydn  are  well  known.  The  Protes- 
tant judgment  of  the  hynm  must  be,  doctrinally, 
that  it  divides  reverence  between  mother  and  son 
in  a  manner  never  to  be  endured  by  a  Protestant 
temperament;  but,  regarded  esthetically,  it  may 
be  pronounced  a  pearl  among  medieval  hymns. 

E.  Lbmpp. 

Bibuoohapht:  Bartholomew  of  Ksa,  Liber  conformitatum 
p.  60b,  Milan,  1510;  L.  Wadding,  Annale$  Minarum,  v. 
407  sqq.,  vi.  77  sqq.,  Rome,  1783;  F.  A.  Maroh.  LaHn 
Hynms,  pp.  171-177.  300-303,  New  York.  1874  (gives  text 
of  Stabat  mater,  notes  on  it.  and  notes  on  Jaoopone);  H. 
Hiode,  FranM  van  Aeeiei  uni  die  AnfOnge  der  Renaiaeanoe 
in  Italien,  pp.  408  sqq.,  Berlin,  1886;  8.  W.  Dii£Beld, 
LaHn  Hvnun^Writere  and  their  Hymn8t  ohap.  xxv.,  ib. 
1889;  JCL.  vi  119^-98.  On  the  Stabat  mater  the  three 
best  works  are:  F.  G.  Lisoo,  Stabat  mater,  Berlin,  1863; 
C.  H.  Bitter.  Studie  zum  Stabat  mater,  Leipeio,  1883;  J. 
Kayser,  BeUrOoe  rur  Oeaehiehie  und  ErklArung  der  dUeeten 
KirehenXtflnneit,  ii.  100-192.  Paderbom.  1886;  A.  Ten- 
neroni,  in  Nuova  Antohgia,  June  16.  1907;  O.  Qalli,  Die- 
eiplinanH  deW  Ufphria  del  1B60  e  le  loro  Landi,  Turin, 
1907.  Available  in  English  are  R.  C.  Treneh,  Sacred 
LaHn  Poetry,  pp.  262-268.  London.  1864;  Seven  Great 
Hymne,  pp.  96-109.  New  York,  1868  (text,  transl.,  and 
notes);  D.  T.  Morgan,  Hymne  of  Oie  LaHn  Churdi,  pp. 
6-8,  184-186,  London,  1871;  W.  A.  Merrill,  LaHn  Hymne, 
pp.  66-66,  Boston.  1904  (text  and  notes);  Julian,  Hym- 
noion,  pp.  1081-84  (admirable  summary  of  data,  details 
of  principal  texts  and  Eng.  transls.). 


JABGER,  y^ger,  J0HA1IN«  See  EpiaroiiAB 
Obscurum  Viborum. 

JAFFE,  yOf'f^,  PHILIPP:  German  historian; 
b.  at  Schwersenz  (6  m.  e.  of  Posen),  Prussia,  Feb.  17, 
1819;  d.  at  Wittenbeig  Apr.  3,  1870.  He  studied 
at  the  University  of  Berlin  imder  Ranke,  and  first 
distinguished  himself  by  his  prize-essay,  Oeackickte 
des  deulschen  Reicks  unter  Lothar  dem  Sachsen  (Ber- 
lin, 1843),  which  was  followed  by  his  Geachichte  des 
deutschen  Reichs  unter  Konrad  dem  Dritten  (Hanover, 
1845).  Finding  that,  as  a  Jew,  the  road  to  academic 
preferment  in  Prussia  was  closed  to  him,  he  took 
up  the  study  of  medicine  in  1850,  and  spent  the 
next  three  years  in  the  universities  of  Berlin  and 
Vienna.  In  1854,  however,  shortly  after  he  had 
passed  his  examination  in  medicine,  he  became  the 
collaborator  of  G.  H.  Pertz  on  the  Monumenta 
Germamae  historiea  and  edited  for  that  collection 
a  number  of  works  in  which  he  showed  great  ability 
in  historical-philological  criticism.  He  became  ex- 
traordinary professor  of  history  at  the  University 
of  Berlin  in  1862,  and  withdrew  from  the  Monu- 
menta the  following  year.  He  turned  Christian  in 
1868,  broke  with  his  old  friends,  fell  into  despond- 
ency, and  finally  committed  suicide.  Other  im- 
portant works  by  Jafif^  are  the  invaluable  Regesta 
poniificum  Romanorum  ,  ,  .  ad  annum  .  .  .  1198 
(Berlin,  1851;  2d  ed.,  Leipsic,  1881^88);  the  mas- 
terly Bibliotheea  rerum  Oermanicarum  (6  vols., 
Berlin,  1864-73);  and  Eodestte  metropolitancB  Colontr 
ensis  codices  (1874),  in  which  W.  Wattenbach  col- 
laborated with  him. 

JA6GAR,  THOMAS  AUGUSTUS:  Protestant 
Episcopal  bishop  of  Southern  Ohio;  b.  in  New  York 
City  June  2,  1839.  He  was  educated  mainly  by 
private  tutors,  and  pursued  his  theological  studies 
partly  privately  and  partly  in  the  General  Theo- 
logical Seminary,  New  York  City.  He  was  ordered 
deacon  in  1860,  and  advanced  to  the  priesthood  in 
1863.  After  being  minister  at  St.  George's,  Flushing, 
N.  Y.  (1860-62),  and  Trinity,  Beigen  Point,  N.  J. 
(1863-64),  he  was  rector  of  Anthon  Memorial  (now 
All  Souls'),  New  York  City,  in  1864-68,  St.  John's, 
Yonkers,  N.  Y.,  in  1868-70,  and  Holy  Trinity, 
Philadelphia,  in  1870-75.  In  1875  he  was  conse- 
crated first  bishop  of  Southern  Ohio.  Ill  health, 
from  which  he  had  long  suffered,  however,  obliged 
him  to  retire  from  the  episcopal  office  in  1889,  al- 
though he  still  retains  his  seat  and  vote  in  the  house 
of  bishops.  While  at  Yonkers  he  founded  St.  John's 
Riverside  Hospital  in  that  city.  He  has  written 
DiUy  of  the  Clergy  in  Relation  to  Modem  Scepticism 
(Cincinnati,  O.,  1883),  and  The  Personality  of  Truth 
(Bohlen  lectures  for  1900;   New  York,  1900). 

JAHH,  yCLn,  JOHAHH:  Roman  Catholic  Biblical 
scholar;  b.  at  Tasswitz,  near  Znaim  (47  m.  n.n.w. 
of  Vienna),  Moravia,  June  18,  1750;  d.  at  Vienna 
Aug.  16,  1816.  He  attended  the  gymnasium  at 
Znaim,  studied  philosophy  at  Olmtktz,  and  in  1772 
began  the  study  of  theology  at  the  Premonstraten- 
sian  convent  of  Bruck,  near  Znaim.  After  he  had 
taken  the  vow  in  1774  he  was  employed  for  a  time 
in  pastoral  work  at  Mislitz,  but  was  soon  recalled 
to  Bruck  as  teacher  of  Oriental  languages  and 
Biblical  henneneutics.    On  the  suppression  of  the 


Jainia 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HER20G 


86 


convent  in  1784,  he  was  given  a  similar  chair  in 
the  lyceum  at  Ohntttz,  and  in  1789  he  was  trans- 
ferred to  the  University  of  Vienna  as  professor  of 
Oriental  languages,  Old-Testament  introduction, 
and  Biblical  archeology.  To  this  professorship  dog- 
matics was  added  in  1803.  On  account  of  Mb  ad- 
vanced views  concerning  the  Bible  he  was  honorably 
removed  from  his  chair  in  1805  and  promoted  to 
a  canonry  in  St.  Stephen's,  Vienna.  Henceforth 
he  lived  in  retirement,  devoting  himself  to  Biblical 
and  linguistic  studies.  His  most  important  works 
are  EirUeitung  in  die  goUlichen  Schriften  des  Alten 
Bundes  (2  parts,  Vienna,  1792;  2d  ed.,  4  vols., 
1802-03);  Bibliache  Arch&ologie  (5  vols.,  1797- 
1805);  IrUroductio  in  Ubros  aacras  Veieris  Fcsderis 
in  compendium  redada  (1804;  2d  ed.,  1814;  Eng. 
transl.,  Introduction  to  the  O.  T.,  New  York,  1827) ; 
ArchoBologia  Biblica  in  compendium  redada  (1804; 
2d  ed.,  1814;  Eng.  transl.,  Biblicai  Archa^Aogy, 
Andover,  1823);  Enchiridion  hermeneuiictB  (1812); 
Appendix  hermeneutica  (2  fasc.,  1813-15);  and  the 
posthumous  Nachtrdge  (Tubingen,  1821).  Jahn 
also  published  a  number  of  grammars,  lexicons,  and 
text-books  of  Hebrew,  Aramaic,  Syriac,  and  Arabic, 
and  an  edition  of  the  Hebrew  Bible  (4  vols.,  Vienna, 
1806).  His  IntroductiOf  Archasologia,  Enchiridion, 
and  Appendix  hermeneutica  were  placed  upon  the 
Index  in  1822. 

Dibljoobapht:  VindidoB  Joannia  John,  Leipde,  1822; 
F.  H.  R«usch,  Index  verboUnen  BlUher,  ii.  1063-84,  Bonn. 
1886;   KL.  vi.  1208-10. 

JAINISM. 

The  Founder  (f  1).  Buii  in  Brmhnuminn  (I  4). 

Relation     to     Buddhiom  The  System  and  its  History 

'I  2).  (I  6). 

The  Jain  Philosophy  (I  3).  The  Literature  (I  6). 

The  remote  origin  of  Jainism  is  traced  to  a  teacher 

named  Parsva  who  lived  in  north  central  India  in 

the  eighth  century  before  Christ  and 

I.  The      left  a  school  of  thought  which  did  not 

Founder,  become  active  till  two  centuries  later. 
The  immediate  founder  was  a  certain 
Vardhamana,  a  younger  son  of  Siddartha,  and  a 
contemporary  of  Buddha.  The  Jain  literature, 
following  the  usual  tendency  of  religious  books  to 
exalt  and  glorify  the  founder,  represents  the  father 
of  Vardhamana  as  king  of  a  laige  town  named 
Kundagrama  or  Kimdapura,  identified  as  the  mod- 
em Basukund.  Investigation  has  shown  that  this 
place  was  a  mere  suburb  of  the  town  Vaisali,  the 
modem  Besarh.  Siddartha  could  therefore  have 
been  at  best  only  headman  of  a  village,  though  he 
was  connected  with  the  king  of  Vaisali  and  with 
the  dynasty  then  ruling  Magadha.  Vardhamana 
consequently  belonged  to  the  Kshatriya  or  warrior 
class,  as  did  Buddha,  therefore  to  the  aristocracy. 
The  traditions  represent  him  as  living  with  l^s 
parents  till  they  died,  when  his  elder  brother,  Nan- 
divardhana,  succeeded  as  head  of  the  household. 
Vardhamana  was  then  twenty-eight  years  of  age, 
and  he  sought  and  gained  permission  to  enter  the 
spiritual  career.  For  twelve  ye&TB  he  followed  the 
life  of  the  meditative  ascetic,  after  which  be  was 
recognized  as  a  prophet,  having  claimed  "  perfect 
knowledge  and  faith,"  and  was  hailed  Mahavira, 
"  great  hero/'  Jina,  "  victor,"  and  greeted  with 


other  titles  indicative  of  his  success.  He  lived  thirty 
years  after  this,  following  the  career  of  a  teacher 
and  ascetic,  preaching  his  doctrine  and  organizing 
his  Church.  He  died  at  Papa  or  Pava,  the  modem 
Padraona.  His  contemporaneity  with  Buddha  is 
established  by  the  fact  that  the  traditions  of  Jains 
and  Buddhists  alike  refer  to  the  same  contempora- 
ries, which  brings  out  the  farther  coincidence  that 
the  two  religions  arose  in  approximately  the  same 
region,  north  of  the  center  of  India,  and  that  Jain- 
ism became  active  and  made  its  early  conquests 
in  a  region  comprising  the  modem  Oudh  and  the 
districts  of  Tirhut  and  Bihar  in  western  Bengal, 
where  its  progress  can  be  traced  by  inscriptions 
from  the  time  of  Asoka  in  the  third  century  B.C. 

The  rise  of  two  religious  leaders  of  the  same  caste 
in  the  same  region  and  period,  bearing  the  same 
titles,  which  were  gained  in  practically 
a.  Rela-  the  same  manner,  using  a  common 
tk>n  to  stock  of  ideas  expressed  in  a  common 
Buddhism*  technic  of  names  and  epithets,  and 
founding  churches  with  similar  forms 
of  organization,  and  having  each  a  Nirvana  as  the 
goal  of  human  striving,  is  a  phenomenon  which 
might  well  cause  not  only  dispute  between  the  later 
adherents  of  the  religions,  but  also  confusion  and 
perplexity  among  scientific  students.  For  long  the 
resemblances  between  Buddhism  and  Jainism  were 
explained  by  the  supposition  that  one  was  a  schism 
or  an  ofifshoot  of  the  other,  and  the  question  of 
priority  was  hotly  debated.  Recent  study  has 
cleared  the  atmosphere  not  only  in  the  matter  of 
origins,  but  in  exact  knowledge  of  the  details  of 
the  lives  of  the  founders  and  of  the  religious  and 
philosophical  conceptions  and  modifications  of  such 
ideas  as  were  inherited  from  the  society  and  religion 
existent  prior  to  the  rise  of  these  two  sects.  Thus 
of  the  founders  it  is  now  known  that  the  birth- 
places were  different,  that  Buddha's  mother  died 
while  he  was  an  infant,  while  Vardhamana's  lived 
to  see  him  reach  maturity;  that  Buddha  entered 
the  ascetic  life  against  the  will  of  his  father,  Vard- 
hamana after  his  parent's  death  and  with  the  con- 
sent of  his  family;  and  that  Buddha  lived  this  life 
for  six  years  and  contenmed  its  results,  while  Vard- 
hamana pursued  it  for  twelve  years  and  regarded 
the  exercise  as  salutary,  continuing  the  vocation 
after  reaching  sainthood.  Among  the  common 
titles  of  the  founders  are  Jina,  Arhat,  Mahavira. 
Tathagatha,  Buddha,  and  Paranivrita,  every  one 
of  which  is  in  the  sacred  writings  of  the  sects  given 
to  the  foimders.  But  each  sect  has  a  marked  and 
unmistakable  preference  for  a  certain  set  of  these 
different  from  that  preferred  by  the  other.  Common 
to  both  sects  as  developed  is  the  worship  of  the 
founders;  but  in  Jainism  this  is  consistent  with  the 
fimdamental  ideas  of  the  system,  while  in  Buddhism 
the  primitive  ideal  rigidly  excludes  it — ^the  practise 
there  has  been  fostered  by  the  people's  inability 
to  live  up  to  the  abstract  ideal  the  Buddhist  faith 
presents.  A  fundamental  doctrine  in  both  sects 
is  that  of  Ahimsa  or  the  sacredness  of  all  life.  In 
this  the  principal  difference  between  the  two  relig- 
ions is  the  irrational  extreme  to  which  the  Jains 
have  carried  the  practise.  The  Jain  may  eat  even  of 
vegetables  and  fruit  only  such  as  have  no  trace  of 


87 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jftlnina 


life  left — ^may  not  pluck  the  vegetable  or  fruit 
from  its  source — ^and  must  strain  through  a  cloth 
the  water  he  drinks.  Further  regulations  prescribe 
the  covering  of  the  ascetic's  mouth  and  nose  with 
a  cloth  that  no  insects  may  be  drawn  in  with  the 
breath  to  their  death,  and  the  pushing  of  a  broom 
before  him  as  he  walks  that  no  living  thing  may  be 
crushed  by  his  feet.  The  systems  have  developed 
along  similar  lines^  with  orders  of  monks  upon 
whom  severe  duties  press,  and  lay  conmiunicants 
from  whom  a  lesser  degree  of  abstinence  is  de- 
manded. Both  have  had  temples  of  ambitious 
structure,  in  which  were  placed  statues  of  the 
founders  and  their  disciples,  though  those  of  the 
Jains  are  the  more  monumental.  These  resem- 
blances and  dififerences  are  now  quite  fully  ac- 
counted for. 

The  fimdamental  assumption  of  the  Jains  is  the 
eternity  of  matter,  which  is  regarded  as  atomic  in 
structure.  Time  proceeds  in  pairs  of 
3.  The  Jain  cycles  each  of  enormous  length,  in  the 
Phjloflophy.  first  of  which  goodness  constantly  in- 
creases, and  in  the  second  diminishes. 
Since  matter  is  eternal,  no  necessity  arises  for 
creative  agency,  and  Jains  have  consequently  been 
called  atheists.  But  worship  is  paid  to  the  Jina, 
and  indeed  to  Hindu  deities,  since  the  native  pre- 
dilection to  polytheism  has  in  Jainiam,  as  in  Bud- 
dhism, been  too  strong  for  the  philosophy  to  over- 
come. Over  against  the  eternity  of  matter  the  Jain 
puts  the  eternity  of  individual  spirits.  The  Jain  phi- 
losophy is  therefore  duahstic  as  against  the  spiritual- 
istic monism  of  Buddhism.  Them  spirits  are  bound 
by  the  action  of  Karma  (the  accumulated  efifects  of 
all  deeds  in  former  existences),  but  owing  to  the 
differences  in  the  manner  of  conceiving  individual 
existence,  that  action  is  regarded  differently  from 
the  Buddhistic  method.  To  the  Buddhist  the  soul 
is  not  a  permanent  individual  entity  passing  as  a 
unit  from  one  state  of  existence  or  incarnation  to 
another,  but  a  dissoluble  aggregate  of  qualities 
in  which  not  individuality  but  the  effect  of  Karma 
is  the  integrating  factor.  To  the  Jain  the  human 
spirit  is  an  eternal  entity  which  in  its  various  in- 
carnated lives  Karma  affects  as  a  permanent  in- 
dividuality. Consequently  Nirvana  takes  a  differ- 
ent form  in  the  two  religions.  Logically  in  Buddhism 
it  is  the  annihilation  of  Karma  as  an  integrating 
principle,  in  consequence  of  which  the  individual 
as  such  ceases  to  exist.  In  Jainism  Nirvana  is 
release  of  the  soul  from  union  with  the  body  and 
from  connection  with  matter,  but  the  soul  continues 
consciously  to  exist.  Salvation  is  wrought  through 
ascetic  practises,  guided  by  the  three  jewels  of  right 
faith,  right  knowledge,  and  right  conduct.  For  the 
layman  eight  reincarnations  are  necessary  to  secure 
release,  while  the  ascetic  secures  the  same  result 
by  twelve  years  of  strenuous  self-denial,  after  which 
he  may  if  he  will  at  once  enter  Nirvana  by /do  de  ae. 
The  monks  are  compelled  to  take  the  five  major 
vows,  practically  identical  with  those  of  Buddhism. 

The  great  similarity  of  the  two  systems  and  also 
their  mutual  dislike  led  to  patient  search  for  the 
reasons  of  the  resemblances  and  the  differences. 
Especially  have  the  religious  life  and  obligations  of 
thepre-Jain  Brahman  ascetic  been  under  review. 


The  result  is  the  discovery  that  of  the  Brahman 
ascetic  of  early  times  were  demanded  four  of  the  five 

major  vows,  viz.,  Ahimsa,  truthful- 
4.  Basis  ness,  honesty,  and  continence.  But 
in  Brah-  besides  these  points,  common  to  the 
manism.    three  systems,  there  are  others  which 

are  established  as  clearly  pre-Jainistic. 
Thus  it  was  required  of  the  Brahman  recluse  not  to 
change  his  residence  during  the  rainy  season,  at 
other  times  the  period  of  his  stay  in  a  place  was 
limited,  though  in  the  later  systems  the  bounds  of 
his  stay  varied;  the  rules  for  dress  in  all  three 
systems  reduce  to  practically  the  same  basis,  and 
Brahman  and  Jain  ritual  provide  for  the  elimination 
of  hair  and  beard.  Even  the  straining  of  drinking- 
water  is  Brahmanic,  and  the  equipment  of  cloth 
and  begging-bowl  is  common  to  Brahman  and 
Jain.  Jainism  stands  revealed,  therefore,  as  one  of 
the  two  revolts  against  Brahmanic  teaching,  ritual, 
and  doctrine  which  took  form  in  the  sixth  century 
B.C.,  and  for  ten  centuries  threatened  the  extinction 
of  the  parent  faith.  Yet,  like  Buddhism,  it  bor- 
rowed thought  and  even  much  of  its  religious  ter- 
minology and  practise  from  Brahmanism.  Its 
monks  are  called  Yatis,  a  Brahmanic  name  for 
eremite,  and  the  titles  given  the  Jina  are  common- 
places in  pre-Jain  Brahmanism. 

On  such  a  basis,  in  the  sixth  century  b.c,  in  the 
north  central  part  of  India,   Vardhamana,  after 

twelve  years  of  asceticism,  launched 
5.  The  his  system.  His  social  status  as  a 
System  Kshatriya  opened  to  him  the  ears  of 
and  its  the  wealthy,  while  his  performance  of 
History,    the  ascetic  vows  and  the  sanctity  thus 

gained  won  him  the  reverence  of  the 
lower  orders  of  the  population.  He  laid  the  usual 
emphasis  of  the  Brahman  upon  the  evil  in  matter 
and  on  the  value  of  the  ascetic  life  as  the  means 
to  evade  it.  The  older  vows  were  made  more 
stringent;  a  theology  with  its  heaven  and  hell  and 
Nirvana  was  formulated.  The  system  broke  with 
Brahmanism  in  making  its  benefits  extend  to  all 
castes  and  even  to  the  outcasts,  though  it  was 
affirmed  that  all  preceding  Jinas  (twenty-three  in 
number)  were  of  the  warrior  caste.  Its  ascetics  were 
called  Nirgrantha,  "  freed  from  bonds,"  Yatis, 
"  ascetics,"  or  Sadhus,  "  holy  ones."  And  since 
not  all  could  follow  the  ascetic  pattern,  provision 
was  made  for  the  lay  community.  The  members 
vowed  obedience  to  the  Jina,  the  law  and  the 
teacher;  in  the  early  morning  they  worshiped  at 
home,  and  in  the  temple  the  image  of  the  Jina, 
read  and  recited  from  the  scriptures,  sang  hymns, 
and  then  at  different  times  of  the  day  practised 
their  devotions.  Meanwhile  they  had  the  privilege 
of  contributing  to  the  support  of  the  monastics, 
and  received  the  name  of  upasakas  or  "  worshipers  " 
and  sravakas  or  "  hearers."  After  eight  reincarna- 
tions they  were  promised  Nirvana.  For  the  monk  a 
more  rigorous  routine  is  prescribed,  and  a  speedier 
release  foretold.  During  the  rainy  season  he  seeks 
shelter  in  a  monastery  of  the  order,  for  then  life  is 
more  abundant  and  movement  pr^nant  with  dan- 
ger to  it.  For  the  remaining  eight  months  he  takes 
the  road  and  wanders  barefoot  and  bareheaded; 
he  may  not  sleep  in  a  bed  nor  take  any  conveyance, 


Jainiam 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOQ 


88 


and  may  ha^e  as  his  only  possessions  his  cloth, 
bowl,  broom,  and  sacred  books — indeed,  these  are 
not  reckoned  his  own.  He  may  not  touch  metal, 
may  eat  no  fruit  and  drink  no  wine,  light  no  fire, 
and  take  no  bath  except  in  water  which  has  been 
previously  used  by  another  and  has  so  been  rendered 
void  of  Ufe.  He  may  not  disturb  the  insects  or 
vermin  which  torment  his  flesh,  nor  do  anything 
that  may  harm  even  potential  life.  After  twelve 
years  thus  spent  he  gains  his  goal  and  may  seize 
the  possession,  or  may  continue  in  this  life  as  a 
teacher.  Moreover,  his  discipline  covers  the  inner 
life  as  he  gains  mastery  over  his  own  mind,  con- 
science, and  heart.  Thus  the  system  was  laid.  In 
the  foiurth  century  B.C.  differences  of  opinion  re- 
specting the  stringency  of  the  Jina's  commands 
regarding  clothing  split  the  religion  into  two  parts, 
the  Svetambaras  or  "  white-clothed "  and  the 
Digambaras  or  ''  air-clothed."  The  latter  wore  a 
minimum  of  clothing,  sometimes  none,  and  are 
possibly,  even  probably,  the  Qymnosophoi  of  Greek 
literature.  The  Svetambaras  have  both  monks  and 
nuns,  the  Digambaras  do  not  admit  women  to  the 
ascetic  life.  The  former  have  divided  into  seven 
minor  sects,  differing  only  on  lesser  points  of  faith 
or  practise.  The  religion  spread  to  the  west  and 
south,  the  Svetambaras  remaining  in  the  northern 
portion,  the  Digambaras  developing  to  the  south. 
Its  course  can  be  traced  by  inscriptions  dated  from 
the  third  pre-Christian  century  until,  in  the  fifth 
Christian  century,  it  is  found  far  south  of  Central 
India.  There  it  met  the  opposition  of  the  Brahman 
sages  Manikka  Vasagar  and  Tiru  Nana  Sambandha, 
who  were  effective  in  staying  its  progress  in  the 
tenth  century.  It  has  never  been  a  missionary 
religion  in  the  sense  that  Buddhism  has  been,  con- 
sequently its  adherents  have  been  confined  to  the 
peninsula.  Its  numbers,  according  to  the  census 
of  1001,  are  1,334,148,  though  the  authorities  de- 
clare that  more  exact  details  would  make  the  total 
greater,  since  many  known  Jains  returned  them- 
selves simply  as  "  Hindus."  The  institutions  are 
the  temples,  the  monasteries  where  the  monks  spend 
the  rainy  season,  and  the  hospitals  for  animals, 
where  the  maimed  and  even  this  healthy  are  sup- 
ported. A  great  deal  of  wealth  is  in  the  possession 
of  adherents  of  the  religion,  and  this  is  held  at  the 
service  of  the  order. 

The  literature  of  Jainism  is  as  yet  comparatively 
unknown,  and  until  1870  almost  none  of  it  beyond 
the  Kalpa  Sutra  was  in  the  possession 
6.  The      of  Occidentals.    The  general  name  cor- 
Litenture.  responding   to  the  word  Scripture  is 
Siddantha,  under  which  term  are  in- 
cluded six  classes  of  writings,  viz.:   twelve  Angas, 
twelve  Upangas,  ten  Painnas,  six  Qhedasutras,  two 
sutras  without  special  names,  and  four  Mulasutras. 
There  is  constant  reference  in  this  literature  to  a 
class  of  writings  called  Purvas,  or  primitive  scrip- 
tures, which  took  form  perhaps  as  early  as  the 
fourth  century  b.c,  but  are  either  lost  or  embodied 
in  the  Angas.    There  are  references  also  to  the  loss 
and  recovery  of  these  primitive  scriptures  such  as 
lead  to  the  suspicion  that  the  sacred  books  of  the 
Jains  have  passed  through  experiences  like  those 
of  the  Hebrews,  Christians,  Zoroastrians,  and  Con- 


fucians. At  any  rate,  so  far  as  known,  the  present 
literatiu^  does  not  contain  anything  recognized  as 
Purva.  The  Angas  are  the  authoritative  scriptures 
of  the  Svetambaras,  and  the  authoritative  recension 
took  place  in  the  fourth  century  of  our  era.  The 
language  is  the  Prakrit,  as  is  that  of  most  of  the 
other  Uterature  so  far  as  it  is  known;  some  of  it 
is  in  Gujarati.  To  each  of  the  Angas  there  are  sub- 
sidiary parts,  just  as  there  are  Brahmanas  to  the 
Vedas.  The  Kalpa  Sutra  may  be  called  the  manual 
of  the  Svetambaras.  The  Jains  who  went  south- 
ward developed  a  later  literature  different  from  the 
Angas,  and  indeed  did  much  in  the  way  of  founding 
the  literature  of  the  Kanarese,  Tamil  and  Telugu; 
consequently  the  Digambaras  have  their  own 
sacred  books  apart  from  that  of  the  rival  sect. 
The  whole  of  the  Angas  reproduce  in  their  literary 
features  the  traits  of  other  sacred  books,  the  parts 
being  of  unequal  merit,  often  evidently  fragmentary, 
and  covering  a  long  period  in  their  dates  of  origin. 
They  have  teen  subject  to  recension,  in  which  harmo- 
nistic  effort  is  clearly  traceable.  This  often  includes 
slokas  or  sections  of  much  earlier  literature,  much 
as  the  Pentateuch  contains  bits  of  early  folk-song 
like  the  song  of  Lamech  or  of  the  well.  Moreover, 
conunentaries  exist  which  contain  alleged  quota- 
tions which  are  not  in  the  extant  texts,  showing 
that  parts  have  been  lost.  The  codification  took 
place,  as  is  noted  above,  some  800  years  after  the 
origin  of  the  religion.  Two  series  of  publications 
embodying  the  texts  are  in  course  of  issue,  one  be- 
gun under  the  auspices  of  a  wealthy  Jain,  the  late 
Rao  Bahadur  Dhanapatisinha,  in  which  some  thirty 
treatises  have  been  produced,  with  comment  and 
explanation,  at  Calcutta  and  Bombay.  The  Jain 
Religious  Book  Society  of  Murshidabad  is  publish^ 
ing  the  other,  which  has  already  duplicated  the 
first  series  and  has  added  a  number  not  otherwise 
printed.  Geo.  W.  Gilmorb. 

Bxblxoobapbt:  On  tha  literature  the  most  exhaustive  etudy 
is  by  A.  Weber,  in  inditthe  Studien,  zvi.-xvii..  Leipeic, 
1883-84,  reproduced  in  EncUah  in  the  Indian  Antiquarv, 
zvii.-xxi.,  1888-02,  and  in  his  Sacrtd  LUeratum  cf  the 
J(Un»,  Bombay,  1803.  Consult  also  A.  Guerinot.  Ettai 
de  bibliograf^ie  Jaina,  Paris,  1006.  A  very  defective 
translation  of  the  Kalpa  Sutra  i4>peared  in  London.  1848. 
H.  Jacobi  has  made  several  of  the  Sutras  available  in 
English  in  SBE,  xzi.,  xlv.,  with  valuable  introduction 
concerning  the  religion,  and  has  edited  the  Kalpa  Sutra, 
with  introduction  and  notes,  Leipoie,  1870.  and  the  Tatt- 
varthadhigama  Sutra,  ib.  1006.  Other  sutras  have  been 
edited  by  T<enmann  in  Ahhandlunifen  fOr  di$  Kunde  cks 
Moroenland«9,  vol.  viii..  and  in  ZDMO/vol.  xlvi.;  also  by 
Hoemle.  in  Bibliothsca  Indiea,  2  vols.,  text,  commentary 
and  transl.,  Calcutta.  1888-^X). 

On  the  religion  the  best  single  discussion  is  by  J.  G. 
BOhler.  Ueb^  die  indUche  8eeU  dm'  Jaina,  Vienna,  1887. 
Eng.  transl.,  On  th»  Indian  Seel  of  tht  Jainaa,  London, 
1003.  Consult:  H.  T.  Coleridge.  Eemut^  late  ed..  London. 
1870  (good  for  description,  not  for  explanation  of  origins); 
J.  Bird,  Hittorical  Reeeard^ea  on  tho  Origin  and  Principle 
of  the  ,  ,  .  Joina  Relioion,  Bombay,  1847;  E.  Thomas. 
Jainiam,  London.  1877;  J.  Burgees,  Jain  Cave  TVntplss.  in 
Fergusson's  Cave  Tempiee,  ib.  1880;  idem,  Templee  and 
Jttina  Cavea  in  Weetem  India,  2  vols.,  66  plates,  ib.  1881- 
1883;  J.  S.  Warren,  Lea  Idfea  phihaophiquea  etreHoieuaeadea 
Jainaa,  in  Annalea  de  Mueie  Ouimei,  x.  321-411.  Paris. 
1887;  E.  W.  Hopkins,  Religiona  of  India,  pp.  280-207. 
Boston,  1806  (not  up  to  the  standard  of  the  rest  of  his 
book,  his  verdict  is  disparaging  and  condemnatory);  Jo- 
gendra  Nath  Bhattacharjee.  Hindu  Coatee  and  Secta,  Cal- 
cutta. 1806;  V.  A  Smith.  Ths  Jain  Stupa  and  Other 
Antiquitiee  of  Mathura,  India  Arohsological  Survey,  Re- 


89 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


JainUm 
Juumi 


porta,  vol.  XX.,  1001;  A.  Barth,  Butt^tin  du  rdiaiofu  de 
VInd€,  iv..  Puis.  1902;  RHR,  zlv.  171-185  (by  Barth). 
xlTii.  34-50  (by  A.  Guersnot).  Tha  filea  of  the  ZDMG 
contain  muoh  important  matter  by  the  few  students  of 
the  subject,  e^g.,  vol.  i  (by  A.  Weber).  xsdL  600  sqq., 
xxjov,  247  SQQ..  XXXV.  667  sqq.,  zxxviii.  1  sqq.,  id.  02  sqq. 
(all  by  Jaoobi).  xxxiv.  445  sqq.  (by  Klatt),  xzxiv.  748  sqq. 
(by  Oldenberi).  xlviii  (by  Leumann,  on  the  Jain  legends). 
Similarly  contributions  have  been  made  to  the  Indian  An- 
Hquary  by  various  observers,  including  Hoemle  and  BQhler. 
The  files  of  the  JRAS  contain  occasional  articles  of  value. 

JAIR  (Hebr.  Fa'trand  Ya'ir):  An  Old-Testament 
name  which  takes  two  forms  and  originally  had  as 
an  element  a  divine  name  which  has  sloughed  ofif. 
Ya*ir  (II  Sam.  xxi.  19)  was  a  Bethlehemite,  and 
father  of  the  Elhanan  who  slew  Goliath  of  Gath, 
or  his  brother  (I  Chron.  xx.  5).  Ya'ir  (Esther  ii.  6) 
is  the  father  of  Mordecai,  and  also  the  name  of  a 
strong  clan  in  the  district  east  of  the  Jordan.  With 
the  last  this  article  is  concerned. 

Judges  X.  ^-5  speaks  of  a  Jair  who  was  one  of 
the  minor  judges  and  ruled  Israel  twenty-two  years, 
a  period  which  falls  within  the  interregna  of  the 
greater  judges,  and  is  included  in  the  chronology 
which  reckons  480  years  between  the  Exodus  and 
Solomon  (I  Kings  vi.  1).  Ndldeke  identifies  this 
Jair  with  the  eponymous  ancestor  of  the  Jair  dan. 
Though  Jair  the  judge  can  find  no  place  in  the 
history  of  Israel,  the  Judges  passage  is  serviceable 
in  investigating  the  clan.  The  thirty  cities  there 
mentioned  (the  Hebrew  for  "  cities "  involves  a 
word-play  between  the  words  for  city  and  colt 
which  the  Greek  poleia  and  pdloua  reproduces)  sug- 
gest thirty  divisions  of  the  clan,  and  in  one  of  these 
cities,  Ciunon,  Jair  is  said  to  have  been  buried. 
Camon  suggests  the  Kamun  which  Antiochus  III. 
took  on  the  march  from  Pella  to  Gephrun  (Poly- 
bius,  v.,  Ixx.  12),  which  is  located  on  an  old  road 
by  the  identification  of  Pella  with  the  modem 
Tabakat  Fahil  and  of  Gephrun  with  Ea^  Wadi  el- 
Ghafr,  not  far  from  Irbid.  A  Kamm  and  Kumem 
were  located  by  Dr.  Schiunacher  from  six  to  ten 
miles  east  of  Iibid.  Kanmi  is  a  ruined  city  of  con- 
siderable extent,  Kumem  a  modem  village  a  mile 
south  of  the  road  with  remains  of  an  old  wail  still 
showing;  the  former  may  be  the  Camon  of  Judges, 
and  may  indicate  the  r^on  of  the  cities  of  Jair  south 
of  the  Yarmuk  and  in  the  northem  part  of  Gilead. 

Other  Old-Testament  passages  speak  of  the  tents 
(or  tent-villages)  of  Jair.  Num.  xxxii.  41  tells  of 
the  conquest  of  these  tents,  but  does  not  state 
the  place  of  departure  or  the  time:  the  intention 
of  the  compiler  was  to  place  it  in  the  time  of  Moses; 
but  that  was  not  the  original  meaning,  and  the 
event  must  have  taken  place  from  a  starting-point 
in  the  West  Jordan  land  and  when  Israel  was 
growing  strong  in  the  early  days  of  the  kingdom. 
The  conclusion  of  commentators  that  the  thirty 
cities  grew  from  earlier  "  tent- villages  "  disregards 
the  fact  that  this  was  not  a  r^on  frequented  by 
nomadic  herders.  Consequently  the  "  tent-vil- 
lages" of  Jair  indicate  nomadic  settlements,  the 
"  cities  "  rather  the  habitations  of  the  settled  por- 
tions of  the  dan,  the  former,  on  the  basis  of  I  Kings 
iv.  13,  to  be  placed  on  the  border  of  the  desert. 
Yet  this  passage  is  a  later  addition  and  is  not  in 
the  Septuagint.  Deut.  iii.  14  makes  Jair  conqueror 
of  the  whole  region  of  Azgob:   Josh.  xiii.  30  gives 


to  Jair  sixty  cities.  According  to  I  Chron.  iL  23, 
the  shepheids  of  the  clan  were  in  early  times  sub- 
dued. Num.  TXTJi.  41  makes  Jair  belong  to  the 
tribe  of  Manasseh.  According  to  I  Chron.  ii.  21-23 
the  Judahite  Hezron  married  a  daughter  of  Machir, 
whose  grandfather,  Jair,  possessed  twenty-three 
towns  in  Gilead,  representing  a  mingling  of  the  two 
tribes  in  which  Judah  took  the  leadership.  But 
this  expresses  a  relationship  of  post^xilio  times, 
and  the  number  of  cities  has  diminished.  This 
account  forms  the  bridge  to  the  story  in  I  Maco. 
V.  24-54  of  the  removal  of  the  Gileadite  Jews  for 
security  of  life  to  Jerusalem:  it  was  in  part  the  Jews 
of  the  dties  of  Jair  on  whose  account  Judas  was  con- 
cemed.  The  passage  in  the  Chronider  seems  to 
have  been  taken  in  part  from  an  old  source. 

(H.  GUTHS.) 

Bxbuooeaprt:  A.  Kuenen,  De  8tam  Manaue,  in  ThT„  xi 
(1877),  478  aqq.;  G.  Schumacher,  Ncrth^m  Ailun,  pp. 
137-138*  London,  1890;  idem,  Diu  •QdliehM  Baaan,  in 
ZDPV,  XX  a8Q7),  109.  173;  DB,  U.  640;  BB,  ii.  2316; 
JEf  vii.  66—66. 

JAMAICA.    See  West  Indies. 
JAMBLICHUS.    See  Nbo-Platonibm. 
JAMES.    See  also  Jacob. 

JAME& 

I.  The    Apoetlee    and    the  New-TeeUment       Idea, 

Brother  of  Jesus.  Brother  (I  2). 

1.  James  the  Son  of  Zebedee.  His  Life  and  Work  (i  3). 

2.  James  the  Son  of  Alphvus.  II.  The  Epistle  of  James. 

3.  James  the  Just.  The  Readers  (i  1). 
Brother,  Step-brother,  or  Aim,  Contents,  and  Style 

Cousin  of  Jesus  (i  1).  (f  2). 

Date,  Canonioity,  and  Reception  (13). 

I.  The  Apostles  and  the  Brother  of  Jesus:  In  the 
New  Testament  two,  or  better  three,  notable  men 
bear  the  name  of  James. 

1.  James  the  Son  of  Zehedea:  In  the  Synoptic 
Gospels  this  James  appears  only  in  close  connection 
with  his  brother  John.  Their  father  pursued  the 
calling  of  a  fisherman  on  the  Lake  of  Galilee  (Mark 
i.  19;  Matt.  iv.  21-22),  perhaps  near  Capernaum 
(cf.  Luke  V.  10  with  iv.  31,  38),  with  his  sons  and 
with  the  help  of  hired  servants  (Mark  i.  20).  His 
wife,  Salome,  was  one  of  those  companions  of  Jesus 
who  cared  for  the  needs  of  his  daily  life  (Mark  xv.  41 ; 
Luke  viii.  3).  It  is  uncertain  whether  Salome  was 
in  any  way  related  to  Jesus,  for  it  is  doubtful  if  the 
sister  of  Jesus'  mother  (John  zix.  25)  can  be  iden- 
tified with  Salome  (Mark  xv.  40).  Certain  only  is 
her  pious  devotion  to  Jesus,  whom  she  faithfully 
followed  in  his  wanderings  through  Galilee,  on  his 
last  journey  to  Jerusalem,  and  also  on  his  way 
to  crucifixion  (Matt,  xxvii.  56;  Mark  xv.  40).  Her 
firm  faith  in  the  Messianic  destiny  of  Jesus  and  her 
impetuous  nature  are  shown  in  her  scHnewhat  rash 
prayer  to  the  Lord  that,  in  his  kingdom,  he  should 
seat  her  sons  on  his  right  hand  and  on  his  left 
(Matt.  XX.  20  sqq.).  Th^  characteristics  she  trans- 
mitted to  her  sons;  of  these,  James  seems  to  have 
been  the  elder,  since  in  the  lists  of  the  Apostles 
and  usually  elsewhere  he  is  named  before  John 
(Matt.  X.  2;  Mark  u.  17;  cf.  Luke  vi.  14).  It 
can  not  be  determined  from  John  i.  40  whether 
James  had  already  come  into  contact  with  Jesus 
in  the  following  of   the  Baptist  at  the  Jordan; 


JamMi 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


90 


the  summary  way,  however,  in  which  both  brothers 
were  called  by  Jesus  to  become  his  disciples,  and  the 
readiness  with  which  they  obeyed  (Mark  i.  10-20), 
make  it  appear  probable  that  they  were  prepared 
for  this  summons.  From  that  time  they  remained 
disciples  of  Jesus  with  ail  the  burning  seal  which 
characterized  them.  This  seal  was  not  without  its 
drawbacks;  it  could  lead  them  into  heartless 
fanaticism  (Luke  ix.  54)  and  also  inspire  unbridled 
ambition  (Mark  x.  36  sqq.);  but  it  enabled  them  to 
endure  resolutely  the  hardest  sufferings  with  Jesus 
(Mark  x.  35  sqq.).  How  highly  Jesus  appreciated 
their  fervent  nature  is  apparent  in  his  applying  to 
them  the  epithet  ''  sons  of  thunder  "  (Mark  iii.  17) 
and  in  his  receiving  them,  with  the  equally  im- 
petuous Peter,  into  the  inner  circle  of  the  twelve 
apostles  (Mark  v.  37,  ix.  2,  xiii.  3  sqq.,  xiv.  33  sqq.). 
After  the  departure  of  the  Lord,  however,  James 
seems  to  have  become  less  prominent.  Neverthe- 
less, he  soon  took  precedence  over  the  other  apostles 
as  the  first  who  gave  his  life  for  the  faith,  since  he 
was  executed  by  order  of  Herod  Agrippa  I  (Acts 
xii.  1,  2). 

8.  Jamas,  the  Son  of  Alphs»us :  This  James  is 
mentioned  with  this  name  in  the  four  lists  of  the 
apostles  (Matt.  x.  3;  Mark  iii.  18;  Luke  vi.  15; 
Acts  i.  13),  but  no  other  passage  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment can  be  brought  into  connection  with  him  or 
his  family.  Especially  groimdless  is  everything 
that  has  been  asserted  regarding  a  relationship  of 
James  Alphssus  (see  ALPHiSUs)  and  his  house  to 
Jesus,  based  on  the  identity  of  the  names  Alphsus 
and  Cleophas.  The  statement  of  Hegesippus  (in 
Eusebius,  Hist,  eccl..  III.,  xi.)  that  Cleophas  was  a 
brother  of  Joseph,  the  foster-father  of  Jesus,  can 
not  be  accepted,  and  the  identification  of  the  names 
Alphffius  and  Cleophas  can  not  be  established. 
Possibly  James  Alphseus  is  alluded  to  in  Matt, 
xxvii.  56;  Mark  xvi.  1,  xv.  40;  Luke  xxiv.  10;  if 
so,  it  may  be  inferred  from  these  passages  that 
James's  mother  was  called  Mary  and  belonged  to 
the  followers  of  Jesus,  and  that  he  had  a  brother 
called  Joses,  and  that  the  epithet  of  "  the  little  " 
was  applied  to  him.  Possibly  this  passage  refers  to 
another  James  of  whom  nothing  further  is  known. 
It  is  altogether  improbable,  however,  that  in  Luke 
vi.  16  and  Acts  i.  13  the  designation  ''  Judas  of 
James  "  [R.  V.  "  Judas  the  son  of  James  "  marg. 
or,  '*  brother,"  as  in  A.  V.]  signifies  that  Judas  was 
the  brother  of  James  Alphseus,  since  this  designa- 
tion can  only  mean  ''  Judas  the  son  of  James,''  and 
a  combination  of  these  passages  with  those  in  which 
a  Mary  Lb  named  as  the  mother  of  James  and  Joses 
is  quite  impossible.  But  neither  the  apostle  Judas 
LebbsBus  (see  Judas)  nor  Simon  Zelotes  is  to  be 
regarded  as  a  brother  of  James  Alphseus.  Nothing 
further  is  heard  of  James  Alphseus,  except  the  legend 
that  he  was  active  in  the  southwest  of  Palestine 
and  in  Egypt,  and  was  crucified  in  Ostrakine,  in 
Lower  Egypt  (Nicephorus,  ii.  40). 

8.  James  the  Joat:  A  James  who  was  the  Lord's 
brother,  head  of  the  conununity  of  Jerusalem,  is 
mentioned  as  a  different  person  from  both  the 
apostles  in  Matt.  xiii.  55;  Mark  vi.  3;  Acts  xii.  17, 
xxi.  18;  I  Cor.  xv.  7;  Gal.  i.  19,  ii.  9-12,  as  well  as 
James  i.  1;   Jude  1.    Also,  outside  of  the  New  Tes- 


tament, by  Josephus  {Ard,  XX.,  ix.  1),  Hegesippus 
(in  Eusebius,  Hitt.  ^.,  II.  23),  and  other  Church 
Fathers.    The  view  of  the  early  Church 
1.  Broth-  yf2^  i^i  Jesus  and  this  James  were 
er,  Step-    brothers,  and  James  was  distinguished 
Oooflinof   ^""^  *"®  *^°  apostles  of   the   same 
Jeans.      i^Ame*    Clement    of    Alexandria    ex- 
pressly states  that  this  view,  which  he 
himself  rejected,  was  general  in  his  time  {Strom, 
vii.  93  sqq.).    Tertullian  refers  to  the  marriage  of 
Mary  after  the  birth  of  Jesus  and  to  the  mention 
of  his  brothers  in  connection  with  her,  as  a  proof 
of  the  reality  of  the  humanity  of  Jesus  {De  mono- 
gamiaf    viii.;     De   came   Christie    vii.;     ''  Against 
Marcion,"  19) .   In  the  Apostolic  Constitutions  (ii.  55, 
vi.  12,  13),  besides  the  twelve  apostles  and  Paul, 
James,  the  Lord's  brother,  is  mentioned  as  one  of 
the  advocates  of  catholic  doctrine,  and  he  is  reck- 
oned among  the  seventy  disciples.    Eusebi\is  counts 
fourteen  apostles;    the  twelve,   Paul  smd   James 
(on  Isa.  xvii.  5;  Hitt.  ecd,,  I.,  xii.,  II.,  i.,  VII.,  xix.), 
and  when  he  once  writes  of  James  as  the  "  so-called  " 
brother  of  the  Lord,  the  context  shows  that  he  is 
not  suggesting  a  more  distant  relationship.     When, 
however,  the  idea  of  the  perpetual  virginity  of  Mary 
gained  ground  in  the  Church,  the  brotherly  rela- 
tionship between  Jesus  and  James  was  transformed 
into  the  more  distant  one  of  stepbrother,  this  view 
appearing  in  several  popular  writings  such  as  the 
Proto-Gospel  of  James  (ix.  2),  the  Gospel  of  Peter, 
the  Gospel  of  pseudo-Matthew  (viii.  4),  the  Gospel 
of  Thomas  (xvi.).  and  the  History  of  Joseph  (ii.). 
In  the  period  after  Epiphanius,  the  recognition  of 
James  as  a  son  of  Joseph  and  Bfary  is  seldom  met. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  view  of  Origen,  that  James 
was  a  stepbrother  of  Jesus,  was  followed   in  the 
East  by  Ephraem,  Basil,  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  Chrysos- 
tom,  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  Epiphanius,  and  later  by 
Euthymius;  in  the  West  by  Hilary,  Ambrose,  and 
Ambrosiaster.     Alongside  of  this,  however,  arose 
the  other  opinion  that  the  brothers  of  Jesus  were 
cousins  BLnd  were  identical  with  the  men  of  the 
same  name  among  the  apostles.    It  is  possible  that 
Clement  of  Alexandria  entertained  this  view  as 
well  as  the  hypothesis  that  James  was  a  stepbrother 
of  Jesus  (in  Eusebius,  Hist,  ecd.,  II.,  1).    The  first 
assured  defender  is  Jerome,  who,  in  his  writings 
against    Helvidius,    expounds    it,    but   practically 
abandons  it  in  his  Conunentary  on  Isaiah  (xvii.  6), 
in  that  he  counts  fourteen  apostles:    the  twelve, 
Paul,  and  the  Lord's  brother,  James.     Ambrose 
and  Augustine  express  themselves  even  more  doubt- 
fully.   Gradually,  however,  the  hypothesis  of  iden- 
tification was  more  and  more  widely  accepted  in 
the  West.    In  the  Middle  Ages  it  was  the  predom- 
inant theory.    On  the  other  hand,  it  found  so  little 
favor  in  the  East  that  two  different  festival  days, 
one  for  James  the  Just  and  the  other  for  James 
Alphseus,  remained  traditional. 

The  statements  of  the  New  Testament  favor  the 
view  that  James  was  a  full  brother  of  Jesus  and 
the  son  of  Mary.  Matt.  i.  25  and  Luke  ii.  7  imply 
that,  after  the  birth  of  Jesus,  a  conjugal  relation  ex- 
isted between  Joseph  and  Mary  and  that  they 
had  children.  Whenever  in  the  Gospels  brothers 
of  Jesus  are   mentioned,  they   appear  in  such  a 


91 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDU 


James 


connection  with  Joseph  and  Mary,  or  with  Mary 

alone,  that  they  are  clearly  regarded  as  their  children 

(Johnii.  12;  Matt.  xii.  47;  Mark  vi.  3; 

l^£r*  t  ^^^  "■  ^^^'  ^^®  designation  of  Mary 
j^^^*^    as  the  mother  of  Jesiis,  employed  in 

Brother.  ^^^^  passages,  implies  that  the  word 
brothers  is  used  in  the  same  proper 
sense.  They  could  not  therefore  have  been 
stepbrothers  of  Jesus,  sons  of  a  former  wife  of 
Joseph  or  of  a  former  husband  of  Mary,  or  foster- 
children  of  Mary  (thus  J.  P.  Lange);  and  just  as 
little  only  cousins  of  Jesus  and  identical  with  the 
apostles  James  Alphsus,  Judas  Lebbseus,  and  Simon 
Zelotes.  Moreover,  nowhere  in  the  New  Testament 
is  James  the  brother  of  the  Lord  called  James 
Alphsus,  and  nowhere  is  the  word  brother  used  in 
a  sense  of  distant  relationship.  That  James  Alphseus 
is  a  brother  of  the  apostles  Judas  Lebbsus  and 
Simon  Zelotes  is  absolutely  excluded  by  the  way 
in  which  they  are  named  together,  to  be  distin- 
guished from  other  brothers  who  are  alluded  to  in 
the  same  way.  Besides  this  the  brothers  of  the 
Lord  are  not  only  named  alongside  of  the  apostles 
as  distinct  from  them  (ut  sup.),  but  they  appear 
also  as  a  circle,  separate  in  every  way  from  the 
disciples  of  Jesus  (Matt.  xii.  46;  John  vii.  5). 
Only  after  the  departure  of  the  Lord  does  there 
arise  a  closer  companionship  of  the  brethren  of 
the  Lord  with  the  apostles,  and  James  gains  apos- 
tolic rank  as  head  of  the  mother-church  in  Jerusa- 
lem, while  still  remaining  distinct  from  the  apostles 
(Gal.  i.  19,  ii.  9;   I  CJor.  xv.  7). 

The  story  of  the  material  and  spiritual  life  of 
James,  the  brother  of  the  Lord,  is  quite  clearly 
defined  in  its  outlines.  During  the 
3.  Hie  Life  public  ministry  of  Jesus,  his  brothers 
and  Work,  adopted  a  skeptical  attitude,  probably 
because  they  could  not  reconcile  his 
lofty  claims  with  the  commonplace  conditions  in 
which  they  had  lived  together  in  their  home.  Jesus 
complains  of  a  lack  of  recognition  on  the  part  of 
his  own  relatives  (Mark  vi.  4),  and  he  could  not 
count  them  as  his  spiritual  kindred  (Mark  iii.  31-34). 
After  the  miracle  of  the  loaves  and  fishes  in  the 
desert  it  seems  that  then  the  idea  of  his  Messianic 
task  may  have  dawned  upon  them,  but  the  humility 
of  his  attitude  prevented  them  from  confidently 
believing  in  him.  Even  at  the  time  of  his  Passion, 
the  brothers  seem  to  have  separated  themselves 
from  his  mother,  who  now  believed  in  him  (John 
xix.  27).  Nevertheless,  the  superhuman  patience 
with  which  Jesus  went  to  his  death  may  have  won 
their  hearts,  especially  that  of  James;  for  to  him 
was  vouchsafed  an  appearance  of  the  risen  Christ 
(I  Cor.  XV-  7),  which  affirmed  his  faith.  He  there- 
fore appears  after  the  ascension  of  the  Lord  as  a 
member  of  the  Christian  commimity,  wherein  he 
won  a  leading  position  after  the  death  of  James, 
the  son  of  Zebedee,  and  the  flight  of  Peter.  In 
general,  his  activity  was  confined  to  Jerusalem 
(Gal.  i.  17).  He  took  part  in  the  council  of  the 
apostles  with  Peter  and  John  as  one  of  the  three 
pillars  of  the  Jewish-Christian  Church  (Gal.  ii.  1 
sqq.;  Acts  xv.  1  sqq.).  There  he  showed  himself 
free  from  the  pharisaical  and  strictly  legal  views  of 
t}ie  Judaizing  opponents  of  Paul  who  desired  to 


impose  upon  Gentile  Christians  the  full  observance 
of  the  Mosaic  laws.  At  the  same  time  he  gave  the 
hand  of  fellowship  to  Paul  in  proof  of  their  thorough 
agreement  on  the  basis  of  the  Gospel.  Nevertheless 
he  considered  it  important  that  Jewish  Christians 
should  strictly  observe  the  laws  of  their  fathers  and 
should  require  for  these  laws  a  certain  respect  on 
the  part  of  the  Gentile  Christians.  The  standpoint 
of  James  also  appears  in  the  influence  exerted  by 
his  friends  in  Antioch  (Gal.  ii.  11  sqq.)  upon  Peter. 
The  Ebionite  party  in  the  post-apostolic  age  en- 
deavored to  cover  itself  with  the  authority  of  James 
and  to  envelop  him  with  a  legendary  atmosphere 
of  glory.  According  to  Epiphanius  {Haer.  XXX., 
xvi.),  there  were  legends  even  of  his  ascension  to 
heaven.  Concerning  the  death  of  James  there  are 
two  contradictory  accounts.  Hegesippus  relates 
(Eusebius,  Hist,  ecd.,  II.  23)  that  he  was  thrown 
from  the  tower  by  the  Pharisees,  not  long  before 
the  beginning  of  the  Roman-Jewish  war  (cf.  Zahn, 
Farschungenf  vi.  236,  Leipsic,  1900),  therefore, 
about  66  A.D.  According  to  Josephus  (Ant.  XX., 
ix.  1),  however,  the  party  of  the  Sadduoees  made 
use  of  the  change  in  the  proconsulship  in  62  or  63 
A.D.  to  have  James  stoned  to  death,  against  the 
will  of  the  Pharisees.  It  is,  however,  strongly  sus- 
pected that  this  passage  of  Josephus  is  an  inter- 
polation (Zahn,  ut  sup.  vi.  301  sqq.).  On  the  other 
hand,  the  date  given  by  Hegesippus  is  supported 
by  the  pseudo-Clementine  literature,  according  to 
which  James  survived  Peter,  and  also  by  the 
Chronicon  Paschale  (p.  592),  and  therefore  is  to  be 
preferred. 

n.  The  Epistle  of  James:   This  bears  a  title  in 

the  opening  verse  which  names  the  writer  and  those 

for  whom  it  was  destined.    To  see  in 

1.  The      this  only  the  dedication  to  a  dogmatic 

Beaders.  writing,  or  a  homily,  is  countei^indi- 
cated  by  the  formal  salutation  conunon 
in  Greek  letters.  Neither  should  it  be  assumed  that 
this  epistolary  form  only  served  the  literary  fiction 
of  an  unknown  writer,  nor  that  it  is  a  title  added 
to  the  writing  about  200  a.d.,  since  in  both  cases 
the  author  would  probably  have  been  called  an 
apostle.  Therefore,  the  words  in  the  title  "  to  the 
twelve  tribes  which  are  scattered  abroad  "  may 
well  be  used  to  determine  the  first  readers.  This 
expression,  however,  "  the  twelve  tribes "  is  so 
specifically  national  and  Israelitic  that  it  can  not  be 
referred  even  figuratively  to  all  Christianity.  Ac- 
cording to  the  title,  therefore,  the  Epistle  is  ad- 
dressed to  the  whole  Jewish  people  outside  of 
Palestine.  This  designation  of  the  readers  is  lim- 
ited, however,  by  the  statement  that  the  writer 
calls  himself  "  a  servant  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  "; 
therefore  he  assumes  that  his  readers  recognize  the 
authority  of  Jesus.  Those  readers  are  therefore 
neither  Jewish  and  Gentile  Christians  nor  Chris- 
tians of  Jewish  and  Gentile  descent  nor  principally 
Gentile  Christians;  and  just  as  little  are  they  Jewish 
Christians  within  or  without  Palestine:  they  are 
Jewish  Christians  living  outside  of  Palestine.  They 
can,  therefore,  only  be  called  the  twelve  tribes  in 
the  dispersion  in  the  sense  that  they  were  the  true 
Israel  so  far  as  it  existed  outside  the  Holy  Land. 
These  Jewish  Christians  living  outside  of  Palestine 


James 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


98 


are  not  to  be  sought  only  in  one  place  or  in  one 
limited  district;  indeed,  the  generalness  and  fulness 
of  the  expression  "  the  twelve  tribes  which  are 
scattered  abroad  "  render  it  certain  that  all  Jewish 
Christians  living  outside  of  Palestine  were  meant, 
and  make  it  extremely  probable  that  there  already 
were  such  far  and  wide.  The  inferences  from  the 
title  are  not  refuted  by  the  letter  itself,  but  partly 
confirmed.  It  is  not  justifiable  to  cite  the  silence 
of  the  author  regarding  the  Law,  the  temple,  and 
the  imbelieving  members  of  his  race  against  the 
Jewish  origin  of  the  readers,  because  he  is  not  alto- 
gether silent  concerning  the  Law  (ii.  8  aqq.)  and 
had  no  occasion  to  speak  of  the  temple  and  un- 
believing Jews.  That  the  readers  are  Christians 
and  not  Jews  is  to  be  seen  from  ii.  1,  and  the  whole 
tone  of  the  Epistle  is  opposed  to  a  narrow  local 
limitation  of  the  circle  of  readers.  In  this  epistle, 
not  only  is  there  no  personal  relation  whatever 
between  the  writer  and  the  readers,  no  special 
salutation,  etc.,  but  the  conditions  referred  to  are  of 
a  very  general  character.  It  is  not,  therefore,  jus- 
tifiable, because  the  conditions  treated  of  in  the 
Epistle  of  James  appear  to  point  more  to  Palestine 
than  to  the  diaspora,  to  assume  that  the  Epistle 
was  originally  addressed  to  the  community  of 
Jerusalem  and  was  later  sent  to  conununities  out- 
side of  Palestine.  The  Epistle  of  James  is  therefore 
not  in  the  true  sense  of  the  word  a  letter,  but  rather 
an  address  in  the  form  of  a  circular  letter  to  all 
Jewish  Christians  within  the  pale  of  Christianity, 
which  was  already  quite  widely  disseminated. 

What,  however,  the  author  recognizes  as  funda- 
mental in  the  spiritual  condition  of  his  readers  is 
the  worldliness  and  superficiality  of 
2.  Aim,  their  Christianity.  With  the  multifa- 
Gontenta,  rious  sufferings  (i.  2)  and  the  delay  in 
and  Style,  the  second  coming  of  Christ  (v.  7-8) 
they  began  to  lose  patience  and  their 
hearts  were  divided  between  God  and  the  world 
(i.  7).  Alongside  of  flattery  to  the  rich,  there  is 
contempt  for  the  poor  (ii.  1  sqq.),  there  is  also 
bitterness  against  the  former  (iv.  11,  v.  9).  Along- 
side of  the  prayer  for  means  to  satisfy  their  pleas- 
ures (iv.  3),  there  is  impious  security  on  the  part 
of  the  well-to-do  (iv.  13  sqq.).  Stress  is  laid  upon 
the  profession  of  faith  (ii.  14),  which  was  a  subject 
of  wrangling  and  dispute,  and  every  one  was  eager 
to  impart  instruction  (chap,  ill.);  but  there  were 
few  signs  of  application  of  faith  to  practical  life. 
These  conditions  are  not  to  be  derived  from  Juda- 
ism so  much  as  from  a  stagnation  of  the  spiritual 
life  succeeding  to  a  period  of  loving  enthusiasm. 
The  aim  and  contents  correspond  to  these  spiritual 
conditions  of  the  readers.  After  an  exhortation  to 
be  steadfast  and  prudent  in  trials,  there  follows  the 
lesson  that  the  temptation  to  fail  in  the  hour  of 
trial  proceeds  from  man's  own  sinful  inclinations, 
not  from  God,  the  giver  of  all  good,  the  author  of 
regeneration  by  the  word  of  truth  (i.  13-18),  and 
to  this  is  attached  the  admonition  to  assimilate 
this  word  of  truth  in  a  humble  and  obedient  spirit 
(i.  19-27).  Later  on  there  are  special  warnings 
against  the  errors  and  faults  named  above.  The 
conclusion  consists  of  various  brief  admonitions, 
V.  12-20.    The  simple  style  of  the  letter  suits  its 


practical  contents  admirably,  foUowing  the  method 
of  the  didactic  writings  of  the  Old  Testament,  in 
which  the  single  proverbs  are  strung  together  in 
groups  like  rows  of  pearls.    Instead  of  the  precision 
of  Paul's  keen,  logiod  thinking,  there  is  foimd  more 
rhetorical  amplification.     The  Greek  is  compara- 
tively pure,  although  there  are  not  a  few  Hebrsr 
isms.     While  this  Gospel  is  designated  as  a  law, 
it  is  yet  the  perfect  law  of  liberty  (i.  25),  not,  like 
the  law  of  the  OM  Testament,  a  heavy  yoke  but  to 
be  engrafted  in  the  heart  (i.  21),  so  that  man,  by 
his  own   initiative,  responds  to  the  divine  will. 
Inasmuch  as  the  Gospel  is  essentially  identical  with 
the  law  of  the  Old  Testament,  everything  that  con- 
cerns the  person  of  the  mediator  of  the  new  revelar 
tion  is  plaioed  in  the  background,  even  the  name  of 
Christ  is  mentioned  only  twice,  and  the  synoptic 
concepts  of  the  Son  of  Man  and  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  are  lacking.    Nevertheless,  the  moral  teach- 
ings of  Jesus,  principally  those  of  the  Sermon  on 
the  Mount,  are  much  more  freely  used  than  in  any 
other  writing  of  the  New  Testament.     Therefore 
this  epistle  is  somewhat  in   disaccord  with    the 
Apostle  Paul,  whose  attention  is  directed  more  to 
that  side  of  the  Gospel  which  is  in  opposition  to 
the  Law.    It  has  even  been  held  that  ii.  21,  24  (cf. 
with  Rom.  iii.  28,  iv.  2;   Gal.  ii.  16)  is  in  irrecon- 
cilable opposition  to  Paul;    indeed,  that  it  shows 
a  conscious  polemic  against  him.     This  difiiculty 
can  not  be  avoided  by  assuming  that  the  Epistle 
of  James  was  earlier  than  the  Pauline  epistles  which 
contain  the  divergent  propositions,  which  would 
not  affect  the  objective  difference;  indeed  the  sus- 
picion of  conscious  contradiction  would  merely  be 
transferred  from  James  to  Paul.    But  this  view 
of  the  chronological  relation  of  the  writings  of  Paul 
and  James  is  untenable,  for  there  is  no  indica- 
tion that  the  formula  "  to  be  justified  by  faith  "  or 
the  use  of  the  passage  Gen.  xv.  6  in  support  of 
this,  was  common,  as  is  assumed  in  this  epistle, 
on  the  part  of  its  rraders.    Indeed  it  remains  doubt- 
ful whether  the  Epistle  of  James  is  intended  to 
combat  the  standpoint  of  the  Pauline  epistles.    In 
any  case  this  epistle  is  in  accord  with  Paul  in  what 
it  really  endeavors  to  prove,  that  is,  that  faith  with- 
out works  can  not  bring  salvation  (cf.  II  Cor.  v.  10), 
and  that  a  faith  which  does  not  find  expression  in 
moral  conduct  is  utterly  worthless  (I  Cor.  xiii.  2). 
Paul  regards  works  as  unimportant  for  justification, 
while  James  looks  upon  works  as  a  condition  of 
justification.    While  Paul  would  not  have  said  that 
there  was  a  justification  by  the  works  of  faith  in 
the  sense  of  the  Epistle  of  James,  because  he  has 
a  stricter  conception  of  what  constitutes  conduct 
well-pleasing  to  God,  his  idea  of  a  moral  righteous- 
ness  of  believers   is   approximately  that   of  the 
Epistle  of  James.    Therefore,  there  is,  if  not  perfect 
agreement  on  this  point  between  James  and  Paul, 
at  least  only  an  unessential  and  not  an  irreconcilable 
opposition  in  principle.    It  is  generally  recognized 
that  the  polemic  of  the  Epistle  of  James  is  only 
directed  against  a  distorted  and  one-sided  Paulin- 
ism.     The  opinion  that  this  epistle  was  designed 
to  attack  Paul's  teaching,  though  unsuccessfully, 
is  without  foundation.    What  is  combated  is  not 
any  doctrine  in  itself,  but  only  a  false  standard  of 


98 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


James 


conduct.  It  denounces  a  lack  of  moral  application 
of  faith,  dependent  upon  a  formalizing  of  Chris- 
tianity and  palliated  by  a  misuse  of  Pauline  doc- 
trine. 

These  results  show  that  the  epistle  should  be 
placed  in  a  relatively  late  period  of  the  Apostolic 
Age  when  the  Church  had  attained  a 
8.  Bate,    considerable  extent  and  Christian  life 
^^**ii  alST*  *^  ^^  something  of  its  first  fresh 
***  tto°*^  vigor.    It  is  not  the  earliest  or  even 
one  of  the  earliest  of  the  New-Testa- 
mezit  writings.    The  synagogue  [so  the  Am.  R.V., 
i.  2]  is  not  a  Jewish  one,  as  though  a  common  use 
of  the  93rnagogue  still  existed  with  Jews  and  Chris- 
tians;  it  is  a  meeting-place  for  Christians,  which 
they  control  (ii.  3).     The  conception  of  the  im- 
minence of  the  Parousia  (v.  8)  appears  even  beyond 
the  Apostolic  Age.    That  the  Epistle  of  James  only 
addresses  Jewish  Christians  does  not  prove  that 
there  were  not  also  Gentile  Christians,  and  if  it  con- 
tains more  passages  recalling  the  sayings  of  Jesus 
than  any  other  of  the  Apostolic  epistles,  that  is 
to  be  attributed  to  its  theological  character,  and 
perhaps  to  the  employment  of  written  sources.    Its 
use  in  the  Church  b^;ins  at  an  early  period.    It  is 
probably  dted  in  I  Peter,  in  I  Clement,  in  the 
Shepherd  of  Hennas,  and  by  Justin  Martyr.     It 
was  certainly  used  by  Irenieus,  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria, Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  Cyril  of  Jerusalem, 
Didymus,  and  Ephraem,  and  it  was  also  included  in 
the  Peshito  version.   Origen,  who  is  the  first  to  cite  it 
expressly  as  a  writing  of  James,  the  Lord's  brother, 
looks  upon  it  as  imcanonical;   Eusebius  counts  it 
among  the  antilegomena,  and  Theodore  of  Mopsu- 
estia  rejected  it.    Jerome  says  it  was  regarded  as 
pseudonymous  in  the  Latin  Church,  but  he  in- 
cludes it  among  the  canonical  books,  and  his  in- 
fluence and  Augustine's  assured  its  acceptance  as 
canonical.    This  view  was  not  disputed  until  Eras- 
mus expressed  certain  doubts.    Luther  thought  it  a 
"  right  strawy  epistle "   (rechi  stroheme  EjMd), 
written    by  a  certain    pious    man,  and  Cajetan 
expressed  doubts  as  to  its  authenticity.     C^vin 
defended  it,  but  Luther's  views  were  accepted  by 
the  Magdeburg  Centuriators  and  by  some  Lutheran 
dogmatists,  as  well  as  by  the  Calvinist  Wetstein. 
In  modem  times  the  opposition  to  its  authenticity 
was  begun  by  De  Wette  and  Schleiermacher.   Natu- 
rally no  use  could  be  made  of  the  title  in  the  debate 
as  to  the  origin  of  the  epistle  on  the  assumption 
that  it  was  added  at  a  later  period  in  order  to  gain 
for  the  epistle  (really  the  work  of  an  unknown 
author)  acceptance  in  the  canon  through  a  title 
bearing  the  name  of  an  apostle.    Still  less  tenable 
is  the  hypothesis  that  the  epistle,  apart  from  the 
two  (assumed  as  interpolated)  mentions  of  Christ 
(i.  1  and  ii.  1),  was  the  work  of  an  unknown  Jew. 
The  method  of  interpolation  assumed  is  devoid  of 
motive  and  without  analogy.    The  introduction  of 
Christian  ideas  into  Jewish  writings  bearing  the 
name  of  highly  revered  Jews  is  often  met,  but  is 
entirely  different  from  the  attempt  assumed  here, 
to  make  the  author  of  a  Jewish  writing  appear  to  be 
a  Christian.    Besides  this,  much  in  the  Epistle  of 
James  is  clearly  Christian,  apart  from  the  two 
supposed  additions  (i.  18-21,  26,  u.  8,  12,  14-26). 


If,  then,  "James,  a  servant  of  God  and  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,"  was  originally  named  as  author 
of  the  epistle,  there  can  be  no  doubt  who  is  to  be 
understood  thereby.  James,  the  son  of  Zebedee,  of 
whom  Jftger  (ZeUsehrift  for  hUheriKhe  Theologies 
1878)  thi^  as  the  author,  was  no  longer  living  in 
the  period  after  the  beginning  of  Paul's  mission 
(Acts  xii.  2);  James  Alphsus  withdraws  entirely 
into  the  background  in  this  time,  and  either  of 
them  would  have  been  designated  as  an  apostle. 
The  only  James  who  is  prominent  in  this  period 
and  needed  no  more  predse  designation  is  James, 
the  Lord's  brother,  the  head  of  the  community  of 
Jerusalem.  And  there  are  no  imperative  grounds 
for  refusing  to  ascribe  the  epistle  to  him.  The 
vacillation  in  the  traditions  of  the  early  church  as 
to  the  canonical  acceptance  of  the  epistle  is  ex- 
plained by  the  facts  that  James  was  not  an  apostle; 
that  he  became  the  patron-saint  of  the  Ebionites, 
and  that  the  epistle  seemed  to  contain  a  polemic 
against  Paul.  The  author  appears  rather  to  have 
been  a  man  of  a  practical  turn  of  mind,  pious  and 
prayerful,  who  does  not  fail  to  recognize  the  essen- 
tial superiority  of  the  Gospel  over  the  Law,  but 
who,  nevertheless,  emphasises  the  relationship  of 
the  morality  of  the  former  to  that  of  the  latter. 
All  this  perfectly  suits  James,  the  Lord's  brother, 
as  known  through  the  New  Testament  and  H^ge- 
sippus.  It  may  therefore  be  assiuned  that  James, 
the  Lord's  brother,  wrote  this  pastoral  letter  in 
Palestine  for  the  Jewish  Christians  outside  of  Pales- 
tine, at  a  time  when  the  activity  of  Paul  had  ceased, 
either  because  of  his  captivity,  or  his  death.  For 
the    Protevangelixmi    of   James   see    Afocbtpha, 

B,  I.,  1.  F.  SiBFFBBT. 

Bzbuoorafht:  On  the  ceneral  topic  oonmilt:  DB,  ii.  540- 
548;  EB,  ii.  2817-26.  On  the  three  JameseB  oonralt  the 
histories  of  the  Apostolic  Ace,  eg..  Schaff.  ChruHan 
Chur^  i.  109  aqq.,  205  sqq.,  272  sqq.,  et  pulim;  A. 
C.  MoOiflert,  Apottolie  Age,  peasim*  New  York,  1807. 
The  question  of  the  relationship  of  the  third  Jsmea  to 
Jesus  is  discussed  m  DB,  I  820-326;  by  J.  B.  Lightfoot 
in  his  Ccmunentary  on  GaUktians,  in  a  special  section; 
in  the  Introduction  to  Mayor's  Commentary  on  James 
(see  below);  in  F.  W.  Farrar,  Early  Day  of  Chri&UanUy, 
chap,  six.,  London,  1884;  in  Schegg's  commentary  (see 
below);  and  often  in  the  otlier  commentaries.  Consult 
also  W.  Patrick,  Jamet  tha  Lord**  BroOm,  Edinburgh, 
1006.  For  the  questions  concerning  the  authenticity, 
date,  contents,  etc.,  of  the  epistle  consult  in  general  the 
works  on  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament— especially 
those  of  JOlicher,  1804,  Eng.  transl.,  Edinburgh,  1004; 
T.  Zahn,  1000;  and  B.  W.  Bacon,  lOCK)— and  those  on  New- 
Testament  theology,  especially  that  of  Beyschlag.  Eng. 
transl.,  Edinburgh,  1806.  Works  on  special  topics  are: 
W.  G.  Schmidt,  UhngthaU  dee  Jakofmabri^M,  Leipsic 
1860;  P.  J.  Gloag.  Inirodueiion  to  ths  Caiholie  BpUOM, 
Edinburgh,  1887;  W.  C.  ran  Bfanen,  in  7*A7*.  zxviii  (1804), 
478--406;  A.  H.  Cullen.  Tmtdiin^  <4  JamM;  StydiM  in  iKe 
Elhiea  of  flh»  EpittU  of  JamsM,  London,  1004;  M.  Meinerts. 
Der  Jakobutbrief  und  eein  VerfoBter,  Freiburg.  1006. 

Of  commentaries  on  the  epistle  the  best  for  English 
readers  is  by  J.  B.  Mayor,  London,  1807.  Others  which 
may  be  mentioned  are:  W.  Augusti,  Lemgo,  1801;  J.  W. 
(Sreshof,  Essen.  1830;  M.  8chneokenbui«er,  Stuttgart. 
1832;  G.  W.  Theile,  Leipsic,  1833;  C.  R.  Jachmann.  ib. 
1838;  F.  H.  Kern,  TAbingen.  1838;  C.  A.  Schariing. 
Ck>penhagen,  1841;  C.  E.  Cell^rier.  Geneva.  1860;  A. 
Neander.  Eng.  transl..  New  York,  1852;  A.  Wieslnger. 
KOnigsberg,  1854;  De  Wette.  Leipsic  1865;  F.  Qraupp, 
Breslau,  1861;  R.  Wardlaw.  Edinburgh,  1862;  H.  Bou- 
mann,  Utrecht,  1865;  A.  H.  Blom,  Dort,  1860;  H.  EVald. 
Gdttingen,  1870;  J.  C.  C.  Hoffmann,  NOrdlingen,  1875; 
H.  Alford,  Cfroek  TVstomsnC,  vol.  iv..  London,  1877;  E.  H. 


Jamas 
Janseai 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


94 


Plumptra,  in  Cambndoe  Bible,  Cambridge,  1878;  J.  T. 
Demarost,  Now  York.  1879;  D.  Erdmann.  Berlin,  1888; 
K.  F.  Keil,  Leipaic.  1883;  P.  Schegg.  Munteh,  1883;  W. 
Beyaohlac  Gdttingen.  1888;  A.  F.  Manoury,  Bar-le- 
Due  1888;  C.  F.  DeemB,  New  York,  1880;  E.  T.  Winkler. 
Philadelphia,  1S80;  A.  Plummer,  in  Expo9Uor*§  Bible, 
London,  1891;  B.  Weim.  in  TV,  viii.  2  (1892);  P.  Peine, 
Eisenach,  1893;  J.  Adderley,  London,  1900;  W.  H.  Ben- 
nett, in  Century  BibU,  ib.  1901;  C.  A.  Bigg,  ib.  1902;  C. 
Brown,  ib.  1906;  F.  J.  Taylor,  Fourteen  Addreeeee,  ib. 
1907. 

JAMES,  SAINT,  OF  COMPOSTELLA,  ORDER  OF: 

A  military  order,  founded  in  1161,  as  the  Knights 
of  St.  James  of  the  Sword  (de  Spada),  by  Pedro 
Fernandez  of  Fuente  Encalada,  m  the  diocese  of 
Astorga,  Spain,  united  in  1170  with  the  Canons  of 
San  Loyo  (St.  Eligius)  of  Compostella.  Toward 
the  end  of  the  century  it  was  confirmed  by  Pope 
Celestine  III.  In  purpose  and  character  the  order 
was  like  those  of  Alcantara  and  Calatrava  (qq.v.), 
but  it  never  equaled  them  in  importance.  It  came 
to  an  end  in  1835.    See  Compostella. 

(O.  ZOCKLBRt.) 
BxBLxoaaAPHT:    G.  Giueci,  Iconoorafia  etoriea  deoli  ordini 
relioioei  e  oavaUereechi,  i.  9<V-100,    Rome.    1836;     P.   B. 
Oamm  Die  KirchenifeeehidUe  von  Spanien,  iii.,  1,  p.  66, 
Regensburg,  1876;   Currier,  Relioioue  Order;  p.  217. 

JAMES,  JOHN  ANGELL:  English  Congregation- 
alist;  b.  at  Blandford  Forum  (17  m.  n.e.  of  Dor- 
chester, Dorset)  June  6,  1785;  d.  at  Birmingham 
Oct.  1,  1859.  After  serving  four  years  as  an  ap- 
prentice to  a  linen-draper  at  Poole,  Dorset*  he 
entered  the  theological  aotdemy  at  Gosport  in  1802. 
and  qualified  under  the  Toleration  Act  as  a  dissent- 
ing preacher  the  following  year.  He  was  called  to 
Carr's  Lane  Chapel,  Birmingham,  in  1805,  and  or- 
dained pastor  there  early  the  following  year.  He 
remained  in  this  pastorate  till  his  death.  He  was 
chairman  of  the  board  of  education  of  Spring  Hill 
College,  Birmingham  (now  Mansfield  College,  Ox- 
ford), from  1838  till  his  death;  and  in  1846  he  was 
one  of  the  chief  promoters  of  the  Evangelical 
Alliance.  He  was  held  in  high  esteem  as  a  preacher 
and  author,  and  as  a  public  man.  Though  a  Cal- 
vinist  in  creed,  he  laid  more  stress  on  Christian  duty 
than  on  doctrinal  niceties.  He  published  numerous 
single  sermons  and  addresses  and  a  dozen  small 
volumes,  of  which  the  best  known  are  Christian 
Charity  (London,  1828) ;  and  The  Anxious  Enquirer 
after  Salvation  (Birmingham,  1834),  which  was 
widely  circulated  in  England  and  America  and 
translated  into  Welsh,  Gaelic,  and  Malagasy.  Other 
writings  by  James  will  be  foimd  in  his  Works  (17 
vols.,  London,  1860-64). 

Biblioorapbt:  James's  Auiebtagravhy  wm  published  as  the 
last  volume  of  the  Worke,  ut  sup.  Consult  also:  J.  Camp- 
bell, Review  of  J,  A.  Jamea*  Hieiory  and  Character,  Lon- 
don. 1859;  R.  W.  Dale.  Life  and  LeUera  of  John  Angell 
Jamee,  ib.  1861;   DNB,  xxix.  215-217. 

JAMES,  MONTAGUE  RHODES:  Church  of  Eng- 
land;  b.  at  Livermere  (6  m.  n.e.  of  Bury  St.  Ed- 
mund's), Sufifolk,  Aug.  1,  1862.  He  studied  at 
King's  College,  Cambridge  (B.A.,  1885),  and  in 
1903  was  appointed  Sanders  Reader  in  bibliography. 
Since  1905  he  has  been  provost  of  King's  College, 
and  is  also  director  of  the  Fitzwilliam  Museum. 
He  has  written  or  edited  Psalms  of  Solomon  (in 
collaboration  with  H.  E.  Ryle;  Cambridge,  1891); 
Te8t4xmerd  of  Abraham  (in  collaboration  with  W.  E. 


Barnes;  1892);  The  Gospel  according  to  Peter  and 
the  Revelation  of  Peter  (in  collaboration  with  J.  A. 
Robinson;  London,  1892);  Apocrypha  Anecdota 
(2  vols.,  Cambridge,  1893-97);  On  the  Abbey  of  St. 
Edmund  at  Bury  (1895);  The  Life  and  Mirades  of 
St.  Wmiam  of  Norwich  (in  collaboration  with  A. 
Jessopp,  1896) ;  Sources  of  Archbishop  Parker's  Cot- 
lecUon  of  Manuscripts  (1899) ;  Verses  in  the  Windows 
of  Canterbury  Cathedral  (1901);  Ancient  Libraries  of 
Canterbury  and  Dover  (1904) ;  and  0?u>st  Stories  of  an 
Antiquary  (1904);  as  well  as  descriptive  catalogues 
of  the  manuscripts  (especially  western)  in  the  libror 
ries  of  Eton  College  (Cambridge,  1895),  the  Fitz- 
william Museum  (1895),  and  Lambeth  Palace  (1900), 
and  of  the  following  Cambridge  colleges:  Jesus 
(1895),  King's  (1895),  Sidney  Sussex  (1895),  Peter- 
house  (1899),  Trinity  (4  vols.,  1900-05),  Emmanuel 
(1904),  Pembroke  (1905),  Christ's  (1905),  Clare 
(1906),  Queen's  (1906),  Trinity  HaU  (1907),  and 
Gonville  and  Caius  (2  vols.,  1907-08). 

JAMES,  WILLIAM:  American  psychologist  and 
philosopher;  b.  in  New  York  Jan.  11,  1842.  He 
studied  in  private  schools,  then  at  the  Lawrence 
Scientific  School  and  the  Harvard  Medical  School 
(M.D.,  1869).  He  has  taught  at  Harvard  since  1876, 
having  been  instructor  in  philosophy  1872-76, 
assistant  professor  of  anatomy  and  physiology 
1876-80,  assistant  professor  of  philosophy  1880--85, 
professor  of  philosophy  1885-89,  professor  of  psy- 
chology 1889-97,  and  professor  of  philosophy  again 
since  1897.  He  holds  a  position  in  the  front  rank 
of  modem  psychologists,  and  in  this  field  has 
exercised  a  potent  iniSuence  both  in  Europe  and 
America.  In  philosophy  he  represents  what  may 
be  called  empirical  idealism  as  opposed  to  absolute 
idealism.  His  works  have  been  widely  translated, 
and  are  characterized  by  keen  analysis,  apt  illus- 
tration, lucid  exposition,  and  a  charm  of  style 
rarely  encountered  in  works  on  philosophy.  He  has 
published  The  Principles  of  Psychology  (2  vols., 
New  York,  1890);  Psychology— Briefer  Course 
(1892);  The  WiU  to  Believe,  and  Other  Essays  in 
Popular  Philosophy  (1897);  Human  Immortality: 
Two  Supposed  Objections  to  the  Doctrine  (Boston, 
1898);  Talks  to  Students  on  Psychology,  and  to 
Teachers  on  Some  of  Life's  Ideals  (New  York,  1899); 
Varieties  of  Religious  Experience:  A  Study  in  Hu- 
man Nature  (1902),  Gifford  Lectures  delivered  at 
Edinbutgh  1900-01,  a  work  which  has  attracted 
much  attention,  and  establishes  his  claim  to  men- 
tion in  a  religious  encyclopedia;  Pragmatism:  A 
New  Name  for  Some  Old  Ways  of  Thinking  (1907); 
and  Pluralistic  Universe  (Hibbert  Lectures;  1909). 
In  1908  a  volume  of  Essays  Philosophical  and  Psy- 
chological was  published  in  his  honor  in  New  York. 

JAMESON,  j^'me-stm,  ANHA  BROWNELL:  Eng- 
lish authoress;  b.  in  Dublin,  Ireland,  May  17,  1794; 
d.  at  Ealing  (9  m.  w.  of  St.  Paul's,  London),  Middle- 
sex, Mar.  17,  1860.  She  was  the  daughter  of  Denis 
Brownell  Murphy,  an  Irish  miniature-painter,  who 
came  to  England  in  1798  and  settled  with  his  family 
at  London  in  1803.  After  spending  a  number  of 
years  as  governess  in  the  family  of  the  marquis  of 
Winchester,  and  in  other  noted  families,  she  con- 
tracted an  unhappy  marriage  with  Robert  Jameson, 


95 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jamas 
Janacn 


a  young  barrister,  in  1825.  She  practically  sepa- 
rated from  her  husband  in  1829,  when  he  went  to 
Dominica  as  puisne  judge.  In  1836  she  joined 
him  in  Canada,  where  he  had  secured,  through  her 
influence,  an  important  legal  appointment  in  1833, 
but  left  him  after  six  months,  though  she  did  not 
return  to  England  till  1838.  In  the  course  of  her 
literary  work  she  spent  much  time  in  France,  Italy, 
and  Germany.  Her  most  important  work  is  Sacred 
and  Legendary  Arty  in  four  sections.  Legends  of  the 
Saints  (2  vols.,  London,  1848),  Legends  of  the 
Monastic  Orders  as  Represented  in  the  Fine  Arts 
(1850),  Legends  of  the  Madonna  as  Represented  in 
the  Fine  ArU  (1852),  and  The  History  of  Our  Lord 
aa  Exemplified  in  Works  of  Art  (2  vols.,  1864),  which 
was  completed  by  Lady  Eastlake.  Other  works 
deserving  mention  are  the  popular  Diary  of  an 
Ennuyie  (1826);  the  excellent  Characteristics  of 
Women  (2  vols.,  1832),  essays  on  Shakespeare's 
heroines  dedicated  to  Fanny  Kemble;  Visits  and 
Sketches  (4  vols.,  1834),  a  charming  work;  Winter 
Studies  and  Summer  Rambles  in  Canada  (3  vols., 
1838);  and  Memoirs  and  Essays  (1846).  In  her 
later  life  Mrs.  Jameson  became  interested  in  the 
work  of  Sisters  of  Charity  and  wrote  Sisters  of 
Charity  (1855)  and  The  Communion  of  Labour  (1856). 
Bxbuoorapbt:  G.  Macphenon,  Memair§  cf  the  Life  cf 
Anna  Jameson,  London,  1878;   DNB,  xadx.  230-232. 

JANNES  AND  JAMBRES:  The  names  given  in 
II  Tim.  iii.  8  to  the  adversaries  of  Moses,  who 
opposed  their  magic  to  his  miracles,  but  were  over- 
come by  him  (Ex.  vii.  11  sqq.).  Paul  derived  the 
names  from  Jewish  tradition.  Jambres  appears  in 
the  forms  YambriSf  Yombros;  the  Talmudists  write  it 
mamre*  and  mamrey,  "  the  rebel."  Jannes  appears 
as  Yannis  and  Yonos,  and  in  the  Talmud  as  Yo- 
hannan  {Yohanne).  Buxtorf  and  Levy  consider 
this  last  to  be  the  original  form;  but  the  analogy 
of  Jambres  suggests  that  it  also  had  an  adjectival 
quality  expressing  a  hostile  character  and  that  it 
was  later  confounded  with  the  usual  name  Johannes. 
The  names  probably  read  Yani  we  Yamri,  Aram. 
Yanne  we  Yamre,  "  he  who  seduces  and  he  who 
makes  rebellious." 

Jewish  tradition  makes  them  sons  of  Balaam 
(Taigum  of  Jonathan  on  Num.  xxii.  22),  and  places 
their  rise  at  the  time  the  Pharaoh  gave  command 
to  kill  the  first-bom  of  Israel  {Sanhedrint  f.  106a; 
S€4ah  11a),  and  supposes  them  to  have  been  teach- 
ers of  Moses,  the  makers  of  the  golden  calf  (Midrash 
Tan^uma,  f.  115b),  and  to  have  accompanied  their 
father  Balaam. 

These  names  were  doubtless  familiar  to  the 
apostle  educated  in  the  school  of  Gamaliel,  and 
they  seem  also  to  have  been  well  known  in  the 
heathen  world.  Origen  and  Ambrose  mention  an 
apocryphal  book  about  Jannes  and  Mambres  (see 

PSEUDEPIGRAPHA,   OlD  TESTAMENT,    II.,  37).      The 

Pythagorean  Nimienius  (second  century)  knew  of 
the  two  Egyptian  magi  (Eusebius,  Fraeparatio  evan- 
gelieat  ix.  8),  Apuleius  had  heard  of  them  (Apologia, 
ii.).  The  two  names  occur  in  the  Gospel  of  Nico- 
demus  (chap,  v.),  in  the  Martyrium  Petri  et  Fault 
(chap,  xxxiv.;  R.  A.  Lipsius,  Ada  apostolorum 
apocrypha,  Leipsic,  1891,  pp.  148-149),  in  the  Ada 
Petri  d  Pavli  (chap.  Iv.;   Lipsius,  ut  sup.  p.  202), 


and  elsewhere.  The  apostle  has  been  blamed  for 
employing  so  unimportant  a  tradition,  but  may  be 
justified  by  the  resemblance  between  these  men 
and  the  false  teachers  of  II  Tim.  iii.  6  sqq. 

C.  VON  Obelu. 
Bibuoorapht:  Scharer*  Q^tdiidUB,  iii.  292-294.  Eng.  trand., 

IL.  iii.  149-150.    Tho  forma  are  disouased  in  tha  toxioona; 

e.g.:   J.  Buxtorf.  ed.  of  Baael.  1039.  pp.  945  aqq.;    J.  C. 

Suioerua,  Thsmurua  •cdenoMtiau,  a.  y.  "  laimCa  ";   J.  A. 

Fabridua,   Codex   ptetuUpigraphuM   VeterU  TetlamenH,  i. 

813  aqq.,  Hamburg.  1723;   DB,  ii.  649;   EB,  u.  2327-29; 

JE,  vii.  71. 

JA1I0W»  yd'nef,  MATTHIAS  OF:  The  first  of  the 
so-called  precursors  of  Huss;  d.  in  Prague  Nov.  30, 
1394.  He  descended  from  a  noble  Bohemian  family 
and  studied  theology  in  Prague  and  Paris,  where 
he  remained  nine  years,  to  which  was  due  his 
title  of  magister  Parisiensts.  In  1381  he  was  ap- 
pointed canon  in  the  cathedral  of  St.  Vitus  in  Prague 
and  confessor.  He  was  not  a  great  preacher,  but 
exercised  influence  through  his  pastoral  labors  and 
writings.  He  considered  that  the  abuses  of  the 
Church  started  from  the  papal  schism,  and  that 
they  could  be  healed  only  by  moral  renovation. 
Therefore  he  was  intent  upon  church  reform.  In 
his  writings  he  addressed  himself  to  the  conmion 
people.  The  reforms  which  he  advocated  were  the 
abolition  of  all  human  additions  to  Christianity 
(doctrinal  and  ceremonial),  and  a  return  of  believers 
to  the  love  of  Jesus  and  the  simple  foundation  on 
which  rested  the  Apostolic  Church.  He  laid  special 
stress  on  frequent  communion,  since  he  re^urded 
the  Lord's  Supper  as  the  most  important  means 
for  spiritual  growth,  and  emphasized  the  common 
priesthood  of  believers.  He  was  a  diligent  student 
of  the  Bible  and  wrote  from  1388  to  1392  various 
treatises  which  he  later  collected  imder  the  title 
Regulae  veteris  d  novi  testamenti.  Parts  of  this  work 
were  erroneously  ascribed  to  Huss  and  embodied  in 
the  Nurembeig  collection  of  his  works  (vol.  i.,  pp. 

376-^71).  (J.  LOSBRTH.) 

BxBLEOOBAPHT.  J.  P.  Jordan,  Die  VarlOufer  dee  HuuUenr- 
tume  in  Bohmen,  Leipaic.  1846;  F.  Palacky.  OtachiddB 
von  Bdhmen^  iii.  1.  pp.  173  aqq..  Praicue,  1851;  idem.  Doe- 
umenta  Joanni9  Hua,  pp.  099  aqq.,  ib.  1869  (the  retraet»- 
tion  of  Janow);  £.  H.  Gillett.  Life  and  Timee  of  John 
Hu9,  pp.  26  aqq..  Philadelphia,  1870;  A.  H.  WraUalaw, 
John  Hu9,  pp.  61  aqq..  London,  1882;  J.  Loaerth,  Widif 
and  Hu$,  ib.  1889;  Count  Latsow,  John  Hua^  pp.  3-60, 
ib.  1909. 

JANSEN,  CORNELIUS,  JAITSENISIL 

Origin  of  Movement  (f  1).        Queanel.     The  Bull  Unioen" 

Comeliua  Janaen  (I  2).  itua  (I  6). 

Janaenism  Condemned    by     Acceptanta  and  AppeDanta 

Pope  (i  3).  (i  6). 

Amauld  and  Paacal  (i  4).        Convolutioniata  (i  7). 
Cloae  of  Controvendea  (f  8). 

The   religious  movement  known   as  Jansenism 
originated  in  the  controversy  on  the  doctrine  of 
grace.    It  divided  the  Roman  Catholic 
I.  Origin    Church  of  France  for  over  a  century 
of  Move-    and  developed  a  puritanical  and  sep- 
ment      aratist  spirit  in  many  ways  analogous 
to  that  of  French  Calvinism.    Since 
the  writings  of  Augustine,  after  Paul,  chiefly  deter- 
mined the  belief  of  both  Luther  and  Calvin,  the 
Counter-Reformation  was  driven  into  an  attitude  of 
practical,  though  veiled,  hostility  toward  his  special 
teachings.    They  had  had  a  powerful  influence  in 


JaBMn 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


96 


the  Middle  Ages  on  the  mystios  and  the  scholAstics, 
which  left  its  mark  on  the  Thomistic  theology  of 
the  Dominican  order.  At  the  Ck>uncil  of  Trent,  in 
regard  to  the  doctrines  of  grace  and  of  sin,  they 
opposed  the  Sootist  tendency  toward  semi-Pelagian- 
ism  exemplified  in  the  Franciscans  and  Jesuits. 
These  latter,  however,  were  victorious  in  the  main, 
and  soon  boldly  developed  their  deductions  from 
the  concessions  made  to  them.  The  Pauline  and 
Augustinian  doctrine  was  now  upheld  especially 
by  Michael  Bajus  (q.v.),  professor  of  Louvain. 
llie  Franciscans  obtained  the  condeomation  of 
seventy-six  of  his  propositions  in  1567  and  1579. 
When  the  Jesuit  Molina  in  1588  taught  semi- 
Pelagianism,  the  Dominicans  brought  serious 
charges  against  him.  In  order  to  settle  the  dispute 
between  the  two  orders,  Clement  VIII.  convoked 
in  1597  a  congregaJtio  de  auxiUia  to  define  decisively 
the  relation  of  grace  to  conversion,  but  it  was  dis- 
solved in  1607  by  Paul  V.  As  the  gulf  between 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church  and  the  churches  of 
the  Reformation  became  wider,  the  spirit  of  semi- 
Pelagianism  in  life  and  doctrine  assumed  larger 
dimensions  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  and  as 
Thomism  degenerated  into  a  lifeless  scholasticism, 
it  is  not  strange  that  the  doctrine  of  Augustine 
became,  in  1612,  a  new  revelation  for  two  young 
and  sealous  students  of  the  University  of  Louvain, 
Cornelius  Jansen  and  Duvergier  de  Hauranne,  after- 
ward abb6  of  St.  Cyran  (see  Duvbroibr  de  Hau- 
bannb). 

Cornelius  Jansen  (b.  at  Acquoy  in  North  Holland 
Oct.  28,  1585;   d.  at  Ypres  [66  m.  w.  of  Brussels, 

Belgium]  May  6,  1638)  studied  the- 

a.  Comdiai  old^  at  the  colk^  of  Adrian  VI.  in 

Jansen.     Louvain,  where  he  formed  an  intimate 

acquaintance  with  Duvergier.  He  de- 
clined a  position  as  teacher  of  philosophy,  hating 
Aristotle  as  the  father  of  scholastidsm,  and  believ- 
ing Plato's  ideas  of  God  and  virtue  superior  to 
those  of  some  Roman  Catholic  theologians.  As 
president  of  the  college  of  St.  Pulcheria  he  taught 
theology.  By  continually  reading  the  writings  of 
Augustine,  Jansen  came  to  the  conviction  that 
the  Roman  Catholic  theologians  of  both  parties 
had  deviated  from  the  doctrine  of  the  primitive 
Church,  and  in  1621  he  resolved,  with  his  friend 
Duvergier,  to  work  for  reform.  For  this  purpose 
he  entered  into  intimate  connections  with  prom- 
inent Irish  divines,  and  with  the  leaders  of  the  new 
French  Congregation  of  the  Oratory.  At  his  instiga- 
tion, the  University  of  Louvain  excluded  Jesuits 
from  positions  as  teachers,  and,  in  behalf  of  the 
university,  he  imdertook  journeys  to  Madrid,  in 
1623  and  1627,  with  reference  to  certain  encroach- 
ments of  the  Jesuits.  In  1630  he  was  appointed 
regius  professor  of  Holy  Scripture  in  Louvain,  and 
in  1636  buhop  of  Ypres.  He  laid  down  the  results 
of  his  studies  of  Augustine  in  his  comprehensive 
work,  AttgtuHmUf  aeu  dootrina  Saneti  Augutiini  de 
humanae  naturae  eanUate,  aegritudine,  medicina  ad- 
versus  Pelagianoe  el  MaseUieruea  (3  vols.,  Louvain, 
1640).  The  first  volume  gives  a  historical  expo- 
sition of  the  semi-Pelagian  heresies;  the  second  sets 
forth  the  Augustinian  doctrine  as  to  the  state  of 
innocence  and  the  fall;    while  the  third  treats  of 


3- J« 
ism  Con- 


by  Pope. 


the  grace  of  Christ  and  of  predestination  in  the 
spirit  of  Augustine.  While  the  work  was  still  in 
the  press  at  Louvain,  strenuous  efforts  were  made 
by  the  Jesuit  party  there,  through  the  papal  nuncio 
at  Cologne,  to  prohibit  its  appearance,  but  in  vain. 
It  was  immediately  reprinted  in  Paris  and  Rouen. 
The  bull  In  eminenii  (1642)  reproached  Jansen 
for  the  renewal  of  the  heresies  of  Bajus,  but  he  had 
then  been  dead  for  four  years.  It  was  only  after 
a  resistance  of  several  years  on  the  part  of  bishops, 
universities,  and  provincial  estates  that  the  bull 
was  published  in  the  Spanish  Netherlands  and  its 
subsoiption  enforced. 

The  leader  of  the  Jansenist  party  after  the  death 
of  Jansen  and  Duvergier  was  Antoine  Aznauld  (see 
Abnaxtld),  the  learned  doctor  of  the 
Sorbonne,  who,  in  1643,  published  De 
lafrfypienU  communion  on  the  basis  of 
the  doctrine  of  predestination  as  taught 
by  Augustine  and  Jansen.  At  the 
same  time  the  Jesuits  were  eagerly  at 
work  to  effect  the  condemnation  of  the  Jansenist 
principles,  being  aided  in  their  efforts  by  the  French 
Dominicans,  while  the  Dominicans  of  Spain  and 
Italy  took  the  part  of  Jansen.  The  University  of 
Louvain  requested  the  assistance  of  the  Sorbonne 
in  repelling  the  encroachments  of  the  Jesuits  and 
preventing  the  condemnation  of  Jansen's  doctrines. 
As  no  particular  doctrines  of  Jansen  had  been  con- 
demned as  heretical  in  the  papal  bull,  the  Jesuits 
attempted  to  formulate,  in  the  shape  of  definite 
propositions,  the  heresy  of  which  they  accused  him. 
These  were  finally  reduced  to  five,  and  in  1650  for^ 
warded  to  Rome.  They  are  as  follows:  (1)  Some 
commandments  of  God  are  impossible  of  execution 
by  the  just,  and  the  grace  by  which  they  might 
be  truly  fulfilled  \b  lacking;  (2)  in  the  state  of 
fallen  nature  inward  grace  is  never  resisted;  (3) 
in  the  fallen  state  merit  and  demerit  do  not  de- 
pend on  a  liberty  which  excludes  internal  neces- 
sity; freedom  from  external  constraint  suffices;  (4) 
the  semi-Pelagians  admitted  the  necessi^  of  an 
inward  prevenient  grace  for  the  perfonnance  of 
every  (good)  act,  even  for  the  first  act  of  faith; 
their  heresy  consisted  in  their  assertion  that  this 
grace  was  of  such  a  nature  that  the  will  of  man 
was  able  either  to  resist  or  to  obey  it;  (5)  it  is 
semi-Pelagian  to  say  that  Christ  died  or  shed  his 
blood  for  all  men  without  exception.  Pope  Inno- 
cent X.  condenmed  these  theses  in  1653  in  the  bull 
Cum  occaeione.  Although  this  bull  was  confirmed 
neither  by  the  assembly  of  the  cleigy  nor  by  par- 
liament, it  was  sent  to  the  different  dioceses  for 
subscription,  at  the  instigation  of  the  Jesuits.  The 
Jansenists  declared  their  willingness  to  condemn 
the  five  theses  in  their  heretical  sense,  but  not  as 
propositions  of  Jansen.  Most  of  the  Jansenists  ad- 
mitted the  infallibility  of  the  pope  in  matters  of 
faith,  but  not  as  to  facts  of  merely  human  knowl- 
edge. In  1654  the  pope  decUuned  that  these 
condemned  theses  were  really  in  Jansen's  Auffiu- 
iinus,  and  that  their  condemnation  as  the  teach- 
ing of  Jansen  would  have  to  be  subscribed  on 
pain  of  deprivation.  Under  these  circumstances 
hundreds  of  the  *'  party  of  grace "  signed  the 
condenmation. 


97 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


JanB«n 


In  1654  a  priest  at  St.  Sulpioe,  in  Paris,  refused 

absolution  to  the  duke  of  Liancourt  because  of  his 

protection  of  a  priest  who  had  refused 

4*  Aniauld  subscription.    Thereupon  Antoine  Ar- 

and  PaacaL  nauld  (q.v.)  published  his  LeUre  a  une 
penonne  de  qualiU,  from  which  two 
propositions  were  immediately  extracted  by  his 
opponents:  (1)  The  grace  of  God,  without  which 
we  can  not  do  anything  good,  had  left  Peter  at  the 
time  when  he  denied  the  Lord;  (2)  since  not  every- 
body can  convince  himself  that  the  five  condemned 
theses  are  in  Jansen,  a  submission  of  respectful 
silence  under  the  papal  decision  suffices;  the  sub- 
mission of  faith  can  not  be  required  for  the  fact. 
Amauld  was  expelled  from  the  Sorbonne  (1656), 
and  eighty  doctors  went  out  with  him  rather  than 
sign  his  excommunication.  At  this  time  Blaise 
Pascal  (q.v.)  sent  forth  his  LeUres  d  un  provindalf 
in  the  first  of  which  he  attacked  the  Thomists  for 
opposing  the  teachings  of  Jansen  and  Amauld, 
while  they  themselves,  according  to  him,  with  their 
mechaniod  view  of  predestination,  really  shared 
their  views.  In  the  following  letters  he  attacked  the 
casuistry  and  moral  theology  of  the  Jesuits.  But 
Louis  XIV.  was  intent  upon  thoroughly  eradicating 
Jansenism.  In  1660,  at  an  assembly  of  the  French 
cleiigy,  a  formulary  was  prepared  which  condemned 
the  five  propositions  of  Jansen,  and  subscription 
was  again  required  not  only  from  the  cleigy,  but 
now  from  nuns  as  well.  Ilioee  who  refused  were 
imprisoned,  De  Sacy,  one  of  the  most  excellent  men 
of  the  Port  Royal  group,  in  the  Bastile.  Amauld 
insisted  upon  the  distinction  between  fait  and  draitf 
though  in  1656  Alexander  VIL,  in  the  constitution 
Ad  aanctam  beaH  Petri  sedem,  had  again  laid  down 
the  ''  fact "  that  Jansen  had  taught  the  five  theses 
in  an  objectionable  sense.  In  1664  he  issued  a 
new  constitution  in  which  he  required  all  cleigy 
to  accept  by  a  new  signature  the  papal  pronounce- 
ments of  1642,  1653,  and  1656.  Four  bishops  would 
promise  no  more  as  to  the  fact,  and  a  number  of 
others  signed  with  reservations  intended  to  protect 
the  doctrine  of  Augustine.  The  strength  of  the 
opposition  impressed  both  the  Curia  and  the  king. 
After  some  hesitation,  the  distinction  between  fait 
and  droit  and  the  possibility  of  a  ^'  respectful 
silence "  was  admitted  by  Pope  Clement  IX.  in 
1668,  and  thus  a  temporary  peace  was  established. 
This  "  peace  of  Clement  IX."  was  evidently  a  defeat 
for  the  Curia,  which  practically  admitted  that  the 
situation  was  beyond  its  control  unless  it  was 
supported  by  the  secular  arm. 

The  dissensions  were  revived  by  the  publication 

of  Quesnel's  Nouveau  Testament  en  franfaie  avec  des 

reflexions  morales  (1693),  which  was 

5*  QuesneL  dedicated  to   Noailles,   at  that  time 
The  Bun    bishop  of  Ch&lons.     But  before  the 

Unigenitus.  development  of  this  new  stage,  Jan- 
senism of  the  older  period  had  come  to 
an  end.  Louis  XIV.  became  more  and  more  jealous 
of  his  authority  and  inclined  to  assure  the  pardon 
of  his  sins  by  the  persecution  of  heretics.  He 
availed  himseff  of  a  dissension  which  had  broken 
out  among  the  Jansenists  themselves,  by  urging 
Pope  Clement  XI.  to  adopt  severe  measures  against 
them.  The  pope  was  glad  to  seize  an  opportunity 
VI.-7 


to  assert  his  authority  over  the  Gallican  Church, 
and  issued  the  bull  Vineam  Domini  (1705)  in  which 
the  five  theses  of  Jansen  were  unconditionally  con- 
demned. The  nims  of  Port  Royal  refused  to  sub- 
scribe the  bull,  and  their  convent  was  suppressed 
in  1709  and  destroyed  a  year  later.  In  the  mean 
time  Cardinal  de  Noailles  had  become  archbishop 
of  Paris.  By  his  protection  of  QuesnePs  ''  New 
Testament "  he  had  incurred  the  hatred  of  the 
Jesuits,  who  influenced  the  pope  to  condemn  certain 
propositions  which  Le  Tellier,  the  Jesuit  confessor 
of  the  king,  had  selected  from  the  New  Testament 
of  Quesnel.  Thereupon  the  pope  issued,  in  1713, 
the  bull  UnigenOus,  in  which  101  propositions 
from  Quesnel  were  condemned  as  Jansenistic  or 
otherwise  heretical.  Among  these,  however,  were 
not  only  some  which  may  be  found  almost  literally 
in  Holy  Scripture  and  in  Augustine,  but  even  some 
substantially  identical  with  the  decrees  of  the 
Council  of  Trent,  as,  for  instance,  the  second,  "  The 
grace  of  Jesus  Chriai  is  necessary  for  all  good  works; 
without  it  nothing  (truly  good)  can  be  done  ";  the 
twenty-sixth,  ''  No  grace  is  imparted  except 
through  faith ";  the  twenty-ninth,  "  Outside  of 
the  Church  no  grace  is  given  ";  and  the  fifty-first, 
"  Faith  justifies  when  it  is  operative,  but  it  is  opera- 
tive only  through  love."  The  bull  was  laid  before 
the  assembly  of  the  French  cleigy  and  accepted  by 
the  majority.  Noailles  prohibited  the  book;  but 
before  he  accepted  the  bull,  he  asked  the  pope  for 
several  explanations.  The  parliament  obeyed  the 
order  of  the  king  to  enter  the  bull  in  the  laws  of 
the  kingdom,  with  the  reservation,  however,  that 
its  views  regarding  exconmiunication  should  not 
interfere  with  loyalty  to  the  king.  The  Sorbonne 
split  into  different  parties,  and  some  of  its  most 
prominent  teachers  were  banished  from  Paris  or 
lost  their  right,  of  voting.  The  king,  intolerant  of 
resistance,  thought  of  settling  the  matter  by  a 
national  council,  but  the  pope  would  not  hear  of 
so  risky  a  measure;  and  at  his  death  in  1715, 
Louis  XIV.  left  the  Jansenist  question  in  the  great- 
est confusion  and  bitterness  of  feeling. 

The  successor  of  Louis  XIV.,  the  frivolous  duke 

of  Orleans,  cared  for  neither  party,  considering  the 

principles  of  both  equally  foolish.    The 

6.  Accept-    exiles  were  allowed  to  return,  and  the 
ants  and    Sorbonne  withdrew  its  half-hearted  ao- 

Appellants.  ceptance  of  the  bull  Unigenitus,  Ac- 
cordingly, the  pope  threatened  Noailles 
with  deprivation  and  even  excommunication.  But 
now  a  number  of  hitherto  submissive  bishops  b^gan 
to  ask  for  explanations,  and  in  1717  several  of  them 
appealed  from  the  pope  and  his  bull  to  a  future 
general  coimcil.  These  were  called  Appellants,  in 
distinction  from  the  Acceptants,  who  accepted  the 
bull.  Almost  twenty  bishops,  the  faculty  of  Paris 
and  two  other  theological  faculties,  and  a  laige 
part  of  the  secular  and  monastic  deigy  joined  the 
cause  of  the  Appellants.  They  were  stigmatized 
as  Jansenists  by  their  opponents,  though  in  some 
cases  unjustly.  Noailles  also  took  the  part  of  the 
Appellants,  after  a  vain  attempt  at  mediation. 
The  party  of  the  Acceptants  was  headed  by  Mailly, 
archbishop  of  Reims.  But  Dubois,  the  favorite 
of  the  regent,  was  ambitious  of  a  cardinal's  hat. 


Jans«niat  Ohnroh 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


98 


and  took  sides  against  the  Appellants;  and  Louis 
XV.,  led  by  his  former  teacher,  Cardinal  Fleury, 
oppressed  them  in  every  way.  Noailles  was  com- 
pelled to  submit  (1728),  and  in  1730  the  bull  was 
formally  registered  as  the  law  of  the  kingdom. 

A  young  Jansenist  clergyman,  Francois  de  PAris, 

had  died  in  1727  as  a  result  of  his  ascetic  practises, 

with  his  "  appeal "  in  his  hand,  and 

7.  Convolu-  some  miraculous  cures  performed  at 

tionisti.  his  grave  were  looked  upon  as  a  divine 
confirmation  of  the  cause  of  the  Ap- 
pellants; even  children  fell  into  convulsions  and 
trances  on  his  grave,  prophesying  and  testifying 
against  the  bull.  Infidels  were  carried  away  by 
the  fanaticism  of  the  thousands  who  knelt  at  the 
grave  of  PAris  in  the  churchyard  of  St.  Mddard. 
In  1732  the  king  ordered  the  graveyard  to  be  closed; 
but  portions  of  earth  which  had  been  taken  from 
the  grave  were  equally  efficacious,  and  the  number 
of  convulsionary  prophets  of  coming  ruin  to  Church 
and  State  continued  to  increase  until  the  movement 
ended  in  strife,  and  sometimes  in  moral  disorder, 
after  giving  occasion  to  the  skeptics  to  draw  con- 
clusions unfavorable  to  the  miracles  of  Christianity. 

The  Jansenists  of  the  first  generation  had  en- 
deavored to  enforce  the  practise  of  confession  to 
the  parish  priest,  not  to  friars  and 

8.  Close     Jesuits,  but  the  subsequent  perseeu- 

ofCon-  tion  compelled  them  to  confess  to 
troTenies.  appellant  priests.  On  their  death-bed, 
however,  they  had  to  confess  to  their 
regular  pastor  if  they  wished  to  be  buried  with  the 
rites  of  the  Church.  Under  the  influence  of  the 
Jesuits,  Beaumont,  archbishop  of  Paris,  resolved 
to  refuse  the  last  rites  of  the  Church  to  all  those 
who  produced  no  evidence  that  they  had  confessed 
when  in  health  to  their  parish  priest.  When  a 
priest  in  1752  accordingly  refused  absolution  to  an 
Appellant,  the  archbishop  was  summoned  before 
parliament  and  threatened  with  confiscation  of  his 
revenues.  Most  of  the  bishops  took  the  side  of 
the  archbishop,  in  defense  of  the  unrestricted 
right  of  the  Church  to  control  the  sacraments,  while 
other  parliaments  took  sides  with  that  of  Paris, 
on  the  ground  that  it  was  trying  to  protect  citizens 
against  clerical  oppression.  In  1753  the  king  forbade 
the  parliament  to  meddle  in  ecclesiastical  affairs, 
and  its  members  were  dispersed  and  banished; 
but  in  the  following  year  they  were  recalled,  al- 
though they  still  insisted  upon  their  rights,  and 
the  archbishop  who  still  refused  absolution  to 
Appellants  was  exiled.  The  bishops,  supported  by 
the  king,  requested  the  decision  of  the  pope,  who 
now  manifested  considerably  more  caution  in  regard 
to  the  bull  Unigenitua  by  refusing  the  sacraments 
only  to  such  Appellants  as  were  recognized  as  such 
publicly  and  by  law.  The  king  referred  grievances 
concerning  the  refusal  of  the  sacraments  to  spiritual 
courts,  but  with  the  right  of  appeal  to  secular 
courts.  The  dissensions  of  Jansenism  ceased  only 
with  the  excitement  preceding  the  expulsion  of 
the  Jesuits.  The  literatiu^  on  these  disputes  from 
the  time  of  the  bull  UntgenUua  comprises  three 
or  four  thousand  volumes  in  the  Bibliothdque 
Nationale  of  Paris. 

(Paul  Tschackert.) 


BiBUOQBiLpHT:  Hie  best  earlier  Uteratuie  is  given  in  Sehaff, 
Crmd9,  L  102.  GoDsult:  T.  Bourier.  Hiat,  du  JanUnitme, 
Btruburg.  1864;  8.  P.  Tregellea.  ThB  JanaeniaU;  their 
RiM,  PertteuHona  and  txitHng  FraofMnU,  London,  1851; 
R.  F.  W.  Guett^  JanUnimiM  at  JiauUiame,  Pftris,  1857; 
R.  lUpin,  Hiat.  du  Janainiame,  PariB,  1865;  idem.  Mf- 
nuriraa  aur  Vtifiiaa  1644-90,  ed.  L.  Aubineeu,  3  vols.,  ib. 
1865;  F.  X.  fliniienmftnn,  M,  Baina  uni  die  Orundkgung 
daa  Jttnaaniamua,  Ttlbingen,  1867;  W.  H.  Jervis,  Tha 
OtUliottn  Chvardiy  L  ohape.  s.-xiv.,  ii.  chaps,  v.  vt,  viiL. 
2  vols.,  London.  1872;  A.  Schill.  Dia  ConaHbUAon  Uni- 
ifanitua,  Freiburg,  1876;  E.  L.  T.  Henke,  Nauera  Kircken- 
ifaaekiehia,  ed.  Qaas.  it  07  sQq..  Hidle.  1878;  A.  Vanden- 
peerenboom,  CcmaUua  Janaaniua,  Bmgea,  1882;  A.  Ri- 
card,  Laa  Pramiara  Janahuataa,  Paris,  1883;  L.  S^che. 
Let  Darmara  Jana&maiaa,  1710-1870,  3  vole.,  ib.  1801;  C. 
Gilardoni,  La  BuUa  Unioanitua,  Vitry-le-Francoia.  1802; 
idem,  L*Abbaya  da  Hauta-Foniaina  at  la  JanaSniama,  ib. 
1804;  C.  Callewaert,  Janaaniua  (v^qua  d'Ypraa,  Louvain. 
1803;  Mrs.  M.  ToUemaehe,  Franeh  Janaaniata,  London. 
1803;  G.  Doublet,  La  JanaHnama  dana  Vanden  dioekae  de 
Vanoa,  Paris,  1001;  J.  Gaillard,  Un  prilat  janainiata, 
Choart  da  Buaauaal,  Sviqua  da  Baauvaia,  1661-70,  ib.  1002; 
A.  M.  P.  Ingold,  Bouaauat  at  la  Janainiama,  ib.  1004;  V. 
Durand,  La  Janahuama  au  xviU.  aiMa  at  Joachim  Col- 
hart,  Htqua  da  MontpaUiar  (1606-1768),  ib.  1007;  Cam- 
bridoa  Madam  Hiatory,  v.  82  sqq..  New  York.  1006.  The 
bull  Unigenitus  is  given  in  Lat.  in  Reioh,  Documents, 
pp.  386-380.  The  reader  should  eonsult  also  for  further 
light  on  the  subject  the  literature  given  under  Pascal, 
Bi.a»b;   Pobt  Rotal;  and  Qubsnel,  Pasquikb. 

JANSENIST  CHURCH  IN  HOLLAND. 

Contributory  Causes  of  the  Schism  of  1702  (i  1). 

Its  Immediate  Occasion  (i  2). 

History  (i  3). 

Differences  from  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  (I  4). 

The  doctrines  of  Jansenism  (see  Jansen,  Cor- 
NBuus,  Jansekibm)  left  no  permanent  trace  in 
Belgium  or  in  France,  but  in  Holland 
I.  Con-     there  has  been  for  more  than  two  oen- 
tributory    turies  a  church  popularly  called  Jan- 
Causes     senist.    Its  adherents  reject  the  name, 
of  the      rightly    calling    themselves    the   Old 
Schism     Catholic  Church  of  Holland,  since  the 
of  1702.    schism  among  the  Dutch  Roman  Cath- 
olics in  1702,  to  which  they  owe  their 
origin,  sprang  from  the  adherence  of  the  Dutch 
clergy  to  the  privileges  of  their  church  rather  than 
from   dogmatic   principles.     The   first   bishop  in 
Holland  was  Willibrord  (q.v.),  consecrated  bishop 
of  Utrecht  by  Pope  Seigius  I.  in  695.    Among  his 
successors  were  not  a  few  who  opposed  the  growing 
tendency  to  regard  the  pope  as  the  unrestricted 
governor  of  all  Christendom.   The  bishop  of  Utrecht 
was  originally  chosen  by  the  clergy,  and  in  1145 
the  Emperor  Conrad  III.  confirmed  the  right  to 
the  chapter  of  St.  Martin's  Cathedral.    The  choice 
was  not  always  accepted  by  Rome.     In  1559  in 
accordance  with  the  wish  of  Philip  II.  of  Spain, 
then  ruler  of  the  Netherlands,  the  pope  elevated 
Utrecht  to  the  rank  of  an  ardibishopric  with  five 
suffragan  sees,  and  it  was  then  agreed  by  pope 
and  king  that  the  latter  should  select  the  bishops, 
to  be  confirmed   by  the  pope.     Nine  years  later 
the  War  of  Liberaticm  broke  out,  lasting  for  eighty 
years,  and  involved  the  Roman  Catholics  in  many 
difficulties.    Though  they  joined  with  the  Protes- 
tants  in  fighting   against  the  Spanish  yoke,  they 
were  mistrusted,  and  about  1573  the  public  exer- 
cise of  Catholic  worship  was  forbidden— a  prohi- 
bition which  remained  in  force  till  the  revolution 
of  1795.    As  the  incumbents  of  the  episcopal  sees 


00 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


TllHBOTI 

Jaastnlst  Ohuroh 


died,  it  was  found  difficult  to  fill  their  places.  Sa»- 
bold  Vosmeer,  chosen  general  vicar  by  the  Utrecht 
chapter  in  1583,  after  the  death  of  the  archbishop 
in  1580,  was  consecrated  archbishop  by  the  pope  in 
1602,  but  with  the  title  archbishop  of  Philippi. 
His  successors  were  chosen  and  consecrated  in  the 
same  way.  Under  the  fifth  of  them,  Petrus  Codde 
(consecrated  1689),  occurred  the  schism. 

More  formidable  opponents  than  the  Protestants 
had  appeared  against  the  Roman  Catholic  clergy  of 

Holland.     During  the  turbulent  con- 

3.  Its      ditions  of  the  long  war  the  country 

Immediate  had  been  invaded  by  "  regular  "  clergy 

Occasion.   especiaUy  by  the  Jesuits  after  1590, 

who  accused  the  Dutch  clergy  of  the 
Jansenistic  heresy.  In  1697,  during  the  negotia- 
tions of  peace  at  Ryswik,  there  appeared  an  anony- 
mous treatise  in  French,  soon  afterward  also  in 
Latin,  and  some  years  later  in  Dutch,  under  the  title 
"  Short  Memorial  concerning  the  Condition  and 
Progress  of  Jansenism  in  Holland."  Some  copies 
fell  into  the  hands  of  Codde,  who  hastened  to  send 
the  book  to  Rome  with  an  apology.  He  was  de- 
clared innocent  in  Rome,  although  there  was  no 
end  of  insinuations.  Since  Alexander  VII.  had  issued 
his  constitution  against  the  so-called  five  theses 
of  Jansen  in  1656,  the  accusation  implied  that  the 
accused  was  suspected  of  sgreeing  with  the  five 
condenmed  theses,  or  of  refusing  to  believe  that 
Jansen  had  taught  those  theses  in  his  AugusHnua, 
and  thereby  given  rise  to  the  heresy  condemned 
by  the  church.  Codde  and  his  subordinate  eccle- 
siastics could  easily  defend  themselves  against  the 
charge  of  sgreeing  with  the  content  of  the  con- 
demned theses,  although  the  former  did  not  express 
himself  on  the  question  whether  Jansen  had  really 
taught  them  or  not.  But  since  the  decision  of 
Al^Eander,  this  point  involved  the  absolute  suprem- 
acy and  infallibiiity  of  the  pope,  and  the  Jesuits 
were  intent  upon  having  this  question  decided. 
Codde  was  sununoned  to  Rome  in  1700,  and  in 
1702  was  declared  guilty  of  heresy.  There  was 
great  consternation  in  Holland  when  it  was  learned 
that  he  had  been  dismissed  from  office,  and  still 
more  when  Theodor  de  Eock,  his  opponent,  was 
appointed  general  vicar.  The  estates  took  the  part 
of  Codde  and  forced  his  opponents  to  let  him  return 
to  Holland,  where  he  arrived  in  1703.  The  ques- 
tion now  was,  what  attitude  would  Codde,  the 
Dutch  deigy,  and  the  Utrecht  chapter  assume. 
If  they  accepted  Codde's  dismissal,  the  independ- 
ence of  the  Utrecht  church  was  necessarily  abolished . 
Codde  himself,  from  love  of  peace,  remained  until 
his  death  in  a  passive  attitude,  stedfastly  asserting 
his  rights  and  those  of  his  church,  but  refraining 
from  exercising  them.  A  large  party  of  the  Dutch 
clergy  and  laity,  however,  remained  faithful  to  him, 
although  another  part  followed  De  Kock.  Thus 
Codde's  dismissal  led  to  a  schism  in  the  Dutch  Ro- 
man Catholic  Church  which  lias  never  been  healed. 
It  was  to  be  expected  that  the  church  of  the 
Jansenists,  as  Codde's  party  was  now  called,  would 
decrease  in  numbers  after  Rome  had  spoken.  Ow- 
ing to  the  lack  of  higher  ecclesiastics,  the  church  of 
Utrecht  was  on  the  point  of  extinction,  when  aid 
came  in  an  unexpected  manner.    Several  French 


clergymen  who  refused  to  sign  the  buD  Untgenitus 
in  1713  (see  Jansen,  Cobneuttb,  Jansenism)  sought 
refuge  on  Dutch  soil.  Moreover,  in 
3.  Histoiy.  1719,  Dom  Maria  Varlet  (chosen  bishop 
of  Babylon  in  1718  and  consecrated  as 
bishop  of  Ascalon  Feb.  19,  1719)  spent  some  time 
in  Amsterdam  before  he  undertook  his  journey  to 
the  Orient.  In  Amsterdam  be  became  acquainted 
with  ecclesiastics  of  the  Old  Catholic  Church  and 
was  active  in  their  behalf.  He  had  hardly  reached 
the  Orient  when  the  pope  suspended  him  as  a  Jan- 
senist.  He  then  returned  to  Holland,  where  the 
Utrecht  chapter  in  1723  had  elected  Cornells 
Steenoven  as  archbishop  to  prevent  the  extinction 
of  the  Old  Catholic  Church.  In  1724  Bishop  Varlet 
consecrated  him.  The  pope,  of  course,  immediately 
put  Steenoven  under  the  ban,  but  the  Utrecht 
church  was  saved  from  extinction.  Steenoven  died 
in  1725,  and  was  succeeded  by  Barchman  Wuytiers 
(d.  1733),  who  was  followed  by  Theodor  van  der 
Croon  (d.  1739),  both  consecrated  by  Varfet.  The 
Utrecht  church  soon  recognised  the  danger  of 
making  its  continuance  dependent  upon  the  life 
of  a  single  bishop,  and  consequently  Hieronymus 
de  Bock  was  consecrated  bishop  of  Haarlem  in  1742, 
and  B.  J.  Bijevelt  bishop  of  Deventer  in  1758. 
Several  attempts  to  reconcile  the  pope  failed.  A 
serious  danger  threatened  the  Old  (Catholic  Church 
in  Holland  under  the  administration  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  king,  Louis  Bonaparte  (1806-10),  and 
under  the  regime  of  Emperor  Napoleon  (1810-13), 
who  contemplated  prohibiting  the  election  of  a 
new  Old  Catholic  bishop;  but  this  danger  passed 
with  the  restitution  of  the  independence  of  Holland, 
and  in  1814  W.  van  Os  was  elected  archbishop  of 
Utrecht,  and  in  1819  Johannes  Bon  bishop  of 
Haarlem  (see  Episcopacy,  III.).  The  difficulties 
which  threatened  the  church  under  King  William  I. 
and  King  William  II.,  who  desired  to  establish  a 
concordat  with  the  pope,  passed  as  soon  as  the 
sgreement  failed.  The  law  concerning  church  asso- 
ciations enacted  in  1853  assured  entire  freedom  to 
all  ecclesiastical  organizations,  including  the  Old 
Catholics.  In  this  way  the  small  church  has  grad- 
uaUy  increased  its  members  from  5,000  to  almost 
8,000,  and  its  parishes  from  twenty-five  to  twenty- 
six.  It  is  not  strange  that  the  Old  Catholic  bishops 
disapproved  the  dogma  of  the  immaculate  concep- 
tion in  1854,  and  that  of  papal  infallibiiity  in  1870. 
The  chief  points  of  difference  between  the  Old 
Catholics  of  Holland  and  their  Roman  Catholic  op- 
ponents are  the  following:  (1)  The  Old 
4.  Differ-  Catholic  Church  considers  the  deposi- 
ences  from  tion  of  Archbishop  Codde  illegal,  and 
the  Roman  asserts  that,  in  spite  of  the  Reforma- 
Catholic  tion  of  the  sixteenth  century  and  its 
Church,  influence  upon  the  affairs  of  Holland, 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church  has  existed 
without  interruption,  and  has  continuously  retained 
its  right  to  administer  its  own  affairs  as  a  national 
church,  independent  of  the  church  in  Rome.  (2) 
It  refuses  to  sign  the  formula  of  Pope  Alexander 
VII.,  unless  permitted  to  make  a  distinction  between 
a  signature  quoad  jtu  and  quoad  faHum;  namely, 
between  the  question  whether  the  five  incriminated 
theses  were  heretical,  and  the  question  whether 


Janssen 
Japan 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


100 


Jansen  had  taught  them  in  a  heretical  sense.  (3) 
It  rejects  the  bull  Unigenitus,  since  this  bull  val- 
idates the  moral  system  of  the  Jesuits  for  the  whole 
Roman  Catholic  Church.  The  importance  of  the 
Old  Catholic  Church  of  Holland  for  all  Roman  Cath- 
olic Christendom  lies  not  only  in  the  fact  that  it  is 
a  monument  of  the  spirit  of  the  earlier  centuries, 
but  also  in  the  fact  that  it  has  entered  into  rela- 
tions with  the  Old  Catholic  movement  in  Gennany 
and  Switzerland.  When  the  Old  Catholic  spirit 
was  aroused  in  Germany  in  opposition  to  the  dogma 
•  of  infallibility  in  1870,  and  the  necessity  of  a  bishop 
for  the  newly  organized  Old  Catholic  Church  was 
felt,  it  was  H.  Heykamp,  the  Old  Catholic  bishop  of 
Deventer,  who,  in  1873,  consecrated  J.  H.  Reinkens 
bishop  of  the  German  Old  Catholics.  See  Old 
Cathoucs.  (J.  A.  Gebth  van  Wuk.) 

Bibuooraprt:  C.  P.  Hoynok  a  Papendracht,  HiBt,  eecle^ 
nae  UUrajeetinae^  Mechlin,  1725;  T.  BaokhusiUA,  Bewija- 
Sthrift,  3  vote..  Utracht.  172&-^;  M.  Q.  Dupae  de  Bell»- 
garde,  Hist.  ahrigH  de  Viglim  nUtropolUaine  d'Ulrteht,  ib. 
1852;  J.  W.  Neale,  Hiai.  c/  the  •(MxOUd  Janeeniai  Church 
cf  Holland,  London,  1858;  R.  Bennink  Jannoniua,  Oe- 
wehiedenU  der  Oud'^Roonuch^Katholieke  Kerk  in  Nederland^ 
The  Hague.  1870;  F.  Nippold.  Die  rOmiaehr-katholieche 
Kimhe  .  .  .  der  Niederlande,  Leipric,  1877;  J.  A.  van 
Beek.  Gtechiedenia  der  hoUandeche  Kerk,  Rotterdam,  1886; 
Neerlandia  Calholica,  Utrecht.  1888;  J.  de  Huller.  Bij- 
drage  tot  de  geeehiedenie  van  het  Utrechteche  Schiema,  The 
Hague,  1892;  W.  P.  C.  Knuttol,  De  Toeetand  der  neder- 
landeche  Katholieken,  2  vols.,  ib.  1892-04;  J.  Meyhoffer. 
Le  Martyrologe  proUalant  dee  Paye-Bae,  14tS-1607,  The 
Hague.  1907.  The  literature  of  the  church  is  given  by  J. 
A.  van  Beek,  lAjet  van  boeken  uitoeven  in  de  (htd-Katho- 
lieke  Kerk,  3  vols.,  Rotterdam.  1892-93.  Much  of  the 
literature  under  Janbbmiam  ie  pertinent,  e.g.,  the  work  of 
Tregelles. 

JANSSE9,  yOns'sen,  JOHANHES:  Roman  Cath- 
olic; b.  at  Xanten  (15  m.  s.e.  of  Cleves)  Apr.  10, 
1829;  d.  at  Frankfort  Dec.  24,  1891.  He  studied 
at  Monster,  Louvain,  Bonn,  and  Berlin  from  1849 
to  1853  (Ph.D.,  Bonn,  1853),  and  was  professor  of 
history  in  the  gynmasiiun  of  Frankfort  from  1854 
until  his  death.  He  was  ordained  to  the  priesthood 
in  1860,  was  a  member  of  the  Prussian  House  of 
Deputies  in  1875-76,  was  created  a  domestic  prelate 
to  the  pope  and  an  apostolic  prothonotary  in  1880. 
His  theological  position  was  so  ultramontanistic 
as  to  evoke  sharp  criticism  from  Protestant  his- 
torians for  his  partisan  views  of  the  moral,  economic, 
and  religious  results  of  the  Reformation.  Of  his 
many  books  the  chief  is  the  monumental  Oeachichte 
de9  deutschen  Volkes  seU  dem  Auagang  des  MiUdaUera 
(8  vols.,  Freiburg,  1879-94),  the  last  three  edited 
and  completed  by  L.  Pastor;  £ng.  transl.  by  M.  A. 
Mitchell  and  A.  M.  Christie,  Hist,  cf  the  German 
People  at  the  Cloee  of  the  Middle  Ages,  12  vols., 
London,  1896-1907;  Pastor  has  also  reedited  the 
whole  work,  and  has  supervised  the  publication  of 
a  series  of  monographs  in  defense  of  it  under  the 
title  ErlAuterungen  und  Ergdntungen  gu  Janssens 
Geschichte  des  deutschen  Volkes  (6  vols.,  Freiburg, 
1898-1908).  Janssen  replied  to  his  critics  in  his 
An  meine  Kritiker  (Freiburg,  1882)  and  Ein  zweites 
Wort  an  meine  Kritiker  (1883). 
Bxblioorapht:    L.  Pastor,  Johannee  Janeeen,  18S9-91,  ein 

Ubenebild,   Freiburg,    1893;     F.  Meister,   Erinneruno  an 

Johann  Jansaen,  Frankfort,  1896. 

JANNSENS,    ERASMUS     (ERASMUS     JOHAN- 
NES):    Dutch   Unitarian    theologian;     b.   about 


1540;  d.  at  Clausenburg  (220  m.  e.s.e  of  Budapest) 
1596.  He  became  rector  of  the  college  at  Antwerp 
m  1576,  but  because  of  his  Sodnian  teaching  was 
compelled  by  William  of  Orange  to  resign  and  go 
into  exile.  He  became  rector  of  the  college  at  Em- 
den,  and  in  1579  he  went  to  Frankfort,  where  there 
seemed  prospects  of  larger  religious  liberty.  But 
his  Clara  demonstratio  Aniichristum  immediaie  post 
mortem  apostolorum  coepissi  regnare  in  eccUsta 
Christi  (n.p.,  1584)  caused  him  new  trouble,  and  he 
emigrated  to  Cracow  in  Poland.  A  disputation 
with  Faustus  Socinus  Nov.  29-30, 1584,  led  to  Jans- 
sens' De  unigenitifilii  Dei  existentia  (Cracow,  1595). 
A  little  later  Janssens  withdrew  his  opposition  to 
the  Unitarian  doctrine,  being  offered  the  pastorate 
of  the  Unitarian  church  at  Clausenburg,  in  the 
service  of  which  he  closed  his  life. 

His  system  of  theology  is  stated  in  his  AntUheais  doo- 
trincB  Christi  et  Antichristi  de  uno  vero  Deo  (n.p.,  1583; 
reprinted  with  refutation  by  J.  Zanchius,  Neustadt, 
1586).    He  was  author  also  of  Scriptum  quo  causae 
propter  quae  vita  cetema  conHngal  compUctitur  (1589), 
and  furnished  the  part  on  the  prophets  in  the  Latin 
Bible  of  Tremellius  and  Junius  (Frankfort,  1579). 
Biblioorapht:    C  .   Sandius,    Bibluaheea  antitrimiariarum, 
panim,  Frwstadt.  1684;    J.  N.  Paquot.  Mimoir^   jww- 
aervir    d  Vhiet,  littSrairt  de  ,  ,  .  Paye-Ba;  vii.  328-333, 
18  vols.,  Louvain,  1763-70;   J.  C.  A.  Hoofer.  NotaveUe  hi- 
ographie  ginirale,  xxvi.  367.  PartB,  1861.  . 
JANUARIUS,  SAINT:  The  patron  saint  of  Naples; 
b.,  according  to  tradition,  either  at  Naples  or  Bene- 
vento  about  the  middle  of  the  third  century;   mar- 
tyred at  Puteoli  Sept.  19  (according  to  other  ac- 
counts. May  1  or  2,  Oct.  19,  or  Dec.   16),  305. 
Within  a  century  after  his  death  his  relics  are  said 
to  have  been  translated  to  a  church  before  the 
gates  of  Naples,  whence  they  were  taken,  about 
820,  to  Benevento  (the  head  being  left  in  Naples), 
and  were  finally  interred  in  a  chureh  of  Benevento 
in  1129.    Since  1497  they  have  rested  in  the  Janu- 
arius  chapel  of  the  cathedral  of  Naples,  the  head 
and  two  glass  flasks  said  to  contain  his  blood  being 
in   the  Capelladi  Tesoro  of  the  same  structure. 
The   famous    miracle  of   the  liquefaction  of    tbe 
blood  in  the  flasks  when  brought  near  the  head  is 
said  to  have  taken  place  first  in  the  twelfth  century, 
and  is  abundantly  confirmed  since  the  middle  of 
the  fifteenth  century,  as  by  Pius  II.  (Aeneas  Syl- 
vius), the  physician  Angelus  Cato  (1474),  the  Bol- 
landists  Henschen  and  Papebroch  (Mar.  10,  1661), 
and  the  Bollandist  Stilting  (Aug.  21,  1754);  cf.  the 
account  of  J.  P.  Peters,  in  American  Church  Magor 
tine,  Aug.  or  Sept.,  1902.    It  occurs  three  times  a 
year — on  the  first  Saturday  of  May,  in  the  evening, 
on  Sept.  19  and  Dec.  16,  between  9  and  10  a.m. 
"  According  as  the  liquefaction  is  rapid  or  slow  it 
is  considered  a  good  or  evil  omen  for  the  ensuing 
year."    (Baedeker.)    Other  miracles  are  also  re- 
lated as  occurring  in  the  nineteenth  century  in 
connection  with  tMs  phenomenon.    There  are  other 
less  important  saints  and  beatified  of  the  same  name. 
BiBLiooRAraY:   The  early  Acta  and  TranelaUo,  with  com- 
ment, are  in  A8B,  Sept..  vi.  762-894.    A  list  of  litera- 
ture is  given,   Potthaet,    Wegweiaer,   p.   1385.     Gonenlt: 
Kinran's  Bomaniam  at  Home,  pp.  81-94,  New  York,  1852; 
J.  Ptoter.  La  Ligende  de  8.  Janvier,  Laiuanne,  1884;    E. 
Gothein.   Die  CuUurontwiekluno  SOd-ltaliene,    pp.    112- 
142.  BreBUu.  1886. 


101 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Janaen 
Japan 


JAPAN. 


I.  The  Country  and  People. 
IL  Native  ReligionB. 

1.  Shinto. 

Ito  Charaeter  ({  1). 

Its  Obeeuration  by  Buddhism  ({  2). 

Ite  Rerival  (|  3). 

Its  Writings  and  Cosmogony  (i  4). 

Its  Worship  and  Sects  (i  6). 

2.  Buddhism. 

Ito  Estoblishment  in  Japan  (i  1). 
Its    Dominance,   Decline,    and  Re- 

eovery  (5  2). 
Buddhist  Sects  (|  3). 
Modem  Doctrinal  Basis  (i  4). 


m.  Christianity  in  Japan. 
1.  Roman  Catholic  Missions. 

Introduction    under    St.    Frands 

Xavier  (|  1). 
Conditions    Favoring   Christianity 

(12). 
Beginnings  of  Persecution  (i  3). 
Dissensions  among  Roman  Catho- 

Ues  (i  4). 
Persecution  tmder  leyasu  ({  6). 
Period  of  Exclusion  of  Christianity 

(16). 
Renewed  Missionary  Efforts  (i  7). 
Modem  Roman  Catholic  Missions 

(18). 


Results  ({  9). 

2.  Missions  of  the  Eastem  Chureh. 
Initiation  by  Nioolai  Kanatlrin  ({  1). 
Results  (I  2). 

3.  Protestant  Missions. 
Beginnings  in  1860  ({  1). 
Alternating  Advance  and  Reaction 

(12). 
The  Advance.  1873-88  (|  3). 
The  Obstacles  Encountered  ({  4). 
The  Reaction  of  1889  (|  5). 
The  New  Advance  since  1899  ({  6). 
Harmony  of  Protestant  Effort  ({  7). 
CSeneral  Results  ({  8). 


I.  The  Country  and  People:  [Japan,  called  by  its 
own  people  Nihon  or  Nippon,  consists  of  a  chain  of 
nearly  4,(XX)  islands,  of  which  about  500  are  in- 
habited, in  the  western  Pacific,  reaching  from 
Formosa  to  the  Kurile  Isles,  or  from  22°  to  51° 
north  latitude,  a  distance  of  about  2,400  miles, 
and  Ijring  generally  in  direction  n.e.  to  s.w.  off  the 
eastem  coast  of  Asia.  Its  climate,  consequently, 
ranges  from  the  subtropical  to  the  subarctic. 
Its  central  portion  is  the  most  important,  consisting 
of  the  four  great  islands  (named  from  north  to 
south),  Yezo,  Honshin,  Shikoku,  and  Kiushiu.  Its 
territoxy,  including  Formosa,  has  an  area  of  162,154 
square  miles  with  a  deeply  indented  coast  line 
nearly  20,(XX)  miles  in  length,  favorably  conditioned 
therefore  for  oonunerce  by  water.  It  is  a  coimtry  of 
high  mountain  ranges,  deep  valleys,  few  plidns, 
no  great  rivers,  many  volcanoes,  and  frequent 
earthquakes,  few  of  which  are  severe.  Its  popula- 
tion, slightly  under  50,000,000,  is  of  varied  stock, 
the  result  of  the  fusion  of  several  migrations  pos- 
sibly of  Mongol  stock  with  the  original  inhabitants. 
The  Ainu,  found  only  in  the  northern  parts,  seem 
to  represent  the  aborigines.  The  Formosans  betray 
a  strong  Malay  infusion.  The  principal  industries 
are  agncultuj^  and  the  fisheries,  though  the  devel- 
opment of  mining  and  manufactures  during  the 
last  quarter  century  has  been  enormous.  Its  gov- 
ernment, since  1889,  is  a  constitutional  monarchy, 
with  two  houses  of  parliament,  the  lower  entirely 
elective  by  the  people,  the  upper  partly  elective 
and  partly  appointive.] 

n.  Kative  Religions. — 1.  Shinto:  This  indigenous 
cult  of  Japan  combines  nature  worship,  hero  wor- 
ship, and  reverence  for  ancestors.  At 
1.  Its  times  its  most  distinguishing  character- 
Oharaoter.  istic  has  been  reverence  for  the  im- 
perial family,  and  the  present  tendency 
is  to  emphasize  this  feature;  nevertheless  through 
long  periods  of  Japanese  history  the  emperors  were 
almost  forgotten  by  the  mass  of  the  people,  and  the 
extreme  honor  shown  at  the  present  day  is  largely 
a  growth  of  the  last  forty  years.  The  name  ShitUd 
is  the  Chinese  equivalent  of  the  Japanese  Kami  no 
nnchi,  "  Way  of  the  Superior  Beings,"  the  word 
kami  (Chinese  ahin),  although  employed  by  Chris- 
tians as  the  name  for  God,  being  used  of  super- 
natural beings — whether  good  or  evil— of  the 
spirits  of  departed  heroes,  and  even  of  extraordi- 
nary natural  objects.  The  number  of  these  beings 
is  said  to  be  8(X)  myriads.  The  beginnings  of  the 
system  are  lost  in  antiquity;  but  its  oldest  elements 


are  found  in  the  worship  of  the  forces  of  nature. 
Phallicism  was  once  common,  but  in  recent  times 
the  government  has  caused  most  of  the  symbols  to 
be  removed  from  public  view.  Shinto  combines 
religious  and  non-religioiis  elements,  the  former 
being  sometimes  so  overshadowed  by  the  latter  as 
to  be  hardly  discernible.  In  its  present  form  it 
has  no  system  of  dogmas,  no  prescribed  code  of 
morals,  and  no  sacred  writings  unless  a  few  semi- 
historical  books  and  some  forms  of  addresses  to  the 
kami  can  be  considered  such. 

Buddhism  came  to  Japan  in  552  a.d.,  and  in  the 
ninth  century  it  taught  that  the  kami  were  avatars 

(reincarnations)    of    Buddhist    saints. 

2.  Its  Oh-  Buddhism  proved  the  stronger  religious 

•ooratlon  element  in  this  combination,  and  most 

hy         of  the  prominent  Shinto  shrines,  with 

Buddhism,  the  exception  of  those  at  Ise  and  Izumo, 

were  served  by  Buddhist  priests,  who 
introduced  the  images,  incense,  and  elaborate  ritual 
of  their  worship.  Many  of  the  smaller  shrines  re- 
mained unchanged,  and  there  was  nothing  in  either 
Shinto  or  Buddhism  that  made  it  seem  inconsistent 
for  the  people  to  observe  the  rites  of  both.  While 
every  locality  had  its  Shinto  shrine  where  some 
hero  or  other  superior  being  was  honored  as  the 
patron  saint  of  the  community,  it  may  be  said  that 
the  people  were  at  the  same  time  Buddhists  and 
Shintoists.  There  was,  however,  one  marked  dis- 
tinction in  their  conceptions  of  the  two  systems. 
The  chief  concern  of  Shinto  was  with  the  present 
world,  while  Buddhism  busied  itself  more  with 
what  came  after  death.  The  erection  of  buildings 
and  the  commencement  of  public  works  were  pre- 
ceded by  Shinto  rites,  and  infants  were  taken  to 
the  village  shrine  for  consecration  to  the  local  deity; 
but  funerals  and  memorial  services  for  the  dead 
were  conducted  by  Buddhist  priests.  Hence  grave- 
yards were  contiguous  to  Buddhist  temples,  while 
Shintoism  avoided  the  pollution  associated  with 
death.  In  the  rare  cases  where  Shinto  funerals 
were  held,  there  were  usually  additional  Buddhist 
rites. 

In  the  seventeenth  century  a  movement  b^an 
for  the  revival  of  ancient  Shinto,  largely  political 

in  its  motives.    It  was  chiefly  conduc- 

8.  Its      ted  by  scholars  who  investigated  old 

Sevival.    records  and  embodied  the  results  in 

books  that  advocated  a  return  to 
ancient  ideas  of  government  and  ritual.  Their 
writings,  though  reaching  only  a  small  section  of 
people,   had  an   important  influence   in   bringing 


Japan 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


108 


about  the  overthrow  of  the  shogunate  in  1868  and 
the  restoration  of  imperial  power.  In  connection 
with  that  great  change  the  ancient  department  of 
Shinto  rites  was  reestablished.  Buddhist  orna- 
ments and  ritual  were  banished  from  the  ancient 
shrines,  a  grant  equal  to  about  $300,000  a  3rear 
was  made  for  their  maintenance,  and  preadiers 
were  sent  out  to  instruct  the  people  in  the  ancient 
beliefs.  This  movement  was  shortlived.  The  de- 
partment of  Shinto  rites  was  degraded  until  it 
became  a  subbureau  of  the  home  department,  the 
Buddhists  recovered  many  shrines,  and  in  most 
respects  people  returned  to  their  former  ways.  In 
1899  the  officials  of  the  most  honored  Shinto  shrine, 
that  of  Dai  Jingu  in  Ise,  obtained  the  government's 
consent  to  their  request  that  they  no  longer  be 
considered  as  forming  a  religious  body,  but  as  an 
association  for  performing  rites  in  honor  of  the 
imperial  ancestors  and  for  conducting  patriotic 
ceremonies.  The  tendency  of  recent  years  has 
been  to  consider  Shinto  itself  a  system  for  fostering 
patriotism  and  loyalty.  This  makes  it  possible, 
without  violation  of  the  freedom  of  conscience 
guaranteed  by  the  national  constitution,  to  claim 
that  every  Japanese  ought  to  support  it  and  take 
part  in  its  ceremonies.  While,  however,  the  shrines 
are  not  considered  religious  buildings,  there  are 
frequently  connected  with  them  voluntary  associa- 
tions of  a  religious  character  called  kySkwai,  the 
name  used  by  Christians  to  designate  a  church. 

The  chief  authority  for  the  cosmogony  and  myth- 
ology of  Shinto  is  the  Kojiki  (**  Records  of  Ancient 
Matters ")»  &  compilation  of  legends 
4.  Its  Wri-  that  was  completed  in  712  a.d.    The 

tinvs  and  Nihongi  ("  Chronicles  of  Japan "), 
Oosmoffony.  though  compiled  only  eight  years  later, 
is  much  more  afifected  by  ChLiese  ideas. 
Tlie  Yenffiakiki  describes  the  ritual  as  practised  in 
the  Yengi  era  (901-923)  and  includes  prayers  that 
had  come  down  from  more  ancient  times.  Accord- 
ing to  the  Kojikif  after  heaven  and  earth  were 
separated  from  the  original  chaos,  three  kami 
came  into  existence  on  the  Heavenly  Plain  and 
afterward  passed  away.  They  were  succeeded  by 
others  until  finally  there  came  two  named  Ixanagi 
(''  Male  who  Invites ")  and  Izanami  (''  Female 
who  Invites  ").  Standing  on  the  bridge  of  Heaven, 
these  two  thrust  a  spear  into  the  liquid  mass  below 
them,  and  as  they  drew  it  back,  the  falling  drops 
became  an  island,  to  which  they  descended.  They 
there  gave  birth  to  the  other  islands  of  Japan  and 
afterward  to  a  number  of  gods  and  goddesses.  The 
birth  of  the  Fire-god  caused  the  death  of  Izanami. 
Izanagi  visited  her  in  the  underworld,  but  did  not 
succeed  in  bringing  her  back  to  earth.  After  his 
return,  as  he  purified  himself  from  the  pollution 
he  had  incurred,  new  deities  were  produced  from 
each  article  of  clothing  and  from  different  parts  of 
his  body.  The  most  important  of  these  was  Ama- 
terasu-O-Mi-Kami,  the  Sun-goddess,  who,  after  a 
qi2arrel  with  one  of  her  brothers,  withdrew  into  a 
cave,  leaving  the  earth  in  darkness.  The  800  myriad 
deities  lured  her  forth  by  offerings,  dances,  songs, 
and  the  exhibition  of  a  mirror  in  which  she  seemed 
to  see  another  being  as  splendid  as  herself.  One  of 
her  descendants  was  Jimmu  Tenn5,  the  first  em- 


peror of  Japan,  whose  ascension  to  the  throne  is 
said  to  have  occurred  660  b.c. 

A  Shinto  shrine  in  its  purest  form  is  of  very 

simple  architecture,  being  constructed  of  unpainted 

wood  and  thatched  with  bark  or  thin 

6.  Its  Wor-  shingles.     Before  it  is  a  torii  or  de- 

•hipand  tached  portal.  There  is  no  visible 
Sects,  object  of  worship,  but  hidden  within 
the  sanctuary  is  something  in  which  the 
spirit  of  the  kami  is  supposed  to  reside.  At  the 
shrine  in  Ise  there  is  a  mirror  said  to  have  been 
bestowed  by  the  Sun-goddess  on  her  grandson  when 
she  sent  him  to  subdue  the  land.  Shrines  where 
mirrors  are  exposed  to  view  and  those  with  tiled 
roofs  or  painted  wood  show  the  influence  of  Bud- 
dhism. Services  consist  chiefly  of  the  recital  of  ancient 
prayers,  the  offering  of  articles  of  food,  and  dancing 
by  priestesses.  Ise  and  other  prominent  shrines 
are  visited  by  large  numbers  of  pilgrims,  who  carry 
home  charms  to  be  placed  in  their  household  shrines. 
Shinto  lays  stress  on  ceremonial  purity.  There  is 
no  formulated  system  of  ethics,  such  being  thought 
necessary  only  for  the  immoral  people  of  other 
lands,  while  in  Japan  each  person's  heart  teaches 
him  what  he  ought  to  do.  A  number  of  popular 
sects  have  more  of  the  religious  element  than  has 
the  Shintoism  thus  far  described.  The  Kurosimu, 
TenrikyO,  and  RemmonkyO  sects  are  the  best 
known.  Springing  up  in  the  last  century,  they 
combine  Shinto,  Buddhist,  and  Confucian  elements. 
Most  of  these  sects  make  much  of  curing  disease 
through  faith  or  by  incantations,  and  at  times  have 
gained  large  numbers  of  adherents. 

8.  Buddhism:    Buddhism  was   introduced   into 

Japan  in  552  a.d.  when  the  king  of  Kudara, .  a 

Korean  state,  sent  to  the  mikado  a 

1.  ItsEa-  golden  image,  some  sutras,  and  other 
tabliflhinant  religious  objects.    A  temple  was  built 

in  Japan,  and  put  under  the  care  of  the  prime 
minister.  An  epidemic  that  soon  after 
broke  out  was  attributed  to  the  anger  of  the  gods 
at  the  introduction  of  the  foreign  religion,  and  the 
temple  was  overthrown;  but  it  is  averred  that  all 
attempts  to  destroy  the  image  proved  vain,  so  that 
it  is  in  existence  at  the  present  day,  there  being, 
however,  two  temples,  each  of  which  cliums  to 
possess  it.  Priests  and  nuns,  with  images  and 
books,  were  soon  after  sent  from  Korea.  Though 
Buddhism  fotmd  much  favor  at  court,  there  was  a 
strong  party  that  opposed  the  supplanting  of 
Shinto  by  the  foreign  system,  but  an  appeal  to  arms 
resulted  in  the  defeat  of  the  Shintotsts.  The  new 
religion  made  a  great  gain  when  a  Korean  priest 
claimed  to  recognize  in  the  mikado's  infant  son  the 
reincarnation  of  a  famous  priest  of  China  and  ob- 
tained pemussion  to  superintend  the  boy's  educa- 
tion. The  prince,  best  known  by  his  posthumous 
name,  Shdtoku  Taishi  (572--621),  afterward  became 
regent  and  was  an  earnest  defender  of  Buddhism. 
An  imperial  edict  in  621  made  it  the  established 
religion  of  the  country.  There  were  at  that  time 
forty-sbc  temples  with  1,385  priests  and  nuns. 
Many  of  these  had  come  from  Korea  and  China, 
countries  which  had  contributed  to  Japan  their 
literature,  arts,  and  sciences  through  the  teachers 
of  Buddhism.    Appreciation  of  the  new  civilization 


103 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Japan 


made  progressive  people  more  ready  to  listen  to 
the  religious  doctrines  of  its  representatives. 

Acceptance  of  the  doctrine  that  the  ruler  of  a 
nation  gained  great  merit  by  abdicating  and  becom- 
ing a  monk  vastly  incr^tsed  the  in- 
8.  Its  Bom-  fluence  of  the  monasteries,  which  thus 

^V^*  became  allied  with  the  imperial  family. 
^^^  *'  The  new  faith  spread  from  the  upper 
Seoovery.  ^  ^^  lower  claases.  Its  progress  was 
more  easy  because  it  did  not  demand 
the  abandonment  of  old  beliefs  and  forms  of  wor- 
ship. As  in  other  countries,  Buddhism  could  ac- 
commodate itself  to  the  religious  ideas  of  those 
whom  it  desired  to  win.  At  the  beginning  of  the 
ninth  century  the  priest  Kokai  (better  known  by 
his  posthiunous  title,  Kob5  Daishi)  formulated  the 
doctrine  that  the  Shinto  deities  were  avatars  of 
Buddhist  saints,  while  the  classification  of  many 
deified  heroes  as  gongen,  temporary  manifestations 
of  Buddha,  simplified  the  problem  and  provided 
for  the  apotheosis  of  future  emperors  and  great  men. 
Most  of  the  Shinto  shrines  soon  lost  their  former 
simplicity,  images  and  decorations  of  various  kinds 
being  introduce  into  them,  while  the  forms  of  wor- 
ship combined  Shinto  and  Buddhist  elements  in  pro- 
portions that  differed  with  time  and  locality.  Bud- 
dhism became  the  chief  religious  force  in  Japan  and 
gradually  attained  to  great  political  influence  and 
even  military  power,  la  the  Middle  Ages  some  of 
the  monasteries  were  strong  fortresses,  the  monks  of 
which  took  an  active  part  in  war  with  rival  sects  or 
political  enemies.  In  the  last  half  of  the  sixteenth 
century  these  fortresses  were  destroyed  by  the 
military  leaders,  Nobimaga  and  Hideyoshi,  while 
the  power  of  Buddhism  was  further  weakened  by 
the  success  of  the  Roman  Catholic  missions.  Under 
the  Tokugawa  shoguns  (1603-1867)  it  was  restored 
to  favor.  The  advent  of  Christian  missions  has  done 
much  to  arouse  the  Buddhist  priests  from  the 
lethargy  into  which  they  had  fallen.  Some  of  the 
sects  imitate  C!hristian  methods,  establishing  schools 
for  boys  and  girls,  young  men's  associations,  wo- 
men's societies,  and  charitable  institutions,  while 
many  Buddhist  journals  are  published.  Preachers 
have  been  sent  to  Korea,  (>hina,  Hawaii,  and  Cali- 
fornia, primarily  for  the  sake  of  Japanese  colonists, 
but  also  with  the  hope  of  gaining  converts. 

Japanese  Buddhiran  is  divided  into  many  sects. 
Some  of  these  were  brought  from  China,  while 
others  originated  in  Japan  itself.  Those 
8.  Buddhist  now  in  existence,  with  the  dates  of 
Sects.  their  establishment,  are  as  follows: 
Tendai  (three  subsects),  805;  Shingon 
(two  subsects),  806;  Yuzu  Nembutsu,  1127;  Jodo 
(three  subsects),  1174;  Rinzai  (nine  subsects), 
1168;  Shin,  also  called  Monto  or  Ikko  (ten  subsects), 
1224;  Soto,  1227;  Nichiren  or  Hokke  (seven  sub- 
sects),  1253;  Ji,  1276;  Obaku,  1650.  The  Rinsai, 
Soto,  and  Obaku  sects  are  offshoots  from  the  old 
Zen  sect,  by  whose  name  they  are  sometimes  called. 
The  word  zen  signifies  "  contemplation,"  the  earnest 
followers  of  this  system  giving  much  time  to  medita- 
tion, or  rather  to  an  attempt  to  induce  a  sort  of 
hypnotic  condition  in  which  there  is  a  complete 
absence  of  thought.  The  Zen  sects  together  with 
the  Tendai  and  Shingon  are  sometimes  called  the 


learned  sects,  as  they  have  attached  much  im- 
portance to  the  study  of  the  Sanscrit  texts.  The 
sects  having  the  most  influence  with  the  people  at 
the  present  time  are  the  Jodo,  Shin,  and  Nichiren. 
The  name  of  the  first  signifies  "  Pure  Land."  It 
teaches  that  Amida  (Amitabha),  the  object  of  its 
worship,  made  a  series  of  vows  to  the  effect  that  on 
attaining  the  state  of  a  Buddha  he  would  create 
a  paradise  into  which  those  who  had  faith  in  him 
should  enter  after  death.  This  faith  is  chiefly 
shown  by  use  of  the  formula  Namu  Amida  BuUu 
("  Hail,  Amida  Buddhal  ").  The  Shin  sect  sprang 
from  the  Jodo,  which  it  rebukes  for  seeking  salva- 
tion through  "  self-effort  depending  on  the  merits 
of  another,"  while  it  teaches  reliance  upon  Amida's 
merit  alone.  This  belief  in  salvation  by  faith,  the 
rejection  of  penance,  fasting,  and  other  forms  of 
asceticism,  together  with  the  fact  that  it  permits 
its  priests  to  marry,  has  caused  the  Shin  sect  to  be 
called  the  Protestantism  of  Japanese  Buddhism. 
The  Nichiren  sect  highly  esteems  charms,  amulets, 
and  pilgrimages.  Its  temples  are  gorgeous  and  the 
services  noisy,  and  its  priests  are  considered  expert 
in  exorcising  demons.  Delighting  in  controversy, 
the  priests  attack  the  doctrines  of  other  sects, 
while  these  declare  that  the  Nichiren  sect  ought 
not  to  be  considered  as  belonging  to  Buddhiran. 
The  Yuzu  Nembutsu  and  the  Ji  sects  have  but  a 
small  following. 

Though  three  extinct  sects  belonged  to  the  Hirir 

ayana  ("  Smaller  Vehicle  "),   Japanese  Buddhism 

of  to-day  belongs  to   the  Mahayana 

4.  ICodem  ("  Oieater  Vehicle  ").    The  differences 

Dootrinal  that  divide  the  sects  turn  upon  ab- 
Baais.  struse  metaphysical  and  technical 
points,  and  often  depend  upon  the 
sutras  that  are  held  in  chief  honor,  here  being  one 
point  in  which  the  divisions  of  Buddhism  differ 
from  those  of  Christianity  with  its  one  Bible.  It 
is  to  be  remembered  further  that,  as  very  few  of 
these  books  have  been  translated  into  Japanese, 
they  are  read  only  by  the  priests.  The  common 
people  have  but  slight  knowledge  of  Buddhist  doc- 
trines. Simply  following  the  religious  customs  that 
have  been  handed  down  in  their  families  for  genera- 
tions, they  know  little  about  the  meaning  of  the 
rites  or  the  nature  of  the  beings  that  they  worship. 
The  beliefs  of  the  yoimger  priests  are  being  greatly 
influenced  by  Western  ideas.  One  resulting  move- 
ment has  taken  the  name  "  New  Buddhism."  It 
is  an  attempt  to  bring  Buddhist  doctrines,  or 
rather  nomenclature,  into  harmony  with  modem 
thought.  The  doctrines  are  so  explained  as  to  bear 
little  resemblance  to  what  was  formerly  taught; 
and  there  is  an  attempt  to  replace  the  pessimism 
of  Buddhism  by  a  more  hopeful  philosophy.  No 
formulated  system  has  yet  been  constructed,  as 
the  leaders  differ  greatly  among  themselves;  some 
being  atheistic,  some  pantheistic,  while  others 
assert  that  they  believe  in  a  persoziai  God. 

m.  Christianity  in  Japan. — 1.  Boinan  OathoUo 
Kiasiona:  The  Portuguese,  who  had  previously  vi»- 
ited  the  Liukiu  Islands,  reached  Jai>an  proper  about 
1542.  Six  3rears  later  one  of  their  ships  brought  a 
young  Japanese  named  Yajiro  (the  Paul  Anjiro  of 
the  Jesuit  accounts)  to  Malaccai  where  he  met  St. 


Japan 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


104 


Francis  Xavier.    He  was  sent  to  the  Jesuit  college 

in  Goa,  and  there,  with  his  servant  and  anotber 

Japanese,  was  soon    afterward    bap- 

1.  Intro-    tized.     In   response   to  Yajiro's   en- 

duotion  treaties  that  missionaries  be  sent  to 
g  -^**'      his  people,  Xavier,  with  Fathers  Cosmo 

Za^w.  "  *^^  Torres  and  Brother  Juan  Feman- 
des,  accompanied  the  three  Japanese 
back  to  their  own  land,  reaching  Kagoshima  Aug.  15, 
1549.  There  they  met  a  favorable  reception,  the 
daimio  (feudal  lord)  of  that  region  authorizing 
them  to  teach  their  religion  and  permitting  his 
subjects  to  become  Christians.  With  Yajiro's  help 
Xavier  prepared  a  summary  of  Christian  doctrine 
in  Japanese,  which  he  wrote  out  in  Roman  letters, 
and  since  he  never  learned  much  of  the  language 
of  the  country,  his  direct  evangelistic  work  wh&e 
in  Japan  consisted  chiefly  in  reading  this  book  upon 
the  streets  to  those  who  were  drawn  by  curiosity 
to  see  and  hear  the  foreigner.  About  100  persons 
had  been  baptised  in  Kagoshima  when  the  Buddhist 
priests  stirred  up  the  daimio  to  order  that  no  more 
of  his  people  should  become  Christians  under  pen- 
alty of  death.  After  having  been  in  Kagoshima 
a  little  more  than  a  year,  the  missionaries  went  to 
Hirado,  where  Xavier  says  that  '^  in  a  few  days 
about  100  persons  became  Christians."  He  and 
Femandes  then  pushed  on  to  Kyoto,  the  capital, 
where  it  was  their  hope  to  convert  the  rulers  of 
the  land.  That  city  was  so  convulsed  by  civil 
strife  that  it  was  impossibfe  to  obtain  a  hearing. 
They  therefore  returned  to  Yamaguchi,  where  they 
had  spent  a  few  days  on  their  way  to  Kyoto,  and 
where  ere  long  a  number  of  converts  were  secured. 

In  all,  Xavier  spent  only  twenty-seven  months  in 

Japan  before  returning  to  India.    Though  he  led 

the  way  and  inspired  others,  the  real 

2.  O^di-    ^Qrk  was  done  by  Torres  and  Fer- 

^°*^3^*  nandez,  who  spent  the  remainder  of 

*4^r%4*Y  ^^®^  ^^^  ^  Japan,  and  by  those  who 
afterward  joined  the  mission.  Many 
circumstances  favored  their  success.  The  Japanese 
were  to  a  remarkable  degree  ready  to  listen  to  new 
doctrines.  Shintoism  had  little  religious  influence; 
Buddhism  was  powerful,  but  its  leaders  were  taking 
an  active  part  in  political  and  military  affairs,  and 
for  this  reason  many  of  the  daimios  were  ready  to 
favor  a  movement  that  seemed  likely  to  weaken  the 
power  of  the  arrogant  priesthood.  Some  of  the 
feudal  lords  were  also  desirous  of  attracting  foreign 
commerce.  The  country  had  long  been  vexed  by 
internal  strife;  and  Nobunaga,  the  military  leader 
who,  by  gaining  control  of  the  central  provinces, 
began  the  work  that  finaUy  resulted  in  the  unifica- 
tion of  the  country,  was  a  bitter  enemy  of  the 
Buddhists  and  openly  favored  the  missionaries. 
Among  the  early  converts  were  several  feudal  lords 
and  other  men  of  high  rank.  Some  of  these  con- 
fiscated the  Buddhist  temples,  destroyed  the 
images,  and  compelled  their  subjects  to  be  baptised. 
Christianity  soon  gained  a  strong  foothold  in 
Kiushiu  and  in  the  region  of  Kyoto.  Churches, 
monasteries,  and  schools  were  built,  and  many 
books  of  instruction  or  devotion  were  published. 
In  1583  the  Christian  lords  of  Kiushiu  sent  four 
young  men  on  an  embassy  to  the  pope.    In  1581 


PerMOu- 
tlon. 


the  Christians  numbered  about  150,000,  and  prob- 
ably the  highest  number  ever  attained  was  300,000 
in  1596. 

Hideyoshi,  who,  soon  after  Nobimaga's  death 
(1582),  gained  control  of  political  affairs,  seemed 
at  first  inclined  to  favor  the  Christians, 
8.  Baffin-  gome  of  whom  were  among  his  leading 
Sl?5"  oflScers.  In  1587,  however,  he  suddenly 
sent  into  exile  Takayama  Ukon  (the 
Justo  Ucondono  of  the  Jesuit  histo- 
rians), the  most  prominent  of  the  Christians,  and 
ordered  all  the  missionaries  to  leave  the  country 
within  twenty  days.  The  chief  reasons  given  by 
Roman  Catholic  historians  for  this  action  are  the 
scandalous  lives  of  the  Portuguese  merchants,  that 
Hideyoshi  was  angered  at  Christian  maidens  who 
would  not  yield  to  his  lust  and  that  the  refusal  of 
a  Portuguese  captain  to  bring  into  harbor  a  large 
ship  that  he  wished  to  examine  aroused  suspicions. 
Japanese  accounts  say  that  from  the  first  he  had 
considered  Christianity  dangerous  to  the  state  and 
had  only  been  waiting  a  favorable  opporttmity  for 
attacking  it,  and  also  that  the  arrogant  demeanor 
of  the  missionaries  enraged  him.  Murdoch  suggests 
that  Hideyoshi  probably  had  no  desire  to  extirpate 
Christianity,  but  only  to  reduce  it  to  the  position 
of  a  serviceable  tool.  However  this  may  be,  he 
postponed  the  time  of  the  missionaries'  departure 
for  six  months,  and  even  then  did  not  insist  upon  the 
enforcement  of  the  decrees,  though  he  pretended 
to  be  angry  at  the  failure  to  carry  them  into  effect. 
The  missionaries  worked  in  a  less  public  manner 
than  formerly,  but  there  continued  to  be  many 
baptisms. 

Papal  bulls  by  Gregory  XIII.,  Jan.  28, 1585,  con- 
firmed  by  Clement  III.,  1000,  had  decreed  that  none 
but  Jesuits  should  go  as  missionaries 
4.  Dissen-  ^  Japan;  and  Philip  II.,  ruler  of  Spain 
^™^"  and  Portugal,  had  given  the  merchants 
Bomj^  ^^  ^^®  latter  country  a  monopoly  of 
OathoUoa.  ^^^^  vrith.  Japan.  The  Spanish  colo- 
nists in  the  Philippines  and  the  different 
religious  orders  that  had  established  themselves 
there  were  vexy  restive  under  these  restrictions,  and 
finally  broke  them.  Franciscan  monks,  coming  as 
envoys  from  the  governor  of  the  Philippines,  were 
allowed  by  Hideyoshi  to  reside  in  Kyoto  on  con- 
dition that  they  would  not  attempt  to  teach  their 
religion.  Soon,  however,  they  were  engaged  in 
the  open  propagation  of  Christianity.  Bitter  feeling 
arose  between  the  two  orders,  and  also  between 
the  Portuguese  and  Spanish  merchants  who  allied 
themselves  respectively  with  the  Jesuits  and  the 
Franciscans.  In  1595  the  pilot  of  a  Spanish  ship 
wrecked  on  the  coast  of  Japan  was  pointing  out  on 
a  map  the  wide  possessions  of  his  king.  When  asked 
how  so  many  lands  in  different  parts  of  the  earth 
had  been  brought  under  one  sway,  he  replied:  "  The 
king  first  sends  out  teachers  of  religion.  After  they 
have  gained  the  hearts  of  a  sufficient  number  of 
persons,  soldiers  are  sent  to  imite  with  these  con- 
verts in  subduing  the  desired  territory."  This 
speech  was  reported  to  Hideyoshi,  who  had  always 
suspected  that  the  missionaries  had  political  ends 
in  view.  Thinking  it  time  to  give  them  another 
warning,  he  ordered  arrests  to  be  made,  and  six 


106 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Japan 


Franciscan  missionaries  and  twenty  Japanese  Chris- 
tians were  taken  to  Nagasaki  and  crucified.  A 
new  edict  forbade  any  of  the  daimios  to  become 
Christians,  and  ordered  all  missionaries  to  leave  the 
country.  By  dressing  Portuguese  merchants  in  cler- 
ical robes  and  sending  them  on  board  a  ship,  the 
Jesuits  pretended  to  be  obeying  the  command,  and 
thus,  with  a  few  exceptions,  they  were  able  to  remain 
concealed  in  Japan. 

Hideyoshi  died  in  1698.  The  missionaries  came 
out  from  their  hiding-places  and  were  reenforced 
by  new  arrivals.  Unfortunately  their 
6.  Perseon-  work  was  weakened  by  dissensions  be- 
tiooi  Undsr  tween  the  orders.  Augustinians  and 
leyasa.  Dominicans,  as  well  as  Franciscans, 
disregarded  the  papal  prohibitions  and 
came  to  Japan  from  the  Philippines.  After  a  period 
of  civil  striife,  leyasu,  the  founder  of  the  Tokugawa 
line  of  shoguns,  gained  control  of  the  country.  His 
desire  for  commerce  led  him  to  adopt  a  kindly  policy 
toward  the  missionaries;  but  some  of  the  Chris- 
tians were  active  supporters  of  his  enemies,  and 
they  were  also  accused  of  plots  with  foreign  rulers 
to  effect  his  overthrow.  Indeed,  in  all  this  histoxy 
of  Roman  Catholidsm  in  Japan,  the  chief  cause  of 
official  opposition  was  the  suspicion  that  its  teachers 
were  agents  of  the  European  nations  that  wished 
to  gain  possession  of  Japan.  In  1614  leyasu  or- 
dered the  expulsion  of  the  missionaries  and  the 
suppression  of  Christianity,  and  the  flames  of  per- 
secution broke  out.  Not  only  missionaries,  but 
many  Japanese  Christians  were  deported,  and  hor- 
rible tortures  were  invented  to  secure  recantation. 
Although  multitudes  apostatized,  there  were  many 
that  stood  firm.  Men,  women,  and  even  little 
children  were  beheaded,  burned  at  the  stake,  or 
crucified.  Many  missionaries  also  suffered,  for  they 
had  endeavored  to  remain  in  the  country,  and  even 
those  who  had  been  once  expelled  returned  under 
various  disguises  to  face  almost  certain  martyrdom. 
After  leyasu's  death  (1616)  the  persecution  was 
continued  by  his  son,  Hidetada.  The  final  blow 
came  in  the  suppression  (1638)  of  a  rebellion  raised 
by  the  peasants  living  in  Shimabara  and  Amakusa. 
Though  largely  a  revolt  against  the  oppression  of 
their  daimios,  the  leaders  were  Christians,  and  they 
fought  under  banners  inscribed  with  the  names  of 
Jesus,  of  Mary,  and  also  of  St.  James,  the  patron 
saint  of  Spain.  The  rebels  seised  an  old  castle, 
where  they  defended  themselves  so  bravely  that 
they  were  put  down  only  with  the  greatest  difficulty. 
When  finally  defeated,  all  of  them  were  put  to  death. 
The  laws  against  Christianity  were  thereafter  en- 
forced still  more  strictly,  and  the  countxy  was  closed 
to  all  foreigners  except  the  Dutch,  who  were  per- 
mitted under  restrictions  to  have  a  trading-post  in 
Nagasaki. 

For  more  than  two  centuries  Japan  refused  to 
have  intercourse  with  foreign  nations.    The  Chris- 
tians were  deprived  of  all  the  sacra- 
^11^*1*^  ®'  ments  except  baptism.    In  every  town 
^^Chri^  was  posted  a  notice  saying  "  The  evil 
tiitnitrT    ^^  called  Christian  is  strictly  prohib- 
ited," and  offering  rewards  for  infor- 
mation against  believers.    Every  householder  was 
required  to  procure  annually  from  the  Buddhist 


priests  a  certfficate  that  no  member  of  his  family 
was  a  Christian.  In  many  parts  of  the  land  all  were 
compelled  to  trample  on  a  cross  or  on  a  copper 
plate  that  bore  a  representation  of  the  crucified 
Jesiis.  The  publication  of  books  containing  refer- 
ences to  Christianity  was  prohibited.  The  Dutch 
ships  that  came  to  Nagasald  were  closely  searched 
for  priests  and  Christian  books.  Nevertheless  Chris- 
tianity was  not  completely  extirpated,  but  was 
carefidly  handed  down  from  parent  to  child.  Sacred 
images  were  hidden  in  what  had  the  appearance  of 
Buddhist  shrines,  lay  baptism  was  practised,  in 
some  villages  nearly  all  the  inhabitants  were  be- 
lievers, and  had  their  catechists  and  baptizers. 
Ways  were  devised  for  evading  the  tests  used  for 
the  detection  of  believers.  In  some  places  where 
the  officials  were  themselves  Christians  the  plate 
on  which  the  people  trampled  was  engraved  with 
Buddhist  symbols.  Elsewhere  the  believers,  after 
stepping  upon  the  cross,  would  wash  their  feet  and 
drink  the  water  while  returning  thanks  that  they 
had  been  permitted  to  touch  the  sacred  sjrmbol. 
But  from  time  to  time  Christians  were  discovered 
by  the  officials  and  punished. 

The  missionaries  made  some  attempts  to  return. 
In  1642  five  Jesuits  entered  the  country  and  were 

put  to  death;    they  were  followed  a 

7.  Benewed  year  later  by  five  others,  who  were  im- 

Xlssionary  prisoned  until  their  death;  as  was  also 

Efforts,     the  case  with  Sidotti,  an  Italian  priest 

who,  in  1709,  had  himself  set  ashore 
on  the  coast  of  Japan.  In  1844  a  French  war  vessel 
left  imder  the  name  of  official  interpreters  a  mission- 
ary and  a  Chinese  evangelist  in  Liuchiu,  which  was 
a  dependency  of  Japan.  It  was  thought  that  they 
might  there  learn  the  Japanese  language,  do  mission- 
ary work  among  the  people,  and  be  preparing  for  the 
opening  of  the  Japanese  group  itself.  They  and 
others  who  succeeded  them  were  so  closely  watched 
that  they  were  able  to  have  but  little  intercourse 
with  the  inhabitants.  Protestants  were  also  seeking 
entrance  to  Japan.  In  1837  the  ship  Morrison 
attempted  to  restore  some  shipwrecked  Japanese 
to  their  country.  In  addition  to  this  philanthropic 
motive,  there  was  a  hope  that  the  expedition  might 
help  to  open  the  land  to  trade  and  the  Gospel. 
Three  missionaries  from  China  accompanied  it. 
The  waifs  were  not  allowed  to  land,  and  the  Morrison 
was  fired  upon,  so  that  it  had  to  return  without 
having  accomplished  anything.  A  number  of 
British  officers  oiganized  the  Loochoo  Naval  Mis- 
sion, and  in  1845  sent  Dr.  Bettelheim,  a  medical 
missionary,  to  the  Liuchiu  Islands.  Though  sub- 
jected to  the  most  annoying  surveillance  and  op- 
position, he  baptised  a  few  persons.  He  also  pre- 
pared Japanese  translations  of  portions  of  the 
Scriptures,  and  some  of  these  were  printed. 

In  1854  Conmiodore  Perry  succeeded  in  negotia- 
ting a  treaty  between  the  United  States  and  Japan. 

This  did  not  provide  for  the  residence 

®*^<**^*"*  of  Americans;  but  later  treaties  made 

*^^     with  the  United  States  and  some  other 

^J^^^    nations  permitted  their  citizens  after 

July,  1859,  to  live  in  certain  ports. 
The  Sod^t^  des  Missions  £trang^res  at  once 
commenced  work  in   Yokohama,   Hakodate,  and 


Japan 


THE  NEW  SCHAFP-HERZOG 


106 


Nagasaki.  At  firat  the  miBsioiiaries  oould  do  little 
except  study  the  language  and  open  sohools,  where 
they  taught  those  desiring  to  learn  French.  In 
1862  a  (^ureh,  nominally  erected  for  the  use  of 
foreigners,  was  dedicated  in  Yokohama,  and  the 
missionaries  soon  fotmd  themselves  engaged  in 
addressing  the  crowds  that  gathered  about  them, 
and  several  of  their  auditors  were  arrested.  The 
French  minister  secured  the  release  of  these  per- 
sons by  promising  that  there  should  be  no  more 
preaching  in  the  Japanese  language.  In  1865  a 
church  building  was  dedicated  in  Nagasaki.  One 
morning,  as  M.  Petitjean,  the  missionary  in  charge, 
was  kneeling  before  the  altar,  three  women  drew 
near  and  kneeling  near  him,  said  in  a  low  voice, 
"  Our  heart  is  one  with  yours,"  and  then  told  him 
that  aU  the  people  in  the  village  from  which  they 
came  were  Christians.  The  descendants  of  the 
ancient  Christians,  for  whom  the  missionaries  had 
from  the  first  been  seeking,  were  found.  The  dis- 
covery of  other  Christian  communities  followed, 
and  ultimately  the  missionaries  learned  of  about 
50,000  persons,  most  of  them  living  near  Nagasaki, 
who  considered  themselves  Christians,  though  for 
various  reasons  about  half  of  these  refrained  from 
entering  into  dose  relations  with  the  missionaries. 
The  missionaries  became  busily  occupied  in  instruct- 
ing and  caring  for  these  believers.  Though  they 
tried  to  exercise  due  caution,  it  was  not  long  before 
arrests  began  to  be  made.  After  the  new  govern- 
ment was  thoroughly  established  in  1868,  the  per- 
secution became  severe,  and  from  one  cluster  of 
villages  3,000  persons  were  exiled  to  distant  prov- 
inces. The  official  representatives  of  Western  na^ 
tions  united  in  a  protest,  declaring  that  by  per- 
secuting Christians  Japan  was  showing  dishonor  to 
the  countries  whose  people  believed  in  the  same 
religion.  The  Japanese  government  at  first  refused 
to  yield  and  told  the  foreign  ministers  that  "  it 
would  resist  the  propagation  of  Christianity  as  it 
would  oppose  the  advance  of  an  invading  army." 
In  1873,  however,  orders  were  issued  for  removing 
from  public  view  the  edicts  against  Christianity. 
Though  the  laws  had  not  been  repealed,  it  was 
evident  that  they  would  not  be  enforced.  From 
that  time  Roman  Catholics  shared  with  others  the 
constantly  increasing  degree  of  religious  freedom 
which  at  last  found  expression  in  the  following 
article  of  the  constitution  promulgated  in  1890: 
"  Japanese  subjects  shall,  within  limits  not  pre- 
judicial to  peace  and  order,  and  not  antagonistic 
to  their  duties  as  subjects,  enjoy  freedom  of  reli- 
gious belief." 

In  comparing  the  growth  of  Roman  Catholicism 
with  that  of  Protestantism  and  of  the  Greek  Church, 
it  must  be  remembered  that  it  began 
9.  Besulta.  its  new  propaganda  with  several  thou- 
sand adherents,  while  the  others  had 
none.  On  the  other  hand,  it  has  been  more  hindered 
than  they  by  the  prejudices  aroused  three  centuries 
ago  against  Christianity.  Its  work  has  spread  into 
most  of  the  large  towns  of  Japan.  It  is  governed 
by  an  archbishop  who,  with  his  coadjutor,  lives 
in  Tokyo;  and  there  are  four  bishops,  whose  resi- 
dences are  in  Tokyo,  Sendai,  Osaka,  and  Nagasaki. 
At  the  dose  of  1907  the  missionaries,  most  of  whom 


are  French,  numbered  124  men  and  124  WQmen. 
There  were  33  Japanese  priests  and  303  catechists. 
The  number  of  believers  was  61,095,  of  whom  more 
than  half  were  in  the  island  of  Kiushiu.  1,551 
adults  and  3,604  infants  were  baptised  in  1907. 
Schools  for  the  training  of  priests  had  20  students. 
There  were  several  other  schools,  while  in  19  or- 
phanages 1,027  children  found  a  home.  Among 
other  forms  of  charity,  two  hospitals  for  lepers  de- 
serve special  notice.  A  large  number  of  books  Ls 
published,  among  them  being  a  translation  of  the 
Bible.  There  are  also  two  periodicals  issued  by 
the  mission. 

2.  Xlsslons  of  the  Eastern  Ohuroh:  In  1861 
Nicolai  Kasatkin  went  to  Hakodate  as  chaplain  of 
the  Russian  consulate  there.  As  a 
1.  Initia-  student  he  had  been  moved  by  a  desire 
tlonliy  to  give  the  Gospel  to  the  Japanese, 
Nioolai  and  this  position  furnished  an  opening 
Kasatkin.  for  carrying  out  his  wish.  His  first 
convert  was  a  Shinto  priest  whose 
prejudice  against  Christianity  led  him  to  come  to 
the  chaplain  either  to  conquer  him  in  argument, 
or  to  assassinate  him,  who,  however,  became  con- 
vinced that  the  foreigner's  doctrine  was  true,  and 
in  1868  he  and  two  others  were  secretly  baptized. 
When  the  Shogunate  was  overthrown,  many  of 
those  who  belonged  to  the  defeated  party  went  to 
Hakodate,  among  them  several  from  the  Sendai 
clan.  Led  in  part  by  curiosity  and  in  part  by  the 
thought  that  a  new  religion  might  subserve  their 
political  aims,  some  of  them  began  to  study  Chris- 
tianity. Many  accepted  it  and  returned  as  evan- 
gelists to  their  own  province,  or  went  elsewhere  to 
teach  what  they  had  learned.  In  a  visit  to  Russia, 
Nicolai  organized  a  missionary  society  to  support 
his  efforts,  and  when  in  1871  another  priest  took 
his  place  in  Hakodate,  he  removed  to  Tokyo,  where, 
besides  engaging  in  direct  evangelistic  work,  he 
opened  a  seminary  for  training  evangelists  and  also 
a  school  for  teaching  languages  and  the  sciences. 
In  1872  three  evangelists  in  Sendai  were  arrested 
with  several  of  their  hearers,  and  there  were  arrests 
in  Hakodate.  Appeals  to  the  imperial  government 
resulted  in  the  release  of  these  persons.  That  same 
year  Nioolai  baptized  ten  persons  in  Tokyo;  the 
greatest  secrecy  was  observed,  but  a  few  days  later 
a  Buddhist  priest  showed  him  a  sketch,  drawn  by 
a  spy  of  the  government,  of  the  room  in  which  the 
ceremony  had  taken  place.  But,  as  no  arrests  fol- 
lowed, anxiety  gave  way  to  confidence.  Other 
spies  entered  the  school  as  pupils  and  at  least  two 
became  Christians.  Great  success  attended  the 
early  efforts  at  evangelization,  especially  in  Sendai 
and  its  vicinity.  In  1875  the  man  mentioned  above 
as  the  first  convert  was  ordained  as  the  first  priest. 
Nicolai  was  made  a  bishop  in  1880.  The  growth 
of  the  Eastern  Church  in  Japan  has  been  to  a  re- 
nuu'kable  degree  due  to  this  one  man. 
2.  BesnUta.  There  have  never  been  more  than  four 
other  missionaries,  and  most  of  the 
time  only  one.  He  trained  the  Japanese  priests 
and,  in  addition  to  the  supervision  of  churches  and 
schools,  he  prepared  a  translation  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament and  published  several  other  books.  A  force 
of  ten  translators  and  writers  is  kept  busy  under  his 


107 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Japan 


direetioii.  The  connection  of  this  miasion  with 
Russia,  and  the  relations  of  Church  and  government 
in  that  land  have  made  it  the  object  of  much  sus- 
picion. The  laige  cathedral  in  Tokyo  occupies  one 
of  the  most  conspicuous  sites  in  the  city,  and  stands 
on  ground  leased  in  the  name  of  the  Russian  lega- 
tion»  facts  which  have  caused  considerable  ill- 
feeling,  and  even  given  rise  to  threats  of  destruction. 
Bishop  Nicolai  has,  however,  gained  the  respect  of 
all;  when  war  broke  out  in  1904  between  Japan  and 
Russia,  he  left  it  to  his  followers  to  decide  whether 
he  should  remain  in  Japan  or  return  to  his  own  land. 
They  urged  him  to  stay  with  them,  and  this  he  did, 
to  the  general  approval  of  the  public.  The  statistics 
for  1907  show  265  churches,  30,166  members,  37 
ordained  Japanese  priests,  and  129  other  evangeUsts. 
The  contributions  of  the  churches  for  the  year 
amounted  to  10,711  yen  ($5,355.50).  Workers  for 
the  Church  are  trained  in  a  theological  seminary  and 
an  evangelists'  school.  The  former  gives  a  liberal 
education  and  teaches  theology  in  the  Russian 
language;  the  latter  is  of  a  lower  grade,  and  uses 
only  the  Japanese  language.  There  are  two  board- 
ing-flchools  for  girls  and  several  day  schools,  while 
three  periodicals  are  published.  In  1907  Nicolai 
was  made  an  archbishop,  another  Russian  being 
sent  out  as  bishop. 

8.  Proteataat  atisaioiis:  The  treaty  made  by 
Japan  with  the  United  States  in  1858  provided  that 
in  July  of  the  next  year  certain  ports 
1.  Baffin-  should  be  opened  for  the  residence  of 
'^JaSS^  American  citizens;  also  that  "  Amer- 
icans in  Japan  shall  be  allowed  the  free 
exercise  of  their  religion,  and  for  this  purpose  shall 
have  the  right  to  erect  suitable  places  of  worship. 
No  injury  shall  be  done  to  such  buildings,  nor  any 
insult  offered  to  the  religious  worship  of  the  Ameri- 
cans." This  treaty  was  followed  by  similar  ones 
with  other  Western  nations.  Though  no  permission 
was  given  for  teaching  Christianity  to  the  Japanese, 
it  was  believed  that  this  would  soon  become  pos- 
sible. Soon  after  the  treaty  was  signed,  Chaplain 
Wood ,  U.  S.  N.,  Dr.  S.  Wells  Williams,  the  well-known 
missionary  and  diplomatist,  and  Rev.  E.  W.  Syle 
met  in  Nagasaki.  As  a  result  of  their  conference, 
they  decided  to  write  to  the  Episcopal,  Reformed 
(Dutch),  and  Presbyterian  Boards  in  America  urging 
that  they  send  missionaries  to  Japan.  Withhi  a 
year  all  three  societies  had  done  this.  In  May, 
1859,  two  months  before  the  time  set  for  opening 
the  ports,  the  Rev.  J.  Liggins,  of  the  Episcopal 
Boanl,  was  in  Nagasaki,  where  he  was  followed 
a  month  later  by  the  Rev.  (afterward  Bishop)  C.  M. 
Williams.  In  October,  J.  C.  Hepburn  (q.v.),  of 
the  Presbyterian  Board,  reached  Kanagawa,  while 
the  next  month  saw  the  arrival  of  three  missionaries 
of  the  Reformed  Board — Rev.  S.  R.  Brown  and 
D.  B.  Sinomons,  M.D.,  at  Kanagawa,  and  Rev.  0.  F. 
Verbeck  (q.v.)  at  Nagasaki.  The  next  April,  Rev. 
J.  Goble,  who  had  been  a  marine  on  Perry's  ex- 
pedition, came  to  Kanagawa  under  the  American 
Baptist  Free  Mission.  At  first  the  missionaries 
labored  under  great  difficulties.  They  were  sur- 
rounded by  spies  and  were  in  danger  of  attack  from 
those  who  hated  all  things  foreign,  and  especially 
the  Christian  religion.    One  man  became  Dr.  Hep- 


bum's  teacher  with  the  intention  of  assassinating 
him.  Japanese  who  showed  any  inclination  toward 
Christianity  were  in  danger  of  arrest.  The  t,eaching 
of  English  gave  some  opportunities  for  exerting 
an  influence  over  young  men.  Even  before  mis- 
sionaries came.  Chaplain  Wood,  U.  S.  N.,  had  held 
classes,  and  though  extreme  caution  was  necessary, 
the  questions  asked  by  students  about  words  found 
in  their  books  could  be  answered  only  by  telling 
something  concerning  Christian  beliefs.  In  1861 
the  Shogun's  court  itself  sent  several  persons  to 
the  missionaries  for  instruction  in  English.  As  many 
of  those  who  were  gathered  in  such  classes  afterward 
held  places  of  influence,  the  honor  in  which  they 
held  their  teachers  and  the  ideas  that  they  received 
concerning  morals,  politics,  education,  and  religion 
had  much  influence  in  shaping  the  course  of  events 
in  which  these  men  became  leaders.  It  was  a  great 
help  to  the  propagation  of  the  Gospel  that  educated 
Japanese  could  read  Chinese.  Their  curiosity  to 
learn  about  Western  ideas  led  them  to  purchase 
not  only  works  on  geography,  history,  and  science 
prepared  by  missionaries  in  China,  but  also  those 
dealing  directly  with  (Christian  truth,  and  even  the 
Bible  itself. 

In  Jan.,  1866,  a  meeting  held  by  Christian  believ- 
ers of  various  nationalities  living  in  Yokohama 
issued  an  address  to  the  Christian 
2.  Altema-  world  asking  that  special  prayers  be 
tlnr  Ad-  offered  for  Japan.  It  mentioned  among 
vanoe  and  encouraging  changes  that  the  mission- 
Beaotioa.  aries  were  no  longer  watched  by  spies, 
but  were  in  some  instances  employed 
by  the  goverment  as  school-teachers,  that  students 
of  English  no  longer  uttered  the  name  of  Jesus  with 
bated  breath,  but  manifested  a  readiness  to  talk 
about  Christianity;  and  that  some  of  them  went 
daily  to  the  missionaries  **  to  read  the  English  Bible, 
preferring  this  to  the  study  of  school-books."  At 
Yokohama  in  1864  occurred  the  first  Protestant 
baptism  in  Japan.  In  1866  at  Nagasaki  a  high 
official  from  Saga  was  baptised  with  his  brother. 
The  greatest  secrecy  had  to  be  observed,  as  the  new 
converts  were  liable  to  capital  punishment.  Up 
to  the  spring  of  1872  only  ten  persons  had  been 
baptized.  Soon  after  the  restoration  of  imperial 
power  in  1868,  the  attempt  to  revive  the  Shinto 
religion  was  accompanied  by  a  renewal  of  strong 
opposition  to  Christianity.  The  new  government 
posted  edicts  against  it  almost  identical  with  those 
of  the  Shogunate.  One  of  the  few  baptized  Protes- 
tants was  cast  into  prison.  In  1870  and  1871  two 
teachers  of  missionaries  were  arrested  under  sus- 
picion of  being  Christians,  and  one  of  them  died 
in  prison.  Knowledge  of  these  persecutions  made 
other  persons  afraid  for  a  while  to  visit  the  mission- 
aries. Yet  even  before  the  removal  of  the  edicts 
in  1873,  it  became  evident  that  the  government 
was  becoming  more  liberal,  and  in  Mar.,  1872,  the 
first  Japanese  church  was  organized  in  Yokohama 
with  eleven  members  as  a  result  of  the  work  of 
the  Reformed  and  the  Presbyterian  missionaries. 
Though  this  churoh  has  since  become  connected 
with  the  Nihon  Kirisuto  Kyokwai  (Presbyterian), 
it  at  first  had  no  denominational  name.  The  next 
two  churches,  those  of  Kob6  and  Osaka,  organiied 


Japan 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


108 


in  1874  in  connection  with  the  miasion  of  the  Amer- 
ican Board,  were  of  a  similar  nature,  and  it  was  the 
hope  of  most  of  the  missionaries  then  in  Japan  that 
this  policy  could  be  continued;  but  that  same  year 
new  churches  in  Yokohama  and  Tokyo  were  put 
'^  on  a  strictly  Presbyterian  basis." 

The  year  1873  marked  the  beginning  of  a  period 
of  rapid  advance.  Among  progressive  Japanese 
there  sprang  up  a  great  desire  to  adopt 
8.  The  Ad-  Western  customs  and  ideas.  Protes- 
▼anoe,  tant  Christianity,  as  the  religion  of 
1878*88.  England  and  America,  was  thought  to 
be  at  least  worthy  of  investigation,  and 
laige  audiences  listened  to  its  proclamation.  Some, 
like  the  popular  leader  Fukucawa,  argued  that  as 
a  matter  of  policy  it  would  be  well  for  the  country 
nominally  to  adopt  Christianity.  The  Christian 
schools  became  crowded  with  earnest  young  men 
and  women,  many  of  whom  became  Christians  and 
showed  much  seal  for  carrying  the  Gospel  to  others. 
Bibles  and  other  religious  books  had  an  increasing 
sale.  The  churches  received  large  accessions  to 
their  membership,  and  several  became  self-support- 
ing. In  1883  a  general  convention  of  the  mission- 
aries and  a  union  meeting  of  the  Japanese  Christians 
were  followed  by  nuu-ked  religious  awakenings.  So 
rapid  did  the  growth  of  the  churches  become  that 
extravagant  expectations  were  aroused,  and  even 
some  enemies  of  Christianity  said  that  ere  the  cen- 
tury closed  it  would  be  the  most  prominent  religion 
of  the  land.  The  statistics  of  Protestant  missions 
for  1888  showed  249  churches  with  a  membership 
of  25,514,  the  number  of  adults  baptised  in  the  year 
being  6,959.  Outside  of  the  professedly  missionary 
ranks  there  were  those  from  foreign  lands  who  did 
much  to  help  on  the  movement.  Among  them  may 
be  mentioned  President  Clark  of  the  Blassachusetts 
Agricultural  College,  who,  in  1876,  went  to  Japan 
to  assist  in  establishing  a  similar  institution  in 
Sapporo.  Capt.  Janes,  U.  S.  A.,  who  was  employed 
as  a  teacher  in  the  city  of  Kumamoto,  invited  his 
pupils  to  come  to  his  house  for  the  study  of  the 
Bible.  Some  of  them  became  Christians,  whereupon 
a  severe  persecution  broke  out.  A  number  of  these 
went,  in  1876,  to  the  Doshisha  School  which  Joseph 
Neesima  and  missionaries  of  the  American  Board 
had  opened  the  preceding  year  in  Kyoto.  Mr. 
Neesima  was  a  young  man  who,  at  a  time  when 
an  attempt  to  leave  the  country  was  a  capital 
crime,  had  been  led  by  his  desire  to  learn  about  God 
and  Western  civilisation  to  go  to  America  (1864). 
He  was  there  befriended  by  Alpheus  Hardy,  a 
Boston  merchant,  and  given  opportunities  for  study 
such  as  fitted  him  to  do  a  noteworthy  religious  and 
educational  work  for  his  own  people. 

The  period  of  rapid  growth  was  not  without  its 
difficulties.  The  movements  of  missionaries  were 
hampered  by  regulations  that  limited 
4.  The  Oh-  freedom  of  travel  in  the  interior.  While 
■taoles  Bn-  the  imperial  government  as  a  whole 
oountared.  pursued  a  liberal  policy,  the  educa- 
tional department  was  much  of  the 
time  in  control  of  those  who  exerted  a  strong  in- 
fluence against  Christianity.  Local  officials  some- 
times put  hindrances  in  the  way  of  evangelization, 
and  there  was  much  petty  persecution  by  the  rela- 


tives and  neighbors  of  believers.  Fear  of  losing 
office,  trade,  or  popularity  deterred  many  from 
following  what  they  believed  to  be  the  truth.  Bud- 
dhism awoke  from  its  slumber  to  oppose  the  rival 
religion  by  means  of  lectures,  tracts,  schools,  and 
societies.  When  elections  were  to  be  held  in  1890 
for  the  first  national  diet,  the  Buddhists  entered 
the  political  arena  and  urged  that  the  people  should 
not  choose  any  Christians  to  represent  them.  It 
was  a  bitter  disappointment  when  returns  showed 
that  out  of  the  300  members  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, thirteen  were  Christians,  one  of  whom  was 
made  president,  while  another  became  chairman  of 
the  committee  of  the  whole.  Incidentally  it  may 
be  mentioned  that  in  subsequent  diets  Christians 
have  several  times  held  the  same  offices  or  that  of 
vice-president,  which  is  one  of  many  facts  that  dL<u 
prove  the  assertion  that  the  influential  classes  in 
Japan  are  not  reached  by  the  Qospel. 

The  movement  in  favor  of  Christianity  was 
checked  by  a  reaction  that  b^gan  to  be  apparent 
about  1889.  Failure  to  secure  desired 
6.  TheSe-  revision  of  treaties,  with  other  un- 
aotion  of  toward  events,  caused  the  Japanese  to 
1889.  feel  much  irritation  against  foreign  na- 
tions. Conservatives  seised  the  oppor- 
tunity to  foster  a  nationalistic  spirit;  while  the 
relations  of  Christianity  with  western  lands  had  onoe 
been  helpful,  now  they  proved  a  hindrance.  Preacb- 
ing-plaoes  were  no  longer  crowded;  pupils  left  the 
Christian  schools,  there  were  few  additions  to  the 
churches,  and  many  defections.  Hitherto  there 
had  been  but  little  doctrinal  discussion;  this  was 
now  aroused  by  the  coming  of  Unitarian  and  other 
liberal  missions,  as  well  as  by  the  increased  reading 
of  books  written  in  other  lands.  The  fondness  of 
the  Japanese  for  novelty  and  the  desire  of  many 
to  show  their  independence  of  the  missionaries  who 
had  been  their  teachers  increased  the  tendency  to 
advocate  all  sorts  of  views,  while  theological  unrest 
led  to  spiritual  decline  and  a  relaxation  of  evangel- 
istic efforts,  and  the  growth  of  trade  and  manu- 
factures fostered  a  commercial  spirit  that  made  it 
more  difficult  to  interest  men  in  religious  themes. 
Nevertheless,  some  advance  was  made  in  this  period, 
so  that  in  1900  there  were  538  churches  with  42,451 
members. 

This  reaction  gradually  spent  its  force.  Revised 
treaties,  becoming  effective  in  1899,  lessened  the 
feeling  against  foreigners  and  made  it 
6.  The  New  possible  for  missionaries  to  travel  or 
Advance  reside  in  any  part  of  the  land,  while 
Binoe  1809.  the  treaty  of  alliance  with  Great  Brit- 
ain  (1902)  increased  the  favor  with 
which  Christian  lands,  and  consequently  their  re- 
ligion, were  regarded.  Regulations  issued  by  the 
government  regarding  buildings  used  by  religious 
bodies  were  a  practical  recognition  of  Christianity 
and  put  it  on  the  same  standing  as  Buddhism. 
Moreover,  the  twentieth  century  opened  with  the 
manifestation  of  renewed  earnestness  and  evangel- 
istic seal  on  the  part  of  the  Christians.  The  war 
with  Russia  did  much  to  sober  the  thoughts  of  the 
people  and  incline  them  to  consider  other  than 
material  interests,  and  also  opened  up  many  c^por- 
tunities  for  work  in  behalf  of  the  sokliers,  the 


109 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Japan 


military  authorities  cordially  welcoming  that  carried 
OD  by  the  Young  Men's  Christian  Association  in 
Mandmria,  the  emperor  himself  contributing  to  its 
support,  while  in  Japan  there  was  much  done  for 
the  soldiers  on  their  way  to  the  front,  for  the  in- 
valids in  the  hospitals,  and  for  the  families  that 
were  in  distress.  The  statistics  of  Protestant  mis- 
sions show  that  at  the  close  of  1907  there  were  295 
male  missionaries  and  255  unmarried  women;  the 
total,  including  wives,  being  789.  There  were  529 
organised  churches,  of  which  102  were  wholly  self- 
supporting.  The  church-membera  (including  pro- 
bationers and  baptized  children)  numbered  71,818, 
of  whom  57,830  were  conmiunicants.  The  adult 
baptisms  in  the  year  had  been  8,623;  and  the 
money  raised  by  the  churches  amounted  to  274,- 
608  yen  ($137,304).  There  were  469  ordained  Japa- 
nese ministers,  626  evangelists,  and  208  Bible- 
women. 

While  many  varieties  of  Protestantism  are  repre- 
sented in  Japan,  there  has  been  a  great  degree  of 
harmony  among  the  different  bodies. 
7.  HarmonyNearly  all  have  joined  heartily  in 
of  Protea-  united  evangelistic  efforts,  and  have 
taatBflbrt.  manifested  a  tendency  toward  the  or- 
ganic union  of  churches  having  similar 
forms  of  government.  The  churches  connected 
with  the  various  Presbyterian  missions  form  the 
Nippon  Kirisuto  Kyokwai  (Church  of  Christ  in 
Japan);  those  connected  with  Episcopal  missions 
of  America  and  England  form  the  Sei  Kokwai 
(Holy  Catholic  Church);  and  a  similar  imion  of 
Methodists  was  effected  in  1907.  These  three 
bodies  and  the  Kumi-ai  Kyokwai  ((Congregational 
churches)  are  of  nearly  equal  strength,  their  mem- 
bership including  more  tlum  five-sixths  of  the  whole. 
Nearly  all  the  churches  except  the  Sei  Kokwai  use 
the  same  hymn-book;  and  by  arrangement  with  the 
latter  body  100  of  its  hymns  are  uniform  with  those 
of  the  Union  Hynmal.  Most  of  the  missions  are 
represented  in  the  **  Standing  Committee  of  Co- 
operating Missions,"  which  serves  as  ''  a  general 
medium  of  reference,  conmiunication,  and  effort." 
The  Japanese  Christians  are  also  united  in  an  al- 
liance that  holds  large  conventions  from  time  to 
time.  Most  of  the  missions  have  educational  insti- 
tutions of  various  grades;  a  few  schools  have  been 
established  by  the  Japanese  Christians.  In  many 
of  the  government  schools  of  higher  grade  there  are 
Christian  associations.  The  International  Young 
Men's  (Christian  Association  has  sent  secretaries  to 
several  of  the  laiger  cities  of  Japan,  and  these,  in 
addition  to  work  for  the  general  associations,  give 
counsel  and  help  to  those  in  the  schools.  The 
educational  officials  have  also  used  their  aid  in 
securing  from  America  men  of  good  character  and 
ability  as  teachers  of  English.  In  the  island  of 
Yezo  the  Church  Missionary  Society  has  a  mission 
to  the  Ainu,  an  aboriginal  race  which  is  gradually 
becoming  extinct.  Of  the  16,000  survivors,  about 
1,200  are  Christians.  Much  successful  work  has 
been  done  among  the  Japanese  emigrants  in  Hawaii 
and  on  the  Pacific  coast  of  the  United  States.  Since 
Formosa  came  into  the  possession  of  Japan,  some 
of  the  Japanese  churches  have  sent  evangelists 
there  to  labor  for  their  own  people  and  also  for  the 


native  inhabitants.  Other  evangelists  have  been 
sent  for  similar  work  in  Korea  (q.v.)  and  the 
Chinese  ports. 

Even  before  the  countxy  was  opened  to  foreign 
intercourse,  most  Japanese  men  were  able  to  read 

more  or  less;   and  since  the  establish- 

8.  General  ment  of  the  educational  system  this 

Besnlts.    ability  has  become  almost  universal 

among  both  men  and  women.  This 
has  made  a  great  opening  for  Christian  literature. 
The  translation  of  the  New  Testament  was  com- 
pleted in  1879,  that  of  the  Old  Testament  in  1877. 
For  the  most  part  the  Scriptures  are  sold,  and  not 
given,  to  the  people,  the  largest  work  of  gratuitous 
distribution  being  in  the  army.  Other  (Christian 
books  and  tracts  were  at  first  prepared  by  the 
missionaries  or  under  their  supervision,  but  now 
they  come  almost  entirely  from  Japanese  writers 
and  are  to  a  large  extent  published  by  Japanese 
firms.  The  same  is  true  of  Christian  periodicals. 
Schools  for  poor  children,  orphan  asylums,  hos- 
pitals, dispensaries,  leper  asylums,  schools  for  the 
blind,  reform  schools,  and  homes  for  released  prison- 
ers have  been  established,  and  these  institutions 
have  been  founded  and  conducted  by  the  Japanese 
Christians  themselves.  They  have  so  far  gained  the 
approval  and  confidence  of  the  people  that  believers 
and  non-believers  alike  have  contributed  toward 
their  support,  and  some  of  them  have  received 
large  gifts  from  the  emperor  and  empress.  The 
Christians  are  also  recognized  leaders  in  reform 
movements,  such  as  those  against  intemperance, 
debasing  exhibitions,  and  the  system  of  licensed 
prostitution.  The  influence  of  Christianity  is  being 
felt  in  many  ways  that  can  not  be  tabulated.  Partly 
because  many  literary  men  are  Christians,  or  have 
been  educated  in  Christian  schools,  Bibliosd  quota- 
tions, theistic  expressions,  and  arguments  based  on 
religious  thought  are  conunon  in  newspapers  and 
magazines,  "nus  shows  that,  in  addition  to  what 
is  visible  to  the  eye,  the  leaven  of  Christian  truth  is 
silently  working  in  the  hearts  of  men.  Apart  from 
the  directly  religious  results  produced  by  the 
preaching  of  the  Gospel,  society  is  being  in  many 
ways  affected  by  Christian  ideas.  No  one  can  un- 
derstand modem  Japan  who  overlooks  the  influence 
that  Christianity  is  exerting  upon  the  thoughts  and 
sentiments  of  the  people.  Oris  Cart. 

Bibuoorapht:  F.  von  Wenelutem,  BibUooraphy  of  tiie 
Japanese  Empire,  1869-OS,  vol.  i.,  Leyden,  1885;  vol.  ii., 
Tokyo.  1007.  On  I.  oonmilt:  E.  Kaempfer,  HitL  of 
Japan^  2  vols.,  London,  1728,  new  ed.,  3  vols..  New 
York,  1006;  H.  Faulda,  Nine  Yeare  in  Nipon,  Boston. 
1888;  P.  Lowell,  The  Soul  of  tKe  Far  Eaet,  ib.  1888; 
E.  Lanuireese.  Le  Japan,  hietoire,  rdiffion.  Pane.  1802; 
H.  Norman.  Real  Japan:  Studiee  in  Contemporary  Man- 
nera,  Moreie,  AdminiatraHon  and  Politice,  New  York. 
1803;  D.  Murray.  The  Story  cf  Japan,  ib.  1804;  J. 
Page,  Japan,  ite  People  and  Mieeione,  London.  1805;  C. 
Muniincer,  DieJapaner,  Berlin.  1808;  W.  G.  Aston.  Hie- 
tory  of  Japaneee  Literature,  New  York,  1800;  F.  Brinkley. 
Japan,  Boston.  1002;  B.  H.  Chamberlain,  Thinge  Japaneee, 
New  York.  1002;  W.  E.  Oriffis.  Japan  in  Hietory,  Folklore 
and  Art,  Boston.  1006;  idem,  Mikado' e  Empire,  2  vols..  New 
York,  1003;  idem.  The  Japaneee  Nation  in  Evolution, 
ib.,  1007;  Augiista  M.  C.  Davidson,  Preeent  Day  Japan, 
Philadelphia.  1004;  8.  Guliok.  Evolution  of  Ihe  Japaneee, 
Social  and  Ptyehie,  New  York,  1003;  L.  Heam,  Japan: 
an  Attempt  at  Interpretation,  London.  1004;  G.  W. 
Knox.  Japaneee  Life  in  Toum  and  Country,  New  York, 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOQ 


11 


1904;  Idam,  impmriai  Japan:  A«  Commtrwand  Ut  PmpU, 
London.  1906;  I.  O.  KiUAm,  BiUkido,  Oim  Smd  o^  Japan, 
New  York,  1906;   Mn.  E.  Bickenteth.  Japan,  1906. 

On  II,  1,  eonsuH:  the  Kojiki,  trmnal.  by  B.  H.  Oiam- 
berinin,  ifaie  supplement  to  TrantadioHM  <4  Cfte  Amaiie 
Sceitiy  €f  Japan,  toI.  z..  1882;  the  Nihon4n,  trmnai.  by  W. 
O.  Aston  in  the  TVsnMdums  «/  As  Japan  Society,  1896; 
W.  O.  Aston,  Shinio,  New  York,  1906;  P.  Lowell.  OeeuU 
Japan,  Boston.  1896;  F.  Kinder.  Old  World  Japan:  Lto- 
onda  of  As  Land  of  God;  New  York,  1896;  J.  Bntcheior. 
TK$  Ainu  and  their  FoUOoro,  London.  1901;  F.  Brinkley. 
Japan,  ut  sup.;  W.  E.  Griffis.  Tho  RoUgiom  of  Japan,  New 
York,  1904;  M.  Revon,  U  Shinioimnt,  Paris,  1907;  O.  W. 
Knox,  The  Developmoni  of  Sslioion  in  Japan,  New  York. 
1907;  E.  Buckley.  Phailiciom  in  Japan,  Chieefo.  privntely 
printed.  There  ere  mnny  papers  of  hnportanoe  in  the 
TVsnsaefions  cf  the  Aeiatie  Society  of  Japan,  e^,  E.  Satow, 
The  Shinto  Templea  of  lee,  ii.  113;  idem.  The  Revival  of 
Pure  Shinio,  iii.  appendix;  idem.  Ancient  Japaneee  HitaaU, 
IT.  409.  vu.  97.  ix.  183;  P.  LoweU.  Eeoterie  Shinto,  zxl- 
zxii.;  D.  C.  Greene,  Tenrikyo,  zxiii.  24;  K.  Fkmni. 
Ancient  Japaneee  Ritual,  xzrii.  1;  A.  Lloyd  and  D.  C. 
Greene,  The  Remmonkyo,  xxir.  1,  17;  J.  Leo,  Die  Ent- 
wiekelung  dee  6ltetlen  fapameeken  Seelenlebene,  Leipeie, 
1907. 

On  II,  2,  consult:  B.  Nanjk>,  A  Short  Hiet,  efthe  Twelve 
Japaneee  Buddhiet  SecU,  Tokyo.  1886;  World'e  Parlia- 
ment cf  Retiffione,  2  vols..  Chioaco,  1898;  L.  Heam,  Olean- 
inge  in  Buddha  Pielde,  Boston.  1897;  idem,  Japom  an 
InlerprelatiAn,  ut  sup.;  F.  BiinUey.  ut  sup.;  W.  E.  Grif- 
fis, The  Reliffione  ef  Japan,  ut  sup.;  and  the  foUowinc 
papers  in  the  TVansod^ofu  ef  the  Aeiatie  Society  of  Japan: 
J.  M.  James,  i^olss  on  Roeariee  ueed  hy  Different  Seeta  ^ 
Buddhiete,  ix.  173;  J.  Troup,  On  the  TeneU  ef  Shinehiu, 
ziv.  1;  J.  Summers,  Buddhiem  and  Traditione  eoncemino 
ite  Introduction  into  Japan,  ziv.  73;  J.  Thmp,  The  Go- 
buneho,  xrii.  101;  A.  Uoyd,  Developmente  of  Japaneee 
Buddhiem,  xxii.  337. 

On  III,  1,  the  moet  yaluable  sourees  of  information  are 
to  be  found  in  the  letters  and  reports  of  the  missionaries, 
of  which  J.  Hay  gives  rnnny  in  De  rebue  Japonicie, 
Antwerp,  1606.  Consult:  Abh6  da  Tak>n  (J.  Craaset), 
Hiet.  de  Vigli*^  du  Japan,  2  vols.,  Paris.  1689.  Eng. 
transl.,  London,  1706;  P.  F.  Charlevoix,  Hiet,  et  di^ 
ecripiion  ointraU  du  Japan,  9  vols.,  Rouen,  1736;  idem, 
HiH,  du  dtrietianiemfe  au  Japan,  2  vols.,  ib.  1716;  L. 
Ibises,  HieL  de  la  reUifion  ehrAtienne  au  Japan,  2  vols.. 
Paris.  1809;  Le  Premier  Mieeionaire  calholigue  du  Japan 
au  xix.  eitele,  Lyons.  1886  (laigely  oompoeed  of  the  letters 
of  T.  A.  Forcade);  F.  Mamas.  La  Religion  de  Jieue  ree- 
eueeitSe  au  Japan,  2  vols..  Pmiia,  1896;  B.  A.  Wilber- 
foroe,  Dominican  Mieeione  and  Martyre  in  Japan,  Lon- 
don. 1897;  J.  Murdoch  and  Y.  Yamagata.  Hietory  of 
Japan  1642-1661,  Kob^  1903;  M.  Steichen,  The  Chrie- 
tian  Daimyo,  Yokohama,  1903;  part  of  the  literature 
under  FaA.Na8  Xavisb;  also  the  letters  and  reports  in  An- 
nale  of  Ms  Propagation  of  the  Faith  and  CathoUe  Mieeione, 
periodicals  published  in  London. 

On  III.  2,  consult:  C.  Hale,  Mieeione  t^  Oia  RuM»an 
Chardi,  in  AmMrioan  Church  Review,  Oct.,  1878;  Q.  W. 
Taft,  Biehop  NieoUri,  in  Japaneee  Evangeliet,  June,  1896; 
The  first  two  volumes  of  a  compendious  history  in  Jap- 
anese, Nihon  Seikyo  Dendo  Shi,  were  published  Tokyo. 
1900. 

On  III.  3,  consult:  Prooeedinge  ^  the  Oeneral  Conference 
of  Proteetant  Mieeionariee  cf  Japan,  Yokohama,  1883; 
Oeneral  Conference  of  Proteetant  Mieeionariee  of  Japan, 
Tokyo.  1901;  H.  Ritter,  Dreieeig  Jahre  proteetantieeher 
Mieeion  in  Japan,  Berlin,  1890,  Enc.  transl.,  Hietory  cf 
Proteetant  Mieei4me  in  Japan,  Tokyo,  1898:  M.  L.  Gor- 
don. An  American  Mieeioruay  in  Japan,  Boston,  1892; 
Jinio  Naruse,  A  Modem  Paul  in  Japan:  Account  of  the 
Life  and  Work  cf  Rev.  P.  Sawayana,  ib.  1893;  R.  B.  Peery, 
The  Giet  of  Japan,  New  York,  1897;  idem,  Lutherane  in 
Japan,  Newberry.  8.  C.  1900;  A.  D.  Hail.  Japan  and  ite 
Reecue,  Nashville,  1898;  E.  Stock.  Japan  and  the  Japan 
Mieeion  of  the  Church  Mieeionary  Society,  London,  1898; 
O.  Gary.  Japan  and  iU  Regeneration,  New  York.  1904; 
W.  E.  Griffis.  Dux  Chrietue,  ib.  1904;  H.  Moore.  The 
Chrietian  Faith  in  Japan,  London,  1904;  E.  W.  Clem- 
ent. Chrietianity  in  Modem  Japan,  Philadelphia.  1905; 
H.  K.  Miller.  Hiet.  aT  the  Japan  Mieeion  t^  the  Re- 
formed Church,  1879-1904,  ib.  1906;  A.  Arnold.  The  Light 
cf  Japan.     Church    Work   in  .  ,  .  South   Tokyo,   Oeaka, 


and  Kiuehiu  under  ffie  Chareh  <^  En^umd,  Hnrtlord.  19C 
W.  M.  Imbrie.  The  Church  cf  Chriet  in  Japan,  Fhilad 
phia,  1906;  The  Chrietian  Movement  in  iU  R^atUm  to  i 
New  Life  cf  Japan,  an  annual  published  in  Tokyo.  l(M 
sqq.;  R.  Allier,  Le  ProteetanHeme  au  Japan,  Paris,  190 
O.  Gary,  Hiet,  <^  Chrietiamty  m  Japan,  New  York,  190 

JAPHET.    See  Tabubs  of  the  Nations,  §  4. 

JASOK:  A  Greek  name  borne  often  by  Jews  ( 
Maocabean  or  later  times  and  by  Jewish  Christian 
On  account  of  its  resemblance  to  the  Hebrew-Jewifi 
name  Jesus  or  Joshua,  it  was  often  assumed  by  Jev 
inclined  to  Groek  culture  or  living  in  a  Greek  ei 
vironment.  The  following  are  notable  bearers  c 
the  name. 

1.  A  brother  of  the  high  priest  Onias  III.,  hin: 
self  occupying  the  office  174-172  B.C.  Two  ver^ 
different  accounts  of  him  exist,  the  first  in  II  Biacc 
iv.  7  sqq.,  v.  5  sqq.  (cf.  i.  7),  and  the  second  ii 
Josephus,  AfU.  XII.,  v.  1  (cf.  XY.,  iii.  1).  AccordiD^ 
to  the  first  account,  Jason  became  an  apostate  f  ron 
the  Jewish  religion,  bought  from  Antiochus  IV.  tU 
office  of  high  priest  for  440  talents,  and  for  150  men 
the  right  to  erect  in  Jerusalem  training-places  foi 
Greek  athletics  and  to  enroll  Jerusalemites  as  citizeiu 
of  Antioch.  He  encouraged  Greek  sports,  and  sent 
an  embassy  with  a  gift  to  the  Herades-Melcartli 
festival  at  Tyre.  After  three  years  he  was  super- 
seded by  Menelaus,  who  outbid  him  for  the  office. 
He  fled  to  the  Ammonites  across  the  Jordan,  but 
returned  in  170  B.C.  with  a  band  of  1,000  men, 
when  a  report  was  spread  that  Antiochus  had  died 
on  his  second  Egyptian  expedition,  took  Jerusalem, 
and  inflicted  great  slaughter  there.  He  was  com- 
pelled again  to  flee,  first  to  the  Ammonites,  then  to 
the  Arabian  Prince  Aretas,  next  to  Egypt,  and 
finally  to  Lacedemonia,  where  he  died.  According 
to  Josephus  he  came  into  the  office  in  an  orderly 
manner,  after  the  death  of  his  brother,  fell  into 
disfavor  with  Antiochus,  and  was  compelled  to 
yield  his  office  to  his  brother  Menelaus,  who  was 
the  real  sponsor  for  Greek  culture.  Willrich  accepts 
Josephus'  account  on  the  ground  that  II  BCaccabees 
is  a  falsified  "  tendency- writing,"  but  the  majority 
of  scholars  are  against  this. 

2.  The  son  of  Eleasar,  who,  according  to  I  Mace 
viii.  17  (cf.  II  Mace.  iv.  11  and  Josephus,  Aril. 
XII.,  X.  6),  was  sent  about  161  B.C.  with  Eupolemus 
to  Rome  by  Judas  Maccabeus  as  ambassador  to 
make  a  treaty  of  friendship.  The  treaty  was  made, 
though  its  results  were  not  actually  apparent.  Will- 
rich  casts  doubts  upon  the  historicity  of  the  event. 

8.  Jason  of  Gyrene,  a  Hellenistic  Jew  who,  ac- 
cording to  II  Mace  ii.  19,  wrote  a  history  in  Greek 
in  five  books  on  the  Maccabees,  the  purification  of 
the  temple,  the  wars  of  the  Jews  against  Antiochus 
Epiphanes  and  Eupator,  and  the  divine  help  which 
came  in  those  times.  It  embraced  the  period  171- 
161  B.C.,  and  is  the  basis  of  II  Maccabees,  the  author 
of  which  lays  the  responsibility  for  his  form  of  state- 
ment of  the  facts  upon  Jason,  though  probably 
Jason  is  also  a  mask  through  which  his  own  pe^ 
sonality  speaks.  Jason  wrote  between  162  and  125 
w.c,  and  probably  in  Egypt. 

4.  In  Rom.  xvi.  21  Paul  speaks  of  a  kinsman 
.Tason,  who  possibly  lived  in  (}orinth  (cf.  R<x°- 
xvi.  1). 


Ill 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Japfta 
JftTan 


5.  Aooording  to  Acts  xvii.  5-9,  Paul,  while  at 
Tbessakmica,  dwelt  at  the  house  of  a  Jason,  who 
L«  probably  to  be  distinguished  from  the  foregoing. 

6.  For  the  Jason  of  the  "  Dialogue  between  Jason 
and  Papiscus  "  see  Aribto  of  Pella. 

(R.  ERATZBCHMABt.) 

BnuoGBAFBT:  A  trefttment  of  the  whole  subject  may  be 
iogad  in  DB,  ii.  551-552;  SB,  ii.  2336-^37;  and  of  1-3  in 
JB.  ▼ii.  74-75. 

For  1  Gonmilt:  H.  Willrioh,  Jnden  und  Orieehen  vor  da- 
ymkhOOitehien  Brhebung,  GOttin«en.  1895;  A.  P.  Stanley, 
Ledmta  on  the  Hiat.  of  the  Jewish  Church,  ilL  324,  Lon- 
don. 1884;  J.  Wellhaiuen,  ImraaUiBche  und  jUdiiche  Oe- 
idUdile,  p.  325.  Berlin,  1895;  A.  BUchler,  Die  Tolnaden 
tnd  dio  Onioden,  pp.  106  aqq.,  Vienna,  1899;  Schfirer, 
(ktekiehU,  L  220.  194-196,  Eng.  trand.,  I.,  I  202-205.  231 
(on  1  and  2). 

On  3:  Trieber,  in  NcuhridUen  dor  kOwiolicken  OMeUaehaft 
dtr  Winenachaften  xu  GdUingen,  1895,  pp.  401,  406;  Will- 
rich,  ut  sup.,  chap.  iL;  idem,  Judaioa,  chap,  xv.,  OOttin- 
sen,  1900;  A.  Schlatter,  in  Featachrift  dar  Univeraitat 
Grnfawald^  Oreifswald,  1899;  Sehflrer,  ut  sup.,  i.  40,  359- 
361.  Enc  tranal..  I.,  i.  47.  II.,  iiL  211-216. 

On  5  oonsolt:  W.  M.  RaniBay,  St.  Paul  the  TraveUar, 
p.  231.  London,  1897. 

JASPER,  JOHH:   Colored  Baptist  pulpit  orator; 
b.  a  slave  on  the  Peachy  plantation  on  the  James 
River,  in  Fluvanna  Co.,  Viiginia,  July  4,  1812;   d. 
in  Richmond,  Va.,  Mar.  30,  1901.    His  father  was 
Philip  Jasper,  his  mother's  name  was  Nina,  and  he 
was  her  twenty-fourth  child,  bom  two  months  after 
his  father's  death.    When  grown  to  manhood  he 
came  to  Richmond  as  a  slave  and  was  employed 
as  a  stemmer  in  the  large  tobacco  factory  of  Samuel 
Hargrove,  a  prominent  Baptist.    He  had  no  educa- 
tion, but  with  the  help  of  a  colored  man  almost 
as  ignorant  as  himself  he  learned  to  read  six  months 
before  his  conversion,  which  occurred  on  Thursday, 
July  25,  1839.    His  father  had  been  a  preacher,  and 
he  followed  his  example.    He  soon  became  a  fa- 
vorite among  the  colored  people  of  Richmond,  then 
his  fame  spread,  especially  as  a  fimeral  preacher, 
until  he  was  known  all  over  the  State.    He  made 
himself  master  of  the  Bible,  and  was  a  formidable 
opponent  of  those  who  questioned  his  interpreta- 
tion.   When  emancipated  he  gathered  about  him 
a  congregation  and  soon  had  a  building  to  preach  in. 
More  and  more  came  to  hear  him  imtil  at  length  the 
Sixth  Motmt  Zion  Church  was  built  for  him,  and 
there  he  preached  to  several  thousand  people  every 
Sunday.    In  1878,  in  the  regular  course  of  his  min- 
istry, he  preached  from  Ex.  xv.  3,  "  The  Lord  is 
a  man  of  war;   the  Lord  is  his  name."    He  b^an 
^th  Biblical  illustrations  of  the  almighty  power 
of  God,  but  branched  off  into  the  demonstration 
by  Biblical  texts  literally  construed  of  the  proposi- 
tion that  "  the  sun  do  move."    The  sermon  was 
prepared  to  end  a  dispute  upon  the  question  of 
the  sun's  motion  and  was  delivered  without  any 
desire  to  cause  talk.    It  made  a  sensation,  had  to 
he  repeated  again  and  again,  and  he  was  even  sent 
out  by  a  lecture  bureau  to  repeat  it  outside  of 
Hichmond.    But  it  only  made  his  name  a  by-word 
and  obscured  to  many  the  fact  that  he  really  had 
BoUd  claim  to  be  considered  a  pulpit  orator.    Even 
^  particular  sermon  was  saved  from  being  ridio- 
^^Jous  by  the  preacher's  profound  reverence  for  the 
Bible,  simple  faith  in  the  Bible  miracles,  and  his 
^^csl  power  and  remarkable  eloquence  of  a  rude 


but  genuine  kind.  He  had  also  humor  of  the  most 
delicious  variety.  In  short,  in  him  the  type  of  the 
ante-bellum  uneducated  but  gifted,  pious,  and  witty 
colored  preacher  reached  its  culmination. 
Bibuoorapbt:  W.  £.  Hatcher,  J(^n  Jaaper,  New  York, 
1906. 

JASPIS,  ALBERT  SIGISMIJND:  General  superin- 
tendent of  Pomerania;  b.  at  Nossen  (19  m.  w.  of 
Dresden)  Feb.  15, 1809;  d.  at  Stettin  Dec.  20, 1885. 
He  studied  at  the  gymnasium  in  Freiburg-on-the- 
Mulde  and  at  Leipsic.  In  1832  he  became  catechist 
and  afternoon-preacher  in  St.  Peter's  Church  in 
Leipsic.  In  1835  Jaspis  became  pastor  in  Lugau, 
three  years  later  diaconus  in  Lichtenstein,  and  pas- 
tor in  Rddlitz.  His  faithfulness  and  especially  his 
success  with  children  and  young  people  won  him 
the  hearts  of  his  parishioners  in  both  places.  In 
1845  he  went  over  to  the  Prussian  State  Church, 
after  having  been  elected  third  preacher  of  the 
Evangelical  Lutheran  congregation  in  Elberfeld. 
In  1855  he  was  called  to  Stettin  as  general  super- 
intendent of  Pomerania.  He  represented  a  pietistic 
oonfessionalism,  and  his  gifts  lay  in  the  direction 
of  the  practical  cure  of  souls.  He  was  not  without 
success  as  a  writer  of  devotional  and  pastoral  litera- 
ture, and  some  of  his  tracts  found  a  large  circulation. 
But  the  publication  which  carried  his  name  far 
beyond  the  borders  of  Evangelical  Germany  was 
his  compilation  of  Luther's  small  catechism  for  the 
instruction  of  young  people  to  be  confirmed.  This 
booklet  is  one  of  the  most  successful  attempts  at 
the  solution  of  the  catechetical  problem  of  the 
Church  as  it  was  conceived  in  the  middle  of  the 
nineteenth  century  in  the  circles  of  pietistic  oon- 
fessionalism. (Hans  Kessler.) 
Bibuoorapbt:  Sketches  were  written  by  his  son,  one  pre- 
fixed to  Jaspis'  Erinnerungan  an  aina  Zait  too  aa  trdba  und 
finatar  wor,  Ck>logne,  1888,  the  other  in  Bildar  aua  dam 
HnMiehan  Leban  ,  .  .  in  Pommam,  pp.  205  sqq.,  Stettin, 
1896. 

JAUFFRET,  ah6"fr^',  GASPARD  JEAN  ANDRE 
JOSEPH:  Bishop  of  Mets;  b.  at  Roque-Brussane 
(15  m.  n.  of  Toulon),  Provence,  Dec.  13,  1759;  d. 
in  Paris  May  13,  1823.  He  studied  at  Toulon,  Aix, 
and  Paris,  where,  in  1791,  he  established  the 
Annalea  de  la  rdigion  et  du  sentiment  to  oppose  the 
civil  constitution  of  the  clergy.  After  the  Revolu- 
tion he  was  one  of  the  principal  collaborators  on 
the  Annalee  religieuses.  About  1801  he  became 
vicar-general  of  Lyons.  Subsequently  he  was  re- 
called to  Paris  as  secretary  of  the  grand  almonry. 
He  became  bishop  of  Mets  in  1806.  In  1811  he  was 
appointed  by  Napoleon  to  the  archbishopric  of  Aix, 
but  was  never  instituted.  His  best-known  works 
are:  Dela  religion  &  VAssembUe  Naiionale  (Paris, 
1790);  Du  cuUe  public  (2  vols.,  1795);  Meditations 
8ur  lee  eouffrancee  de  la  croix  de  NatreSeigneur 
JSsua-Chriet  (1800),  and  Entretiene  aur  le  eaerement 
de  la  confirmation  (1809). 

JAVAN:  A  designation  common  to  the  Old  Testa- 
ment and  the  entire  Orient  for  Greeks  in  general 
and  those  of  Asia  Minor  in  particular.  The  name 
is  an  example  of  a  tribal  name  being  given  to  a 
whole  people,  and  the  Hebrew  (Yawan)  form 
corresponds  to  the  Greek  laonea  or  laFonee.  In 
an  inscription  of  Saigon  II.  (722-705  B.C.),  also 


Ja: 


JeouB 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


112 


in  one  of  the  Indian  King  Asoka,  the  name  occurs  as 
Javana,  and  on  one  of  Darius  as  Jauna,  The 
reason  why  all  Greeks  were  called  lonians  in  the 
Orient  is  that  after  the  eighth  century  before  Christ 
the  lonians  controlled  the  commerce  of  the  East. 

Old-Testament  mention  is  found  in  Eflek.xzvii.l3, 
where  Javan  is  mentioned  with  Tubal  and  Meshech, 
and  refers  probably  to  the  lonians  settled  in  Asia 
Minor  on  the  coast  of  the  Black  Sea;  Isa.  Ixvi.  19 
(Septuagint)  connects  Lud,  Meshech,  Tubal,  and 
Javan;  Javan  in  Ezek.  xxvii.  19  is  a  corruption  of 
the  text,  as  the  Septuagint  shows.  The  word  has 
the  general  sense  of  "  Greeks  "  in  Gen.  z.  2,  4;  in 
verse  2  they  are  connected  with  Tubal  and  Meshech, 
but  in  verse  4  the  term  includes  Elishah  (probably 
Sicily),  Tarshish  in  Spain,  Kittim  (Cyprus),  and 
Rodanim  (see  Dodanim),  and  therefore  covers  the 
people  of  the  Mediterranean.  The  priestly  writer 
who  wrote  this  verse  knew  of  the  supersession  of  the 
Phenicians  by  the  Greeks,  in  commercial  matters. 
Joel  iii.  6  mentions  the  Greeks,  Zech.  ix.  13  speaks 
of  the  Greek  empire,  Dan.  viii.  21  has  in  mind 
Alexander's  kingdom,  and  x.  20  that  of  the  Seleu- 
cid».  (H.  GuTHE.) 

Bxbuoobafht:   B.  Stada,  De  pojnUo  Javan,  QioBMii,  1880, 

also  in  R^dtn  und  Abkatidiunatn,  pp.  123-142,  ib.  1809; 

E.  Meyer.  ae9ekidU0  dm   AUertum;  i.  400^94.  ii.  433. 

686  sqq..  Stuttgart,  1884M>3;   A.  H.  Sayoe,  AtffAcr  CriH- 

CMffi  and  thB  Mowumenta,  London,  1894;   DB,  ii.  fi62-663; 

EB,  ii.  2338-39;    also  litexmtun  under  Table  of  trb 

Nations. 

JAY,  WILLIAM:  English  dissenting  preacher  and 
author;  b.  at  Tisbury  (13  m.  w.  of  Salisbury), 
Wiltshire,  May  8,  1769;  d.  at  Bath  Dec.  27,  1853. 
After  serving  for  two  years  as  apprentice  to  his 
father,  a  stonecutter  and  mason,  he  entered  the 
religious  seminary  of  Cornelius  Winter  at  Marl- 
borough in  1785,  and  began  to  preach  in  the  neigh- 
boring villages  the  same  year.  On  leaving  Marl- 
borough in  1788  he  preached  at  Surrey  Chapel, 
London,  and  achieved  considerable  notoriety  as 
the  "  boy  preacher."  After  short  ministries  at 
Christian  Malford,  near  Chippenham,  and  Hope 
Chapel,  Clifton,  he  became  pastor  of  the  Atgyle 
Independent  Chapel  at  Bath  Jan.  30,  1791.  He 
retired  from  this  pastorate  sixty-two  years  later. 
His  preaching  attracted  hearers  from  all  classes 
and  from  all  denominations.  John  Foster  calls  him 
the  prince  of  preachers,  and  Sheridan  styles  him 
the  most  natural  orator  he  had  ever  heard.  Some 
of  his  writings  have  been  widely  circulated  and 
frequently  reprinted  in  America.  His  best-known 
works  are:  The  MtUual  Didies  o/Htubanda  and  Wives 
(London,  1801);  An  Eetay  on  Marriage  (Bath, 
1806);  The' Domestic  Minister's  Aaeietant  (London, 
1820);  The  Christian  Contemplated  {1S26);  Morning 
Exercises  in  the  Closet  (2  vols.,  1829);  and  Evening 
Exercises  for  the  Closet  (2  vok.,  1831).  Ris  Works 
(12  vols.,  Bath,  1842-48)  were  edited  by  himself. 

Bibliography:  His  Autobiography,  ed.  O.  Redford  and  J. 
A.  Jamee,  appeared  London,  1865.  Connult  T.  Wallaoe, 
PortraUuro  of  W.  Jay,  ib.  1864;  S.  Wilson.  Momoir  of 
W.  Jay,  ib.  1864;  C.  Jay.  RoooOoetioru  of  WilKam  Jay, 
ib.  1869  (by  his  son);   DNB,  xxix.  266-266. 

JAYHE,  FRANCIS  JOHN:  C!hurch  of  En^and 
bishop  of  Chester;  b.  at  Llanelly  (15  m.  s.e.  of 
Garmartben),  Oarmartibendiire,  South  Wales,  Jan. 


1,  1845.  He  was  educated  at  Wadham  College, 
Oxford  (B.A.,  1868),  and  became  deacon  and  priest 
in  1870.  He  was  fellow  of  Jesus  College,  Oxford, 
1868-73,  and  lecturer  in  the  same  college  and  tutor 
of  Keble  College,  Oxford,  1871-79.  He  was  curate 
of  St.  Clement's,  Oxford,  1870-71;  principal  of 
St.  David's  College,  Lampeter,  as  well  as  sinecure 
rector  of  Llangeler,  1877-86;  rural  dean  of  Lam- 
peter, 1885-86;  vicar  and  rural  dean  of  Leeds, 
1886-88;  and  was  consecrated  bishop  of  Chester 
in  1889.  He  was  also  Whitehall  Preacher,  1875-77. 
and  select  preacher  at  Oxford  in  1884. 

JE:  The  product  resulting,  according  to  the 
critical  school,  from  the  union  of  the  J  document 
and  the  £  document  in  the  Hexateuch  (q.v.).  See 
Hebrew  Language  and  Literature,  II.,  {{  4,  7. 

JEALOUSY,  TRIAL  OF.    See  Orobai.. 

JEANNE  D'ALBRET,  zhOn  dol'^br^':  Queen  of 
Navarre;  b.  at  Pau  (56  m.  e.s.e.  of  Bayonne)  Jan.  7, 
1528;  d.  at  Paris  June  9,  1572.  She  was  the  eldest 
child  of  Henry  of  Navarre  and  Margaret  of  An- 
goultoie-Alengon,  the  sister  of  Francis  I.  of  France. 
By  the  death  of  her  brother  John,  she  became  heir- 
presumptive  of  Navarre-B^m,  a  kingdom  which 
was  important  on  account  of  its  position  between 
France  and  Spain.  She  received  a  thorough  educa- 
tion, although  her  trend  was  practical  and  am- 
bitious rather  than  scholarly,  nor  could  she  sym- 
pathize with  the  intellectualism  and  mjrBticism  of 
her  famous  mother.  Suitors  for  her  hand  were 
numerous,  and  as  early  as  1535  Francis  had  in- 
tended to  marry  her  to  Anthony  of  Bourbon,  but 
when,  in  1540,  Charles  Y.  of  Spain  sought  her  as 
a  wife  for  his  son  Philip,  her  uncle  decided  to  wed 
her  to  Duke  William  of  Cleves.  Despite  her  resist- 
ance, the  ceremony  was  performed  on  June  14, 
1541,  but  her  youth  made  the  marriage  a  mere  form, 
and  her  ill  health  obliged  her  to  remain  in  France 
while  her  husband  returned  to  Germany.  The 
change  of  political  conditions  caused  Frauds  to 
desire  an  annulment  of  the  marriage,  and  a  brief 
of  Paul  III.  on  Oct.  12,  1545,  declared  the  enforced 
wedlock  void.  Three  years  later  (Oct.  20,  1548) 
she  married  Duke  Anthony  of  Bourbon- Vend6me. 
The  first  two  children  of  this  union  died  while  still 
infants,  but  on  Dec.  14,  1553,  she  gave  birth  at 
Pau  to  her  son  Henry,  afterward  Henry  IV.  of 
France.  The  death  of  her  father  on  May  29,  1555. 
made  her  queen  of  Navarre,  and  she  succeeded  in 
having  Anthony  recognized  as  king,  although  the 
actual  sovereignty  devolved  on  her. 

It  was  in  her  relation  to  the  Reformation  that 
Jeanne  was  most  important.  She  had  been  brought 
up  in  an  atmosphere  favorable  to  the  new  teaching, 
although  Margaret  of  Navarre  never  formally 
became  a  convert  to  Protestantism.  Jeanne  re- 
mained true  to  Roman  Catholicism,  even  after  her 
husband  entered  into  correspondence  with  Calvin 
in  1557,  and  became  the  mainstay  of  the  Reformed. 
Her  disaffection  with  the  Roman  Catholic  Oiurch, 
however,  steadily  increased,  and  on  Ghristmas  ai 
the  same  year  she  publicly  renounced  her  fonner 
faith  and  received  communion  according  to  the 
Reformed  rite.    Within  a  year  her  court  became 


113 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jr^ 


%u 


the  center  of  the  Reformed,  and  her  zeal  for  her 
new  creed  and  its  adherents  was  most  pronounced. 
She  educated  her  son  in  the  Reformed  faith,  and 
Navarre  was  thoroughly  Galvinised  by  Raymond 
Merlin  in  1563-64.  Many  statues  were  forcibly  torn 
from  the  churches,  and  the  monasteries  were  trans- 
formed into  schools,  while  their  incomes  were 
devoted  to  the  establishment  of  educational  institu- 
ticms. 

A  sudden  opponent  arose,  however,  in  the  person 
of  Pius  IV.,  who,  in  a  bull  of  Sept.  28,  1563,  cited 
ber  to  appear  before  the  tribunal  of  the  Inquisition 
or  to  forfeit  her  territories  both  for  herself  and  her 
children.  Tlus  peril  was  obviated  by  her  suzerain, 
Charles  IX.,  and  the  bull  was  annulled,  but  the 
peace  which  she  now  hoped  to  enjoy  was  broken 
by  the  wars  of  religion  which  broke  out  anew,  and 
she  was  forced  to  flee  from  Navarre  and  to  take 
refuge  in  La  Rochelle.  During  the  war  she  was  un- 
tiring in  her  encouragement  of  her  coreligionists, 
and  her  son  Henxy  (then  sixteen  years  of  age)  was 
the  nominal  head  of  the  Huguenot  party,  with 
Coligny  and  Andelot  as  his  advisers,  a  course  by 
whidi  Jeanne  increased  her  own  prestige.  Mean- 
while Navarre-B^m  had  been  overrun  by  the 
royal  troops  under  Terrides,  Pau  was  captured, 
and  only  the  little  fortress  of  Navarrein  still  held 
out.  Tliither  Jeanne  sent  Montgomery,  who  re- 
conquered the  country  for  its  queen  within  two 
months.  Jeanne  thereupon  forbade  the  exercise 
of  the  Roman  Catholic  religion,  and  expelled  the 
priests  and  monks,  but  in  Navarre,  where  her  power 
was  limited,  she  tolerated  it.  In  the  Peace  of  St. 
Germain  (Aug.  8,  1570)  her  coimsels  and  persever- 
ance were  important  factors  in  obtaining  favorable 
terms  for  the  Protestants,  and  she  remained  at  La 
Rocbelle  until  Aug.,  1571,  declining  to  be  present 
at  the  marriage  of  Charles  IX.  with  Elizabeth  of 
Austria  (Nov.  26,  1570),  but  attending  the  third 
Reformed  synod  held  at  La  Rochelle  Apr.  2-10, 
1571. 

Though  she  had  pleaded  the  length  of  the  journey, 
she  was,  in  reality,  deeply  distrustful  of  the  coiut, 
and  repeatedly  declined  invitations  to  visit  it, 
despite  the  fact  that  she  was  planning  a  marriage 
of  her  son  with  Margaret,  the  daughter  of  Henry  II. 
This  match  had  been  proposed  by  Henry  himself 
as  early  as  1556,  but  had  been  iorgotten  until  nego- 
tiations were  renewed  during  the  war  in  the  autumn 
of  1569,  and  again  in  Jan.,  1571,  this  time  in  earnest. 
In  Nov.  the  reluctance  of  Jeanne  was  overcome, 
despite  the  difference  in  religion  of  Henry  and 
Margaret,  for  she  hoped  that  the  princess  would 
become  a  convert  to  Protestantism.  In  Jan.,  1572, 
the  queen  of  Navarre  consented  to  visit  the  French 
court,  and  in  the  following  month  met  Catharine. 
X^otiations  for  the  marriage  dragged,  but  in  April 
it  was  decided  that  the  ceremony  should  be  per- 
formed at  Paris.  On  Apr.  11  the  marriage-contract 
was  signed,  but  the  pope  would  not  give  the  requisite 
dispensation,  although  Charles  IX.  earnestly  advo- 
cated the  union  which  was  so  necessary  for  the  peace 
of  the  land.  Jeanne  then  hastened  to  Paris  to 
make  the  final  preparations  for  the  marriage,  and 
on  June  3  received  communion  at  Vinoennes  with 
a  number  of  her  coreligionists,  but  died  six  days 
VI.— 8 


later.      It  was  this  marriage  which  was  followed 
by  the  massacre  of  St.  Bartholomew's  Day. 

(TBSODOR  SCHOTTt.) 
Bxbuoobapbt:  The  best  aoeount,  band  on  doeumentsiy 
•videnoe,  of  the  life  of  Jeanne  d'Albret  ia  in  the  three 
worke  of  A.  de  Ruble,  Le  Manaoe  de  Jeanne  d'Atbrti, 
Peris,  1877,  Ant.  de  Bourbon  et  Jeannt  d*Albrtt,  4  Tola., 
ib.  1881-86,  end  Jeanne  d*Albrei  et  la  guerre  ctvOt,  ibw 
1897;  for  her  later  life  very  important  ia  LeMret  d*Ankiine 
de  Bourbon  et  de  Jeanne  d'Albret,  ib.  1877.  Consult 
further:  W.  G.  Soldan,  Geedtu^U  dee  ProteetanOemue  in 
Frankreieh,  2  vols.,  Qotha,  1856;  O.  yon  Polens,  Oe- 
eckicfUe  dee  /rane6eieehen  Caiviniemue,  5  vols.,  Leipeio, 
1857-00;  N.  de  Boodenave,  HieL  de  Biam  et  Navarre, 
Paris.  1873;  J.  Delaborde,  EUonare  de  Roye,  ib.  1876; 
idem,  Oaepard  de  CoUgny,  vol.  i.,  ib.  1879;  H.  M.  Baird. 
Hiet.  aT  the  Riee  of  the  HuguenoU,  2  toIs.,  New  York,  1880; 
Cambridge  Modem  Hietory,  iii.  6, 11.  13, 17-18,  New  Yoris, 
1905. 

JEBB,  JOHN:  Bishop  of  Limerick;  b.  at  Drag- 
heda  (26  m.  n.  of  Dublin),  Ireland,  Sept.  27,  1775; 
d.  at  East  Hill,  near  Wandsworth  (6  m.  s.w.  of 
London),  Surrey,  Dec.  9,  1833.  He  studied  at  the 
Londonderry  grammar-school,  and  in  1791  entered 
TrinityGollege»  Dublin  (M.A.,  1801;  B.D.andD.D., 
1821).  He  was  ordained  in  1799  and  instituted  to 
the  curacy  of  Mogorbane,  Tipperary  county,  in  1801. 
He  became  Archbishop  Brodrick's  examining  chap- 
lain in  1805  and  archdeacon  of  Emly  in  1820.  For 
his  services  in  maintaining  order  in  his  parish 
during  the  disturbances  that  followed  the  famine 
of  1822  he  was  rewarded  with  the  bishopric  of 
Limerick  in  Dec.  of  that  year.  In  1827  a  stroke  of 
paralysis  incapacitated  him  for  active  work.  There- 
after he  resided  at  various  places  in  England, 
devoting  himself  to  literary  pursuits.  He  had  a 
strong  tendency  toward  High-church  ritual,  and  is 
regarded  as  a  forerunner  of  the  Oxford  movement. 
His  chief  works  are:  Sermons  (London,  1816);  Sacred 
Literature  (1820);  Practical  Theology  (2  vols.,  1830); 
and  a  Biographical  Memoir  of  WiUiam  Phdan 
(1832).  His  correspondence  with  Alexander  Knox 
was  edited  by  C.  Forster  (2  vols.,  1834). 
BiBuoaRAPHT:    C.  Forater,  Life  and  Lettere  ef  John  Jebb, 

London,  1851;   Anne  Mosley,  Lettere  of  J,  H,  Newman,  i. 

440,  470,  ib.  1890;   DNB,  zzix.  260-261. 

JEBXJS,  jfbus,  JEBUSITES,  jeb'u-eoits:  Upon 
the  basis  of  Judges  xix.  10-11  and  I  Chron.  xi.  4-^ 
Jebus  was  formerly  supposed  to  have  been  the  pre- 
Israelitic  name  of  Jerusalem  (cf.  II  Sam.  v.  6). 
But  Judges  xix.-xxi.  took  its  present  form  in  post- 
exilic  times,  and  probably  Jebus  did  not  occur  in 
the  original  text;  consequently  the  testimony  for 
Jebus  as  the  name  of  a  city  is  late,  for  in  all  early 
narratives  only  the  name  Jerusalem  is  found,  as  it 
is  in  the  Amama  Tablets  (see  Amarna  Tablbtb, 
III.).  The  passages  cited,  therefore,  embody  the 
erroneous  conclusion  that  the  earlier  name  of  the 
city  was  Jebus.  It  is  to  be  noted,  however,  that 
the  Jebusites  were  not  spoken  of  as  limited  in  their 
dwelling-place  to  the  city,  but  as  inhabiting  the 
immediate  region  thereabout  (II  Sam.  v.  6)  or  the 
mountain  region  in  particular  (Num.  xiii.  29; 
Josh.  xi.  3).  The  better  conclusion  therefore  is 
that  the  people  derived  its  name  from  a  district 
rather  than  a  city.  They  are  represented  as  holding 
an  important  point  in  the  h^^hland  after  Israel 
had  carried  on  a  victorious  campaign  against  the 
Canaanites,  and  from  the  mountain  fortress  of  Zion 


J«ilbrs 
Jeholakiin 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


114 


ruling  a  smaU  territory  limited  on  the  north  by  the 
Benjaminitic  Nob,  Gibeah  of  Saul,  and  Ramah,  and 
on  the  south  by  Bethlehem  of  Judah.  Their  in- 
dependence was  not  especially  important  until  the 
time  of  David,  when  he  wished  to  unite  his  northern 
and  his  southern  territories,  and  therefore  captured 
the  place  (II  Sam.  v.  6-S;  I  Ghron.  xi.  4-6).  After 
that  they  were  in  part  freemen  on  their  own  posses- 
sions (implied  by  the  story  of  Araunah  or  Oman, 
II  Sam.  xxiv.  16;  I  Chron.  xxi.  15),  and  in  part 
slaves  (under  Solomon,  I  Kings  ix.  20-21).  The 
text  of  the  description  of  the  boundary  between 
Judah  and  Benjamin  calls  the  hill  north  of  the 
Valley  of  Hinnom  **  the  Shoulder  of  the  Jebusites  " 
(Josh.  XV.  8,  xviii.  16),  whence  it  may  be  concluded 
that  the  part  of  the  city  which  the  Jebusites  occu- 
pied in  later  times  was  that  to  the  southeast. 
It  might  be  concluded  from  Josh.  x.  5  that  as  Adoni- 
sedek  is  reckoned  to  the  Amorites  the  Jebusites 
were  also  Amorites;  but  this  is  not  conclusive,  as 
it  may  be  held  that  the  Amorites  had  recently 
come  in,  while  the  Jebusites  were  regarded  as  early 
inhabitants  of  the  land.  From  the  frequent  men- 
tion of  the  people  (e.g.,  Gen.  x.  16;  Deut.  vii.  1, 
XX.  17)  nothing  certain  can  be  gathered  regarding 
the  racial  affinities  of  the  Jebusites.     (H.  Guthe.) 

Bibuographt:  The  subject  b  treated  in  the  literature 
under  Amarna  Tablstb  and  Jxrubalui.  Consult  also: 
O.  F.  Moore.  Comrntniary  o*>  Judge*,  New  York,  1896; 
K.  Budde,  Da»  Buck  der  Richter,  Gdttincen,  1896;  DB,  ii. 
564^S&6;   EB,  ii.  2415-16. 

JEFFBRS,  ELIAKDf  TUPPER:  Presbyterian; 
b.  at  Stewiacke,  Nova  Scotia,  Apr.  0,  1841.  He 
studied  at  Jefferson  College,  (?anonsburg.  Pa.  (B.A., 
1862),  and  Princeton  Theological  Seminary  (1862- 
1865),  and  at  the  United  Presbyterian  Theologi- 
cal Seminary,  Alleghany,  Pa  (1865-66).  He  was 
pastor  of  the  United  Presbyterian  Church  at  Ox- 
ford, Pa.  (1865-72),  after  which  he  was  president  of 
Westminster  (College,  New  Wilmington,  Pa.,  until 
1890,  and  professor  of  theology  in  Lincoln  Univer- 
sity, Oxford,  Pa  (1883-90).  He  was  pastor  of  the 
First  Presbyterian  Church,  Oil  City,  Pa.  (1890-93) 
and  since  1893  has  been  president  of  the  York 
Collegiate  Institute,  York,  Pa.  He  has  written 
Stwrtut  Road  to  Ccbbot  (New  York,  1896). 

JEFFERS,  WILLIAM  HAMILTOll:  Presbyterian; 
b.  at  Cadiz,  O.,  Bfay  1,  1838.  He  was  graduated 
from  Geneva  College,  Northwood,  Pa.  (now  Beaver 
Falls,  O.;  A.B.,  1855),  and  at  the  United  Presby- 
terian Theological  Seminary  at  Xenia,  O.  (1859). 
He  was  pastor  of  the  combined  United  Presbyterian 
churches  of  Belief ontaine  and  Northwood,  O.  (1862- 
1866);  was  professor  of  Latin  and  Hebrew  in  West- 
minster (College,  New  Wilmington,  Pa.  (1866-69); 
professor  of  Greek  in  the  University  of  Wooster, 
Wooster,  O.  (1869-75);  pastor  of  the  Euclid  Avenue 
Presbyterian  Churdi,  Cleveland,  O.  (1875-77);  and 
professor  of  historical  theology  in  the  Western 
Theological  Seminary,  Alleghany,  Pa.  (1877-1903). 
He  has  since  resided  at  Los  Angeles,  Cal.,  and  lec- 
tures on  church  history.  While  at  Bellefontaine 
he  was  a  member  of  the  committee  to  revise  the 
United  Presbyterian  metrical  version  of  the 
Psalms. 


JEFFBRSOH,  CHARLES  EDWARD:  Congrega- 
tionalist;  b.  at  Cambridge,  O.,  Aug.  29,  1860.  He 
was  educated  at  Ohio  Wesleyan  University  (A.B., 
1882);  was  superintendent  of  public  schools  in 
Worthington,  O.  (1882-84);  studied  at  the  School 
of  Theology  attached  to  Boston  University  (1884- 
1887).  He  was  pastor  of  the  Central  ciongrega- 
tional  Church,  Chelsea,  Mass.,  from  1887  to  1898. 
Since  1898  he  has  been  pastor  of  the  Broadway 
Tabernacle,  New  York  City.  He  has  written: 
Quiet  Talks  voiUi  EameBt  People  in  My  Study  (New 
York,  1898);  Quiet  Hints  to  Growing  Preachers  in 
My  Sttuty  (1901);  Doctrine  and  Deed  (IWl);  Things 
Fundamentai  (1903);  Faith  and  Life  (1905);  The 
Minister  as  Prophet  (1905);  The  New  Crusade 
(1907);  The  Old  Year  and  the  New  (1907);  Charac- 
ter  of  Jesus  (1908);  and  My  Father's  Business: 
Series  of  Sermons  to  Children  (1909). 

JEHOAHAZ,  je-h6'a-has:  1.  Eleventh  king  of 
Israel,  son  and  successor  of  Jehu.  Hie  dates,  ac- 
cording to  the  old  chronology,  are  856-840  b.c; 
according  to  Kautcsch,  814-798  b.c.  Under  him 
the  oppression  of  the  northern  kingdom  by  the 
Arameans  reached  its  height,  the  army  being 
reduced  to  fifty  horsemen,  ten  chariots,  and  10,000 
foot  soldiers.  An  addition  to  II  Kings  xiii.  22  in 
the  Septuagint  shows  that  the  Arameans  operated 
from  the  southwest  as  well  as  from  the  north  against 
Jehoahaz.  Under  him  the  Asberah  worship  seems 
to  have  revived  (II  Kings  xiii.  6). 

2.  Sixteenth  king  of  Judah,  third  son  and  suc- 
cessor of  Josiah  (called  Shallum,  Jer.  xxii.  11). 
He  reigned  only  three  months,  according  to  the 
old  chronology,  in  610  B.C. ;  according  to  Kautssch, 
609  B.C.;  according  to  Peake,  608  b.c.  He  was 
evidently  regarded  as  more  energetic  than  his  elder 
brother  (see  Jehoiaxim),  since  the  people  elevated 
him  to  the  throne;  but  both  the  Book  of  Kings 
and  Joeephus  give  him  a  bad  character  (II  Kings 
xxiii.  30  sqq.;  Ant.  X.,  v.  2).  Pharaoh  Necho,  on 
his  return  from  his  campaign  to  the  Euphrates, 
sununoned  Jehoahaz  to  Riblah  and  threw  him  into 
chains  to  be  carried  to  £!gypt,  whence  he  never 
returned,  and  put  his  brother  Jehoiakim  (Eliakim) 
in  his  place  as  king.  Whether  the  name  Shallum 
( — "  retribution  "?)  was  symbolically  applied  or 
was  his  original  name,  disoutied  when  he  became 
king,  is  a  subject  of  debate.  [The  list  of  Josiah's 
sons  in  I  CSiron.  iii.  17-18  erroneously  makes  Shal- 
lum to  be  a  different  person  from  Jehoahaz.] 

The  name  appears  dso  in  II  Clhron.  xxi.  17  as  that 
of  King  Ahaziah  of  Judah,  and  also,  II  C^hroii. 
xxxiv.  8,  of  a  recorder  under  Josiah  of  Judah. 

(E.  Kautzsch.) 
Bxbuoobapbt:  Sources  are:  II  Kinga  xifi.  1-0.  zziiL  30^; 
II  Chron.  iii.  17-18,  xxxvi.  1-3:  Jer.  xxu.  10-12.  Con- 
sult the  pertinent  sections  of  the  histories  mentioDed  under 
Arab;  and  Israbl,  Huttobt  of;  and  the  artidee  in  DB, 
BB,taidJE. 

JEHOIACHm,  je>hei'a-kin:  Eighteenth  king  of 
Judah,  son  and  successor  of  Jehoiakim.  He  reigned 
only  three  months,  in  598  b.c.  according  to  the  old 
chronology,  507  b.c.  according  to  nearly  aU  modem 
historians.  The  difference  in  his  age  at  his  acces- 
sion and  in  the  length  of  his  reign  as  given  in  II 
Kings  xxiv.  8  and  II  Chron.  xxxvi.  9  is  probably 


115 


REUGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


i\ 


'alioialdm 


due  to  a  ahifting  in  the  Chronicler's  narrative  of  the 

numeral  ten  from  his  age  to  the  length  of  his  reign. 

When  Jehoiachin  ascended  the  throne,  Jerusalem 

was  already  under  siege  by  the  Babylonians  or  was 

besiegBd  soon  after,  and  he  rendered  himself  prisoner 

to  the  besiegers,  with  his  household  and  his  officers, 

and  was  carried  into  exile  to  Babylon,  where  he 

remained  a  prisoner  until  Evil-Merodach  set  him 

free  in  562  (II  Kings  xxiv.  10-15,  zxv.  27  sqq.) 

and  gave  him  an  honorable  place  at  the  court  of 

Babylon.  (E.  Kautzsch.) 

BiBuoaKAPHT:   SouroM  are  11  KingB  xxiv.  8-16,  xxv.  27- 

30 ;  II  Chron.  xxxvL  1^-10;   Jer.  xxii.,  xxiv.,  xxvii.-xxix. 

Consult  the  pertinent  eections  in  the  worke  on  the  hie- 

iory  of  Israel  dted  under  Arab,  and  the  articles  in  the 

Bible  dietionariee;    J.  W.  Rothstein,  Die  Otnealogis  d— 

K&nia9  Jojachin  und  uinar  Naehkommtn,  Berlin,  1002. 

JEHOIADA,  je-hei'a-da:  High  priest  in  the  time 
of  Athaliah  and  Joash,  king  of  Judah.  His  wife, 
Jehoeheba,  sister  of  Ahaziah,  saved  Joash  from 
death  at  the  time  of  the  slaughter  of  the  seed  royal 
by  Athaliah.  Six  years  after  that  event  Jehoiada 
set  Joash  on  the  throne,  and  had  Athaliah  killed. 
He  followed  this  up  by  destruction  of  the  Baal 
temple  and  the  slaying  of  the  priest  of  Baal,  and 
renewed  the  service  in  the  temple  of  Yahweh. 
While  Jehoiada  was  practically  regent  during  the 
minority  of  Joash,  the  independence  of  the  king 
on  reaching  maturity  is  indicated  in  II  Kings  xii.  7. 
The  Chronicler  relates  that  Jehoiada  died  at  the 
age  of  130  and  was  buried  among  the  kings  because 
of  his  good  deeds  (II  Chron.  xxiv.  15-16). 

Others  of  the  name  are  the  father  of  Benaiah, 
one  of  David's  heroes,  and  a  son  of  Eliashib,  a 
priest  among  the  returning  exiles  named  in  Neh.  xii. 
10  sqq.  (E.  Kautzsch.) 

BiBUOOKAPinr:  Sources  are  II  Kings  xi.-xiL  16;   II  Chron. 

xxiL  lO-xxiv.  16.    Consult  the  pertinent  sections  in  the 

works  on  the  History  of  Israel  mentioned  under  Ahab, 

and  the  articles  in  the  Bible  Dictionaries. 

JBHOIAKIM,  je-hei'a-kim:  Seventeenth  king  of 
Judah,  second  son  of  Josiah,  and  successor  of 
Jehoahas.  His  dates,  according  to  the  old  chronol- 
ogy, are  609-698  B.C.;  acoordmg  to  recent  author- 
ities 608-^597  B.C.  He  was  set  on  the  throne  by 
Pharaoh  Necho  in  place  of  his  brother  Jehoahas 
(q.v.),  and  his  name  changed  from  Eliakim.  Through 
the  defeat  of  Necho  at  Carchemish  the  Egyptian 
overlordship  of  Hither  Asia  was  broken  and  the 
Judeans  came  practically  under  the  sway  of  the 
Babylonians,  though  not  for  some  time  did  a  Baby- 
lonian force  appear  in  the  land.  After  remaining 
a  vassal  of  Nebuchadrezzar  for  three  years,  Jehoi- 
akim  rebelled,  doubtless  at  the  instigation  of  Egypt, 
while  the  neighboring  Edomites,  Moabites,  and 
Anmionites  were  encouraged  to  ravage  his  territory. 
Finally  Jerusalem  was  besieged  by  the  Babylonians, 
and  possibly  during  the  siege  Jehoiakim  died  (II 
Kings  xxiv.  6),  though  the  Chronicler  reports  that 
Nebuchadrezzar  put  him  in  chains,  which  may  be 
due  to  a  confusion  of  Jehoiakim  with  his  successor, 
or  to  an  omission  indicated  in  the  Septuagint,  which 
adds  to  II  Chron.  xxxvi.  8  "and  buried  him  in 
the  garden  of  Uzza."  Ewald  is  of  the  opinion  that 
the  difficulties  occasioned  both  by  the  brevity  of  the 
accounts  and  by  their  lack  of  agreement  are  solved 
by  supposing  that  Jehoiakim  was  decoyed  from 


the  city,  an  assault  made  on  him  to  take  him 
prisoner,  and  that  he  was  killed  in  the  mdl^;  in 
this  way  he  accounts  for  the  definiteness  in  the 
lamentation  of  Jeremiah. 

Jehoiakim  ( Joiakim)  is  also  the  name  of  a  post- 
exilic  high  priest  (Ne^.  xii-10  sqq.),  and  (Joakim) 
of  the  husband  of  Susanna.  (E.  Kautzsch.) 

In  609  B.C.  Pharaoh  Necho  advanced  from  Egypt 
against  Babylon.  Josiah,  king  of  Judah,  as  ally 
of  Babylon  met  him  at  Megiddo,  was  defeated  and 
slain  (II  Kings  xxiii.  29).  The  people  of  Jerusalem 
then  made  Jehoahaz  king,  passing  by  the  elder 
brother,  Jehoiakim,  with  the  purpose  doubtless  of 
continuing  the  pro-Babylonian  policy  of  Josiah. 
Three  months  later  Necho  placed  Jehoiakim  upon 
the  throne  and  carried  Jehoahaz  to  Egypt.  Jeru- 
salem was  distracted.  The  court  party  favored 
Egypt,  but  Jehoiakim  was  not  the  people's  choice. 
The  anti-Egyptian  party  was  incensed  at  the  fine 
which  Necho  imposed — ^not  on  the  royal  treasury, 
but  on  the  inhabitants  (II  Kings  xxiii.  34,  35),  and 
Jeremiah  earnestly  warned  against  the  fjgyptian 
alliance  (Jer.  xxvi). ' 

The  Egyptian  and  Babylonian  armies  did  not 
meet  in  608,  but  the  conflict  was  only  postponed, 
and  four  years  later,  605,  Necho  was  back  again. 
The  intervening  time  was  employed  by  Nebuchad- 
rezzar in  making  alliances  and  suppressing  enemies 
on  the  line  of  Necho's  projected  return.  This  ap- 
pears from  Berosus  (Josephus,  Ajnon,  i.  19),  who 
says  that  after  the  defeat  of  Necho  at  Carchemish 
in  605,  "  Nebuchadrezzar  was  sent  by  his  father 
against  the  parts  of  Coele-Syria  and  Phenicia  which 
had  revolted  from  him,  and  that  he  reduced  the 
country  under  his  dominion  again."  If  they 
revolted  they  must  have  been  in  subordination  of 
some  sort.  The  interval  608  to  605  suggests  itself 
as  the  time  when  that  subordination  took  place. 
Judah  was  one  of  those  countries.  It  had  been 
friendly  imder  Josiah.  It  must  be  made  friendly 
under  Josiah's  son.  The  three  years'  vassalage 
(II  Kings  xxiv.  1)  fits  into  this  interval.  It  is  a 
meaningless  phrase  applied  to  any  other  portion 
of  Jehoiakim's  reign.  Jeremiah's  silence  also  from 
the  "  beginning "  of  Jehoiakim's  reign  to  the 
"  fourth  year  "  of  that  reign  (Jer.  xxxvi.  1)  is  con- 
sistent with  friendly  relations  between  Judah  and 
Babylon.  During  this  interval,  i.e.,  in  606  B.C., 
the  young  nobles  of  Judah  were  taken  to  Babylon 
(Dan.  i.  1)  to  be  brought  up  at  court — an  arrange- 
ment designed  to  promote  good  feeling  between  the 
subordinate  and  the  dominant  powers.  That  these 
yoimg  men  became  captives  along  with  their  whole 
nation  was  due  to  Jehoiakim 's  folly. 

But  when,  in  605,  the  tramp  of  the  Egyptian  army 
was  heard  again  Jehoiakim  put  aside  pretense  and 
joined  Necho.  Necho's  defeat  at  Carchemish  threw 
the  whole  coimtry  into  Nebuchadrezzar's  hands. 
He  punished  the  nations  which  had  fallen  away 
from  allegiance  to  him  by  transporting  some  of 
their  people  to  Mesopotamia  (Josephus,  ut  sup.). 
Jerusalem  was  in  great  fear.  A  fast  was  proclaimed 
in  Jehoiakim's  fifth  year  (Jer.  xxxvi.  9)  and  Nebu- 
chadrezzar's vengeance  did  not  fall  immediately. 
Nebuchadrezzar  contented  himself  with  allowing 
bands  of  Chaldeans,  Ammonites,  and  others  to 


Jahoahaphat 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


116 


ravage  Judah  (11  EingB  zziv.  2).     Tbe  Jewish 
monarchy  existed  thereafter  only  on  sufiFerance. 

Jehoiakim  reigned  eleven  years,  dying  in  697  bx. 
He  was  not  put  to  death  by  Nebuchadrezsar,  as 
Joeephus  says,  but  may  have  perished  by  assassina- 
tion, for  he  had  filled  Jerusalem  with  innocent  blood 
and  was  a  curse  to  his  country. 

JOSBPH  D.  WlUON. 

BnuooaApHT:  SonroM  m  11  KingB  sdiL  34-xziv.  7;  II 
Chran.  zxanri  4-8;  Jer.  viL-ix..  x.  17-26.  nv.-xrii.  18. 
xriiL-xx.,  etc.;  and  the  Book  of  H*bakkuk.  The  subject 
ie  treated  in  the  pertinent  leetions  of  the  literature  named 
under  Ahab  and  in  the  Bible  Diotionariee. 

JEHOSHAPHAT,  je-hesh'a-fat:  Fourth  king  of 
Judah,  son  and  successor  of  Asa.  His  dates,  accord- 
ing to  the  old  chronology,  are  914-893  B.C.;  accord- 
ing to  Kamphausen,  876-852  B.C.;  according  to 
Duncker,  869-848  B.C.;  according  to  Curtis  (DB, 
i.  401),  876-^851  B.C.  He  was  an  energetic  ruler, 
whose  extensive  preparations  for  war  and  prudent 
measures  (II  Chran.  zvii.  2,  12-13)  induced  Ahab 
of  Israel  to  seek  an  alliance  in  view  of  the  strained 
relations  between  Israel  and  the  Sjrrians,  and  of 
the  dangers  arising  from  the  pressure  from  the  rising 
power  of  Assjrria  (e.g.,  the  victory  of  Shalmaneser 
II.  at  Karkar;  see  Assyria,  VI.,  3,  |  8).  Good  rela- 
tions with  Israel  were  also  desired  by  Jehoshaphat; 
accordingly  he  became  only  too  intimate  with  the 
heatheniited  court  of  Samaria  and  sealed  his  friend- 
ship by  arranging  a  marriage  between  his  son  Joram 
and  Athaliah,  daughter  of  Ahab  and  Jesebel.  This 
alliance  had  its  first  test  in  an  unsuccessful  cam- 
paign against  the  Syrians,  the  object  of  which  was 
to  recapture  the  fortress  of  Ramoth  in  Gilead,  which 
was  important  as  the  center  of  the  country  east  of 
the  Jordan  (I  Kings  xxii.  1  sqq.).  When  Jehosha- 
phat returned  he  received  a  severe  rebuke  from 
the  prophet  Jehu,  son  of  Hanani,  for  entering  into 
relations  with  those  whom  the  Loid  hated  (II  Chron. 
xix.  1  sqq.;  cf.  II  Chron.  xx.  34).  Nevertheless, 
moved  by  his  continued  desire  for  a  closer  connec- 
tion with  the  northern  kingdom,  he  was  ready 
to  undertake,  in  company  with  Joram  (q.v.), 
another  campaign  against  the  Moabites,  who  had 
revolted  from  Israel  (II  Kings  iii.).  This  expedi- 
tion, to  which  Edom  was  also  forced  to  furnish  aid, 
marohed  through  the  desert  of  Edom  around  the 
southern  end  of  the  Dead  Sea,  and  was  threatened 
with  defeat  through  the  lack  of  water  in  this  region, 
when  Elisha,  for  Jehoshaphat's  sake,  gave  coimsel 
and  promised  rescue  and  victory.  Khig  Mesha,  be- 
sieged in  his  fortress  Kir-hareseth  (the  modern 
Kerak),  in  his  dire  extremity  offered  his  son  as  a 
sacrifice  to  the  national  god,  Chemosh,  whereupon, 
according  to  the  mysterious  statement  in  II  Kings 
iii.  27,  "  there  was  great  indignation  against  Israel  ** 
(i.e.  on  the  part  of  Chemod^)  and  the  allies  were 
forced  to  turn  back,  so  that  they  returned  home 
without  having  accomplished  their  task.  The 
Chronicler,  who  omits  this  story  and  does  not  allude 
to  the  activity  of  the  prophet  Elisha,  speaks  (II 
Chron.  XX.)  of  a  defensive,  but  more  successful,  ex- 
pedition of  Jehoshaphat  against  the  Ammonites, 
Moabites,  and  Meunim  (cf.  II  Chron.  xx.  1,  R.V. 
margin,  but  read  Mehamme'umm),  As  this  expe- 
dition is  mentioned  only  by  the  Chronicler,  many 


critics  maintain  that  his  story  is  a  readjustment 
of  the  events  related  in  II  Kings  iii.,  and  credit  it 
with  no  historic  value.  Nevertheless,  in  view  of 
the  great  difference  in  all  the  principal  details,  it  is 
best  regarded  as  an  account  of  an  independent  act 
of  Jehoshaphat. 

Both  earlier  and  later  sources  praise  Jehosha- 
phat's  piety  and  his  reforming  tendendea  (I  Kings 
xxii.  43,  46;  11  Chron.  xvii.  3,  6,  xix.  3).  According 
to  the  Chronicler  he  was  a  zeedous  reformer  of  legal 
procedure  (II  Chron.  xix.  5  sqq.),  and  sought  to 
impress  his  judges  with  a  true  sense  of  their  respon- 
sibilities. In  each  city  of  the  land  he  established 
a  court  of  justice,  and  in  Jerusalem  a  supreme 
tribunal  composed  of  the  chiefs  of  the  families,  of 
Levites  and  of  priests,  entrusted  with  decision  in  the 
most  difficult  cases.  In  this  tribunal  a  priest  pre- 
sided when  the  religious  cases  were  tried,  and  a 
prince  when  the  action  was  a  civil  one.  Both  sources 
tell  of  an  unsuccessful  mercantile  venture  of  Je- 
hoshaphat, though  the  narratives  are  not  altogether 
concordant  (I  Kings  xxii.  48;  II  Chron.  xxi.  35,  37). 
He  endeavored  to  reestablish  the  traffic  to  Ophir 
from  Ezion-geber,  but  the  newly  equipped  ships 
were  wrecked  by  a  storm. 

The  picture  of  Jehoshaphat,  although  not  without 
its  shadows,  is  still  the  brightest  presented  by  the 
house  of  David  after  Solomon's  time.  The  land 
was  densely  populated  (II  Chron.  xvii.  14  sqq.)  and 
highly  prosperous;  little  Judah  was  respected 
beyond  her  boundaries  because  of  the  wisdom  and 
bravery  of  her  king  (II  Chron.  xvii.  10-11).  Justice 
and  religion  flourished  and  developed,  tbe  sacred 
writings  were  carefuUy  guarded  and  enriched.  The 
king  himself,  another  David  in  his  piety,  submitted 
to  the  sharp  reproach  of  the  prophets,  was  far- 
sighted,  endowed  with  a  noble,  generous  nature, 
and  displayed  tireless  energy  in  his  care  for  his 
people's  welfare.  That  the  condenmation  of  tbe 
well-meaning  efforts  of  Jehoshaphat  for  a  closer 
connection  with  the  idolatrous  rojral  house  of  Israel 
did  not  spring  from  narrow  fanaticism  was  only 
too  well  proved  immediately  after  his  death,  since 
the  marriage  of  his  son  with  Athaliah  bore  the 
worst  possible  fruits  and  robbed  the  land  of  the 
blessings  which  Jehoshaphat 's  reign  had  bestowed 
upon  it.  C.  VON  Orxlu. 

BiBUOoaAFRT:  Tb«  aouroes  mn  I  King*  zxiL;  II  Kingfi 
iii.;  II  Chron.  xvii.-zxi.  1.  The  literature  is  given  under 
Ahab.  Consult  also:  C.  F.  Burney.  NotM  on  ffte  Hebrev 
Text  cf  Kino;  Oxford.  1003;  DB.  ii.  661;  BB,  ii.  2352- 
2363.  ef.  i.  770;   JB,  vu.  86^7. 

JBHOVAH,  je-hd'vd:  An  erroneous  form  of  the 
divine  name  of  the  covenant  God  of  Israel  which 
appears  first  about  1520  A.n.  The  error  arose  from 
the  fact  that  the  utterance  of  the  divine  name,  in 
original  quadrilateral  form  (the  tetragranunaton) 
YHWH,  became  unlawful  in  Jewish  usage  as  early  as 
the  third  Christian  century  and  probably  much 
earlier,  at  least  outside  the  sacred  precincts  (cf .  Ex. 
XX.  7;  Lev.  xxiv.  16,  the  Septuagint  of  which  reads 
''  name  the  name  "  for  ''  blaspheme  the  name  "). 
Consequently  in  reading  the  sacred  text,  "  Adonai  " 
(Heb.  Adhonaif  "  my  lord  ")  was  pronounced  in- 
stead of  it  (or  "  Elohim  "  in  case  the  collocation 
Adhonai  Yhwk  occurred)  and   the   consonants  of 


117 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


JSS?*^ 


^phat 


Adhonai  were  often  written  in  the  maigin  of  the 
manuscripts.  When  the  vowel  punctuation  was 
added,  the  vowels  of  Adhonai  were  written  in  the 
text  with  the  tetragrammaton,  which  thus  appeared 
to  read  Yehowah  (rarely  Yehowih)^  or,  according 
to  an  older  system  of  transliteration,  Jehovah.  This 
form,  with  anglicised  pronunciation,  entered  the 
English  Bible  and  so  came  into  general  use  in  wor- 
ship and  theology  as  one  of  the  names  of  God, 
connoting  especially  his  majesty  and  greatness.  For 
the  derivation,  meaning,  etc.,  of  the  Hebrew  form, 
see  Yahweh. 

In  Christian  theology  since  the  Reformation 
**  Jehovah "  has  become  an  expression  inclusive 
.  of  the  three  persons  of  the  Trinity.  In  the  case  of 
the  Third  Person  this  is  rather  tacit  than  explicit; 
in  the  case  of  the  Second  Person,  the  inclusion  is 
explicit.  Thus  C.  Hodge  remarks:  **  This  mani- 
fested Jehovah  [i.e.,  the  Malakh  Yahweh  or  ''  Angel 
of  Yahweh  ''j,  who  led  his  people  under  the  Old- 
Testament  economy,  is  declared  to  be  the  Son  of 
God,  the  ^6yo^,  who  was  manifested  in  the  flesh  " 
(Syatematic  Theology,  i.  485;  cf.  "  Christ  is  repre- 
sented ...  as  the  Jehovah  of  the  Old  Testament, 
who  led  the  Israelites  through  the  wilderness," 
p.  512).  Similarly  Shedd  first  identifies  the  Malakh 
Yahweh  with  Yahweh  and  then  says :  "  The  Jehovah 
in  the  theophany  was  the  same  trinitarian  person 
who  is  in  the  incarnation  "  {Dogmatic  Theology, 
i.  1 10,  New  York,  1888).  To  the  same  purport  may 
be  dted  A.  H.  Strong  {Systematic  Theology,  p.  146, 
New  York,  1902),  A.  A.  Hodge  {Popular  Lectures 
on  Theological  Themes,  i.  263,  Philadelphia,  1887), 
S.  Harris  {God  the  Creator  and  Lord  of  All,  i.  315,  New 
York,  1896),  W.  F.  Gess  {Das  Dogma  von  Ckristi 
Person  und  Werk,  pp.  244-246,  Basel,  1887),  and 
dogmaticians  in  general.  Church  covenants  not 
infrequently  use  the  term  ''  Jehovah-Jesus "  to 
emphasise  the  deity  of  Christ. 
Bibuoorapht:  See  literatura  under  Yahwsb. 

JEHU  (Hebr.  Yehu;  Assyr.  Ya-Ura:  LXX.  lou; 
Josephus,  leous):  Tenth  king  of  Israel,  a  usurper, 
BUcoesBor  of  Joram,  whom  he  slew.  His  dates,  ac- 
cording to  the  old  chronology,  are  884-856  B.C.; 
according  to  Kamphausen,  84^15;  according  to 
Kdhler,  881-853  B.C.;  and  according  to  Curtis 
(DB,  i.  401),  842-815  b.c.  The  Books  of  Kings 
(I,  xix.  16-17;  II,  ix.-x.)  give  a  detailed  account 
of  the  manner  in  which  Jehu  gained  his  throne, 
rooted  out  the  house  of  Ahab,  and  exterminated 
the  worship  of  Baal.  The  statement  (II  Kings 
X.  32-34)  that  during  the  reign  of  Jehu  Hazael  of 
Damascus  took  possession  of  the  whole  of  the 
country  east  of  the  Jordan  is  to  be  understood  of 
the  whole  of  Bashan  and  Gilead.  The  rest  of  the 
recital,  as  well  as  I  Kings  xx.  22,  and  probably  II 
Kings  iii.  4-27,  vi.  24-vii.  17  is  derived  from  a  spe- 
cial North-Israelitic  source,  both  old  and  valuable. 

Jehu  was  a  leader  in  Joram's  army  and,  during 
the  battle  with  the  Arameans  at  Ramoth-gilead, 
had  the  chief  command.  As  one  day  he  was  taking 
council  with  his  captains,  a  youth  appeared,  gave 
him  a  message  from  the  prophet  Elisha,  anointed 
him  king  over  Israel,  and  hastened  away.  Jehu 
then  regarded  himself  as  Yahweh's  appointed  instru- 
ment to  execute  justice  upon  the  house  of  Ahab. 


He  had  the  gates  of  the  city  guarded  so  that  no 
news  could  reach  Joram,  and  then  hastened  with  a 
troop  toward  Jezreel.  After  two  messengers  des- 
patched by  Joram  had  been  detained,  Joram  and 
his  friend  Ahaziah  went  to  meet  Jehu.  In  answer 
to  the  question  whether  he  brought  good  news,  he 
replied  with  the  sinister  remark  that  nothing  could 
be  good  as  long  as  the  heathenish  practises  of 
Jezebel  continued,  and  then  sent  an  arrow  through 
the  heart  of  the  fleeing  Joram.  Jehu  ordered  the 
dead  body  to  be  thrown  into  the  neighboring  field 
of  Naboth,  and  then  entered  Jezreel.  Jezebel,  by 
his  command,  was  hurled  from  the  window  at  whi(^ 
she  stood  and  mocked.  The  nobles,  who  felt  no 
disposition  to  risk  anything  for  the  house  of  Ahab, 
submitted  to  Jehu,  and  he  ordered  them  to  appear 
before  him  the  next  day  with  the  heads  of  the  sev- 
enty princes  who  were  in  Samaria.  He  declared, 
hypocritically,  that  he  was  innocent  of  the  death  of 
the  princes,  which  had  been  accomplished  by  the 
will  of  God  in  fulfilment  of  the  words  of  Elisha,  and 
then  proceeded  to  slay  all  the  relations  of  Ahab 
as  well  as  his  officials,  friends  and  priests.  There- 
upon he  advanced  against  Samaria.  On  his  way 
thither,  he  slew  forty-two  princes  of  the  house  of 
David,  who  were  on  their  way  to  Jezreel  to  visit 
their  kindred  (II  Kings  x.  12-14).  Jehu  openly 
sided  with  the  party  which  would  not  tolerate  the 
worship  of  Baal  and  proceeded  to  do  all  in  his 
power  to  extirpate  it. 

All  that  is  known  of  the  subsequent  twenty-eight 
years  of  Jehu's  reign  is  that  he  fought  unsuccess- 
fully against  the  Arameans  under  Hazael  (II  Kings 
X.  32),  who  ascended  the  throne  of  Damascus  about 
the  same  time  as  Jehu  became  king  of  Israel  (II 
Kings  viii.  7-15)  and  by  the  same  means — ^r^cide. 
The  misfortune  in  this  war  with  SyriB.  is  ascribed 
(II  Kings  X.  31)  to  Jehu's  protection  of  the  calf- 
worship  in  Israel,  although  the  continuance  of  his 
dynasty  for  four  generations  is  regarded  as  a  re- 
ward for  rooting  out  Baal-worship.         W.  Lotz. 

Biblioorapht:  llie  souroes  are  I  Kings  xix.  1&-17;  II 
Kings  ix.-x.;  II  Chron.  xxii.  7-9.  The  literature  is  given 
under  Ahab  (q.v.).  Consult  also:  C.  F.  Bumey,  NoUa  on 
the  Hebrew  Text  of  .  .  .  Kino*.  Oxford.  1003;  DB,  ii. 
564-566;    EB,  u.  2356-2357;    JE,  vii.  88-^80. 

JENKS,  BENJAMIN:  English  clergyman  and 
theological  writer;  b.  at  Eaton-under-Haywood  (13 
m.  s.  of  Shrewsbury),  Shropshire,  May,  1646;  d. 
at  Harley  (8  m.  s.e.  of  Shrewsbury),  Shropshire, 
May  10,  1724.  Very  little  is  known  of  his  life. 
After  his  ordination  he  officiated  for  a  time  as  curate 
at  Harley,  and  subsequently  became  vicar  of  the 
parishes  of  Harley  and  Kenley,  and  also  chaplain 
to  Francis,  Viscount  Newport,  the  patron  of  these 
livings.  He  is  remembered  for  his  Prayers  and 
Offices  of  Devotion  for  Families,  and  for  Particular 
Persons  upon  Most  Occasions  (London,  1697;  2 
vols.,  1706;  26th  ed.  by  C.  Simeon,  1808;  13th  ed. 
of  Simeon's  revision,  1866).  Other  works  by  Jenks 
are  Meditations,  with  Short  Prayers  Annexed,  in 
Ten  Decades  (London,  1701);  A  Second  Century  of 
Meditations  (1704);  and  The  Poor  Man's  Ready 
Companion  (1713). 

Biblioobapbt:   Oentlmnan'e  Maganne,  Deo..  1852;    DNB, 
315. 


Jennlatfs 
Jeremiah 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


118 


JENHIIIGS,  ARTHUR  CHARLES:  Church  of 
England;  b.  in  London  Dec.  19,  1847.  He  was 
educated  at  Jesus  College,  Cambridge  (B.A.,  1872), 
and  was  ordered  deacon  in  1873  and  ordained 
priest  in  1874.  He  was  curate  of  St.  Edward's, 
Cambridge  (1873-74),  and  rector  of  Whittlesford, 
Cambridgeshire  (1877-^).  Since  1886  he  has 
been  rector  of  King's  Stanley,  Gloucestershire. 
Theologically  he  is  a  broad  churchman.  Besides 
contributing  the  commentary  on  Nahum,  Haggai, 
Habakkuk,  and  Zephaniah  to  the  fifth  volume  of 
C.  J.  EUicott's  Old  Testament  CammerUary  (London, 
1884),  was  joint  author  of  CammerUary  on  the  Paalme 
(2  vols.,  London,  1875-77);  Ecdeeia  Anglieana:  A 
History  of  the  Church  of  Christ  in  England  ...  to 
the  Present  Times  (1882);  Synopsis  of  Ancient 
Chronology  (1886);  Manual  of  Church  History  (2 
vols.,  1887-88;  3d  ed.,  1905);  Chronological  Tables 
of  the  Events  of  Ancient  History  (1888);  and  Medi- 
aval  Church  and  the  Papacy  (1909). 

JEPHTHAH,  jef'thd:  The  name  of  one  of  the 
Judges  of  Israel.  It  is  related  (Judges  x.  6-xii.  7) 
that  he  was  driven  from  his  home  because  of  il- 
legitimate birth,  and  became  captain  of  a  band  of 
freebooters  in  the  land  of  Tob.  When  the  Israelites 
of  the  East  Jordanland  were  oppressed  by  the  Am- 
monites, they  sent  for  him  to  return  and  lead  them 
against  their  enemies.  This  he  consented  to  do 
if  he  were  given  the  headship,  which  was  promised 
him.  After  vainly  trying  by  argument  to  induce 
the  foe  to  retire,  he  made  a  vow  to  sacrifice  whatever 
should  come  forth  to  meet  him  if  he  should  return 
from  the  campaign  victorious.  He  won  a  brilliant 
victory,  and  was  met  by  his  daughter  on  his  return 
who  consented  to  the  performance  of  his  vow, 
asking,  however,  a  reprieve  of  two  months.  He 
performed  the  sacrifice,  and  a  yearly  celebration 
was  established  in  which  for  four  days  the  women 
lamented  Jephthah's  daughter.  Jephthah  was 
assailed  by  the  Ephraimites  for  not  summoning 
them  to  the  battle,  and  in  an  ensuing  conflict  in- 
flicted upon  them  a  stinging  defeat.  He  then  ruled 
as  judge  for  six  years. 

Examination  of  the  narrative  shows  that  several 

sources  are  employed,  and  the  story  endoeed  in  the 

pragmatic  framework  is  itself  complex. 

Diicitaston  Jephthah  is  mentioned  as  the  son  of 

of  the      Gilead  by  a  foreign  wife;   but  Gilead 

Sources,  is  the  name  of  a  district  or  of  its  popu- 
lation. Moreover,  the  section  xi.  12-28 
severs  the  continuity  of  the  narrative  and  discusses 
the  Moabites,  whom  the  Hebrews  had  left  unassailed 
(Num.  XX.  14  sqq.),  while  xi.  34  shows  that  the  hero 
had  a  house  in  Mispah,  which  does  not  accord 
with  verse  3.  And  it  is  difficult  to  relate  the  episode 
of  the  Ephraimitic  conflict  with  the  two  months  of 
the  reprieve  of  Jephthah's  daughter,  since  it  is  not 
likely  that  the  Ephraimites  would  await  'the  issue 
of  that  event.  Many  scholars  have  suspected  an 
extension  of  the  original  text  by  interpoLsition,  the 
passage  xi.  12-28  especially  being  regarded  as  of 
late  introduction,  though  this  is  opposed  by  Hols- 
inger  and  Budde  on  the  ground  that  the  verses  in 
which  the  Ammonites  are  mentioned  (12-15,  27) 
show  the  same  conception  as  the  main  portim  of 


the  narrative.  It  is  probable,  however,  that  this 
is  an  independent  report  which  the  redactor  wished 
to  bring  into  connection  with  the  Anunonitic  war. 
Wellbausen  and  Frankenbeig  suspect  also  xii.  1-7 
as  a  late  interpolation  founded  upon  viii.  1-3. 
While  the  individuality  of  this  section  differentiates 
it  from  viii.  1-3,  it  is  probably  taken  from  an  in- 
dependent source.  Holsinger  disposes  of  one  of  the 
difficulties  by  supposing  that  Jephthah,  on  his 
recall  from  Tob,  acquired  a  residence  in  Mizpah. 
That  a  war  with  Moab  is  implied  in  xi.  12-28  goes 
weU  with  the  place  names  in  verse  33,  some  of  which 
are  Moabitic,  while  others  are  Ammonitic,  and  thus 
a  double  narrative  is  suggested  dealing  with  two 
episodes,  which  an  addition  in  verse  33  of  the 
Septuagint,  "  and  unto  Amon,"  supports.  Then 
the  Moabitic  war  was  later,  and  the  residence  in 
Mizpah  already  acquired  goes  well  with  the  "  I " 
and  **  me  "  of  verse  27.  Holsinger  finds  in  xi.  29 
a  suggestion  of  a  journey  made  by  Jephthah  in  the 
West  Jordanland  ("and  Manasseh ")  connecting 
xi.  with  xii.  1-6,  and  concludes  that  there  are  two 
sources  combined  inside  the  framework  of  this 
story. 

Against  the  historical  character  of  the  narrative 
of  the  Ammonitic  war  there  is  no  reasonable  objec- 
tion.    Jephthah   appears  as  an  exile 

Historicity  who  has  gained  position  as  head  of  a 
of  the      band  like  that  of  David.    The  differ- 

llarrative.  ences  of  the  two  sources  do  not  oppose 
the  historicity,  since  the  events  may 
be  referred  to  different  times  and  occasions,  a  war 
with  the  Ammonites  and  one  with  Moabites.  The 
hero  is  not  to  be  taken  as  a  mythical  invention  to 
explain  the  celebration  of  the  death  of  his  daughter, 
and  analogies  of  the  event  are  not  lacking  in  the 
history  of  other  Semitic  peoples.  One  is  furnished 
by  the  story  of  II  Kings  iii.  27,  and  another  comes 
out  of  Arabic  history  of  the  seventh  Christian  cen- 
tury (Tabari,  i.  1073-1074),  so  that  the  historical 
character  of  the  event  which  the  celebration  com- 
memorated appears  at  least  probable.  Since  in  the 
narrative  there  is  no  mention  of  substitution,  it 
must  be  that  Jephthah  really  sacrificed  his  daughter. 
This  was  the  understanding  of  the  early  exegetes 
untU  D.  Kimchi,  who  asserted  that  the  maiden  was 
simply  devoted  to  the  service  of  Yahweh,  an  ex- 
planation which  gained  the  approval  of  later  Chris- 
tian exegetes,  who  combined  the  idea  with  that  of 
an  enforced  celibacy.  The  reason  for  this  is  not 
far  to  seek,  since  not  only  is  human  sacrifice  ih  itself 
unusual  for  such  a  state  of  society,  but  it  was 
supposed  that  the  Pentateuchal  legislation  was  well 
known  in  the  time  of  the  Judges  (cf.  Lev.  xviii.  21, 
XX.  2-n5,  and  see  Vows,  I.;  cf.  also  the  Targum  on 
Judges  xi.  39);  moreover  emphasis  was  laid  on  the 
fact  that  the  maiden  bewailed  not  her  life,  but  her 
virginity,  as  though  condemned  to  a  single  life. 
Some  support  was  gained  from  Ex.  xxxviii.  8  and 
I  Sam.  ii.  22,  though  it  is  not  said  that  the  women 
mentioned  here  were  celibates.  But  the  true  ex- 
planation of  verse  37  doubtless  is  that  the  catise  oi 
the  maiden's  grief  was  that  she  must  die  without 
being  either  wife  or  mother.  Some  take  refuge  in 
a  disjunctive  in  the  statement  of  the  vow  (verse 
31)  making  the  last  two  dauaes  apply  to  different 


119 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


^6nziiiitffl 
Jerwnlah 


objects,  human  and  animal.  Other  syntactical 
devices  have  been  proposed  with  the  object  of 
getting  rid  of  the  sacrifice  of  a  human  being,  but 
they  all  fail  in  view  of  the  fact  that  the  verb  used 
in  the  passage  (he'dah)  is  that  employed  in  the 
technical  language  of  the  ritual  for  sacrifice.  More- 
over, human  sacnfice  is  involved  in  the  whole  story; 
only  thus  can  be  explained  the  despair  of  the  father 
and  the  grief  of  the  daughter;  and  the  celebration 
itself  finds  no  adequate  ground  short  of  the  actual 
sacrifice  of  the  maiden.  In  anti-prophetic  circles 
human  sacrifice  was  not  imknown  (Jer.  xxzii.  35); 
indeed,  within  the  prophetic  circle  itself  the  idea 
was  not  absolutely  strange  (Gen.  xxii.).  That  the 
words  of  Jephthah's  vow  involve  that  he  thought 
only  of  a  human  being  and  must  therefore  have 
reckoned  upon  the  possibility  of  the  victim  being 
his  daughter  is  rightly  characterised  by  Reuss  as 
'"detestable."  But  the  idea  of  htmoan  sacrifice 
lay  in  the  background  of  the  Yahweh-religion, 
and  in  later  times  under   foreign    influence   the 


practise  broke  out  in  opposition  to  the  prophetic 
teaching.  (F.  Buhl.) 

Bibuoorapht:  The  best  diBouaaon  ia  in  the  Commentary 
on  Judges  by  G.  F.  Moore,  with  whioh  should  be  eom- 
pared  the  treatment  in  the  Commentaries  of  Studer,  Keil, 
Gaseel.  Bertheau,  Harvey,  Oettli  and  Budde,  as  men- 
tioned under  Jxtdobs,  and  that  in  the  standard  works  on 
the  History  of  Israel,  mentioned  under  Ahab.  Consult 
further:  £.  W.  Hengstenberg,  EinleUun4f  in  daa  A.  T„ 
iii.  127,  Berlin,  1830.  Eng.  transl.,  Edinburgh,  1847-48; 
K.  A.  Auberlen,  in  TSK,  1860,  pp.  640  sqq.;  £.  Reuss, 
(TesdkuAle  dtr  heUiaen  Sdtriften  A,  T.,  Brunswick,  1874, 
Eng.  transl.,  Boston,  1884;  I.  Qoldsiher,  Der  M^ihu*  M 
den  HtbrAem,  pp.  113  sqq.,  Leipsic,  1876;  A.  Kuenen, 
HiHoruehrkrititch  Ondertoek,  i.  340,  Leyden,  1886;  J. 
Wellhausen,  Kompoeitian  dee  HexaUuehe,  pp.  228-220, 
Berlin,  1880;  K.  Budde,  RidUer  und  Samuel,  pp.  126 
sqq..  Giessen,  1800;  M.  K6hler,  Bibliedte  Oeeehiehie  dee 
AUen  Bundee,  ii.  1,  p.  100;  H.  Schults,  O.  T.  Theohov- 
London,  1802;  W.  Frankenberg,  Die  KompoeiHon  dee 
deuteronomiechen  Riehierbudtee,  Marburg,  1806;  A.  Kamp- 
hausen,  Dae  VerfMtnie  dee  Menedienapfer§  eur  isrosltfi- 
eehen  Religion,  pp.  46  sqq.,  Bonn,  1806;  E.  SelUn,  Bei- 
tHko^  eur  ieraelitiechen  und  judiechen  Relii/iont  i.  200  aqq.* 
Leipsio,  1806;  DB,  u.  667-668;  BB,  ii.  2360-62;  JB.  yH 
04-06. 


I.  The  Prophet. 
Family 
(ID. 
His  Life  and  Times  (i  2). 
Liteiatuze    Ascribed   to 
(13). 
XL  The  Book  of  the  Prok>het  Jersmiah. 
1.  The  Contents. 


and    Social    Connections 


Jeremiah 


JEREMIAHi    jer^'e-mod'a. 

Cautpters  l-x.  (|  1). 
Chapters  zi.-xvii.  (|  2). 
Qiapters  xviii.-zxix.  (|  3). 
Chapters  zzx.-lii.  (|  4). 
2.  The  Composition. 
The  Groundwork  and  its  Expansion 

(ID. 
The  Greek  and  the  Hebrew  Text  (|  2). 


8.  The  Importance  of  the  Book, 
in.  The  Lamentations  of  Jeremiah. 
Names,  Place  in  the  Canon  (|  1). 
The  Artistic  Form  (|  2). 
Traditk>nal   View    of    Authorship 

(13). 
Aiigumente  Concezning  Jeremianic 
Origin  (I  4). 


L  The  Prophet:  The  name  (Hebr.  Yirmeyahu  or 
Yvrme^foh;  Gk.  leremioM)  is  borne  not  only  by  the 

prophet,  but  also  by  the  father-in-law 

^'  JS°^^i  o^  King  Josiah  (II  Kings  xxiii.  31),  by 

*c«««^  a  Rechabite  (Jer.  xxxv.  3),  by  a  priest 

tioaSu"    ®^  *^  ^"^®  ®^  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  3) 

and  by  persons  in  the  Chronicler's 
tables  (I  Chron.  v.  24,  xii.  4,  10,  13).  In  spite  of 
his  importance  the  prophet  is  seldom  mentioned 
in  the  Old  Testament  outside  of  his  book  (II  Chron. 
xxxv.  25,  xxxvi.  12,  21,  22;  Ezra  i.  1;  Dan.  ix.  2), 
which  remains  the  principal  and  quite  fuU  source 
for  knowledge  of  his  life.  According  to  this  source 
Jeremiah  was  of  priestly  lineage  from  the  little  city 
of  Anathoth,  3  m.  north  of  Jerusalem  (i.  1),  a  son  of 
Hilkiah  (i.  1),  and  nephew  of  Shallum  (xxxii.  7). 
A  possible  relationship  to  Abiathar  is  suggested  by 
I  Kings  ii.  26,  but  the  identity  of  his  father  with 
the  Hilkiah  of  II  Kings  xxii.  is  improbable.  His 
known  history  begins  in  the  thirteenth  year  of  Josiah 
(626  B.C.),  when  he  was  called  to  the  prophetic 
office  (i.  6).  His  position  regarding  sacrifice  (vii.  22) 
is  against  the  supposition  that  he  acted  as  a  priest. 
Notwithstanding  the  hatred  aroused  among  the 
people  of  Anathoth  by  his  preaching,  he  exerdsed 
his  rights  there  (xi.  21,  xxxii.  8,  xxxvii.  12),  though 
his  duties  as  prophet  were  performed  at  the  capital. 
From  xvi.  2  it  seems  probable  that  he  was  un- 
married. 

Jeremiah  lived  in  critical  times.  Five  years  after 
his  call  the  law  book  was  found  which  caused  the 
Josianic  reformation,  to  which  his  words  in  chap, 
xi.  apply.  But  little  is  known,  however,  of  his 
work  under  Josiah,  though  of  his  activities  under 
Jehoiakim  (q.v.)  more  is  told.    Jehoiakim  was  not 


of  a  nature  to  respond  to  prophetic  ideals,  being 
a  brutal  despot  wrapped  up  his  building-projects 
(xxii.  13-19).  The  prophet  denounced 
T?#  ^^A  ^  ^  addresses  the  heathen  and  un- 
~?*'^*  ethical  influences  protected  by  the 
^'  princes,  and  at  the  time  of  the  battle 
of  Carchemish  appeared  with  a  prophetic  pro- 
gram which  aroused  against  him  the  bitterest  lutte. 
At  the  beginning  of  the  king's  reign  an  address 
in  the  court  of  the  temple  foretelling  the  fate  of 
that  structure  incensed  priests,  prophets,  and 
people  (vii.,  xxvi.),  and  in  605  he  gave  definite  form 
to  this,  pointing  to  the  Chaldeans  as  the  people  into 
whose  power  Judah  was  to  fall,  and  had  Baruch 
commit  it  to  writing.  This  was  brought  to  the  king, 
who  tore  it  into  pieces  and  threw  it  into  the  fiie 
(xxxvi) .  The  events  of  succeeding  years  proved  the 
justification  of  Jeremiah,  though  they  caused  him, 
in  his  love  for  his  people,  the  deepest  suffering. 
Jehoiakim  had  become  the  vassal  of  the  Chaldean 
king,  but  soon  began  to  intrigue  against  him,  relying 
on  the  power  of  Egypt,  thus  causing  a  Chaldean 
attack  which  was  the  beginning  of  the  end,  and  his 
successor  Jeconiah,  with  the  best  of  the  people,  was 
carried  away  to  Babylon  (597  b.c).  The  new  king, 
Zedekiah,  was  not  so  hostile  to  Jeremiah,  and 
indeed  twice  saved  his  life,  in  spite  of  the  court 
party  which  wished  to  continue  the  policy  of 
Jehoiakim.  Jeremiah  was  opposed  also  by  false 
prophets,  who  predicted  speedy  restoration  of 
power,  and  reliance  on  ^E^gfpt  was  encouraged. 
After  this,  the  final  revolt  broke  out  in  the  breach 
of  Zedekiah's  oath  and  Nebuchadrezzar's  anny 
came  against  Jerusalem.  When  Zedekiah  applied 
for  counsel  to  Jeremiah,  the  latter  advised  uncon- 


Jer«mlah 


THE  NEW  SCHAFP-HERZOG 


IdO 


ditional  surrender  to  the  Chaldeans.  Temporary 
retirement  of  the  Chaldeans  filled  the  people  with 
joy,  which  Jeremiah  foretold  would  be  short-lived, 
as  events  proved  (zzziv.).  Meanwhile,  as  Jeremiah 
was  going  out  of  the  city  to  visit  Anathoth,  he  was 
arrested  and  thrown  into  prison,  but  removed  by 
the  king  to  another  place  of  detention  and  by  him 
supported  there  (xxxvii.).  His  opponents,  who 
rightly  feared  his  influence,  besought  the  king  to 
have  him  put  to  death,  and  to  that  end  had  him 
thrown  into  a  foul  cistern  to  die,  whence  he  was 
again  rescued  by  the  king's  order  and  placed  in 
detention  near  the  king  (zxxviii.).  At  the  capture 
of  the  city  Jeremiah  was  taken  prisoner,  but  was 
released  by  a  Babylonian  commander  and  given  his 
choice  between  going  to  Babylonia  and  remaining 
in  Judea,  accepting  the  latter  alternative.  He  gave 
his  support  to  Gedaliah,  the  governor  appointed  by 
the  Chaldeans.  Gedaliah  was  soon  after  murdered, 
and  the  leaders  of  the  people,  in  fear  of  the  con- 
sequences, and  following  the  advice  of  a  prophet 
who  opposed  Jeremiah,  fled  with  a  number  of  the 
population  to  Egypt,  taking  with  them  both  Jeremiah 
and  Baruch.  There  the  hostile  relations  between 
prophet  and  people  continued  because  of  his  denun- 
ciations of  their  heathen  proclivities  and  his  pre- 
diction that  £!gypt  should  fall  into  the  power  of 
Nebuchadresiar  (xxxix.-xliv.).  This  closes  the 
authentic  record  of  the  prophet's  life.  The  Old 
Testament  does  not  tell  of  his  death.  Tradition 
has  it  that  he  was  stoned  to  death  in  £!gypt  (Ter- 
tullian,  Searpiace,  viii.;  ANF,  iii.  640;  II  Mace.  ii. 
gives  a  report  of  his  hiding  certain  sacred  utensils 
in  a  cave,  on  which  is  foimded  the  Pcaralipomena 
of  Jeremiah  and  the  apocryphal  Baruch  literature 
with  its  sequelliB  (see  Apocrypha,  A,  IV.,  5;  Pseu- 
DBPiGRAPHA,  Old  Tbbtament,  II.,  10-11,  35;  and 
cf.  SchOrer,  GeachichU,  iii.  223  sqq.,  285-286,  Eng. 
transl.  II.,  iii.  83-93;  II  Mace.  xv.  11  sqq.;  Matt, 
xvi,  14). 

It  is  reported  in  II  Chron.  xxxv.  25  that  Jeremiah 
wrote  a  dirge  on  the  death  of  Josiah,  called  Lamenta- 
tions; this  is  probably  the  first  trace 
*•  ^**"*"  of  the  tradition  which  ascribes  to  him 

^?^~"  the  book  of  that  name,  which  is,  how- 
Jeremiah.  ®^®''*  opposed  by  the  contents  of  the 
book.  A  manuscript  of  the  Septuagint 
ascribes  Ps.  Ixv.  and  cxzxvii.  to  him,  and  there  is 
an  apocryphal  Epistle  of  Jeremiah  (see  Apocrypha, 
A.,  IV.,  6).  A  passage  in  the  Book  of  Jeremiah  is 
luminous  for  the  history  of  that  production  (xxxvi. 
2  sqq.).  According  to  this,  in  the  fourth  year  of 
Jehoiakim  Jeremiah  dictated  to  Baruch  the  proph- 
ecies which  he  had  uttered  in  the  twenty-three 
years  of  his  prophetic  activity.  This  being  burned 
by  the  king,  he  had  Baruch  rewrite  it  with  many 
additions  (rzzvi.  32).  This  new  book  is  not  iden- 
tical with  the  present  book,  since  the  latter  contains 
prophecies  of  a  later  time;  but  that  it  formed  the 
basis  of  our  book  may  be  confidently  assumed,  and 
it  may  be  reconstructed  by  putting  together  the 
pieces  which  are  older  than  Jehoiakim's  fifth  year. 

IL  The  Book  of  the  Prophet  JeremialL — x.  The 
Ctontenta:  Chap.  i.  states  that  the  prophet  is  in- 
formed in  the  thirteenth  year  of  Josiah  before  his 
birth  that  he  had  been  called  to  predict  the  com- 


ing of  powers  from  the  north  against  his  people, 
whose  hate  he  was  to  incur.  But  the  indication 
in  the  chapter  itself  of  the  lapse  of 
1.  Obapters  ij^g^^y  years  proves  that  the  narra- 
tive depends  upon  the  memory  of  the 
prophet  and  is  not  exactly  contemporary  with  the 
utterance  itself.  It  is  clear  that  Jeremiah  narrates 
the  story  of  his  earlier  experiences  in  the  light  his 
later  life  had  given  him,  and  sharp  distinction  be- 
tween later  and  earlier  utterances  is  not  possible. 
In  ii.-vi.  the  parts  are  closely  related  to  each  other 
and  belong  to  the  same  conditions  in  the  reign  of 
Josiah.  These  chapters  bewail  the  people's  sins, 
their  idolatry,  their  fondness  for  covenants  with 
foreign  powers,  and  foretell  coming  judgment. 
Yet  in  this  section  passages  suggest  the  time  of 
Jehoiakim  (v.  1,  ii.  18,  36).  Who  the  northern  foe 
in  these  chapters  is  raises  a  difficult  question.  They 
are  an  ancient  people,  whose  speech  is  unknown  to 
Israel,  carrying  bow  and  spear  and  possessing 
chariots.  Some  of  these  marks  appear  when  the 
prophet's  utterances  concern  the  Chaldeans  in  the 
time  of  Jehoiakim.  Some  scholars  refer  them  to  the 
Sc3rthians,  in  which  case  Jeremiah  must  later  have 
modified  them,  since  their  present  form  hardly  fits 
references  to  that  people.  It  is  questionable  there- 
fore whether  Jeremiah's  earlier  prophecies  were  not 
general;  when  the  Chaldeans  appeared  on  the  scene 
be  may  have  identified  them  with  the  foe  foretold. 
While  V.  18  and  the  related  v.  10  are  not  un- 
Jeremianic,  they  do  not  fit  their  present  place; 
similarly  iii.  6-iv.  2  is  hardly  intelligible  unless  iii. 
14-18  is  taken  out.  It  is  probable  that  these  pas- 
sages are  genuine,  but  transferred  hither  by  an  editor. 
Chapters  vii.-x.  contain  a  discourse  delivered  in 
the  court  of  the  temple,  upon  which  structure  the 
people  put  their  trust.  If  they  continue  in  their 
sins,  the  temple  will  be  no  help,  but  will  perish  as 
did  the  sanctuary  at  Shiloh.  Its  sacrifices  are 
worthless,  the  people  who  bring  them  are  untrue 
and  have  filled  it  with  heathen  symbols  which  repre- 
sent their  own  unethical  nature.  Chaps,  ix.  22-x. 
give  the  impression  of  fragmentariness,  and,  as  the 
Septuagint  shows,  have  been  expanded,  and  suggest 
a  deutero-Jeremiah.  The  little  pieces  ix.  22-23  and 
24-25  have  no  connection  with  the  previous  context, 
while  X.  17  sqq.  appear  to  be  genuine  and  the  orig- 
inal continuation  of  ix.  21.  Genuineness  is  apparent 
in  vii.  1-ix.  21,  but,  contrary  to  Hitzig,  H&vemick, 
and  others,  the  passage  appears  to  belong  rather 
with  xxvi.  and  to  connect  not  with  the  time  of 
Josiah,  but  with  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of 
Jehoiakim,  especially  in  the  matter  of  heathen 
practises. 

In  xi.  1-17  Jeremiah  warns  the  people  to  regard 
"  the  words  of  this  covenant."    In  spite  of  the  pun- 
ishment of  their  fathers,  the  present 
2.  Chapters  generation  continues  its  service  of  other 
xi.-xvli.    gods  and  renders  divine  punishment 
inmiinent.     That  the  "  covenant  "  is 
the  law  book  found  imder  Josiah  is  generally  recog- 
nized; the  passage  can  not,  however,  in  its  present 
form  have  been  uttered  then,  but  in  the  time  of 
Jehoiakim,  and  so  furnishes  a  good  example  of  the 
way  in  which  in  the  reduction  of  his  words  to 
writing  Jeremiah  mingled  past  and  present.    In  xi. 


idi 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jeremiah 


lS~xii.  6  the  prophet  deals  with  the  hostility  of 
his  fellow  villagers  of  Anathoth.  Formally,  by  the 
"then"  of  xi.  18,  it  is  connected  with  the  prece- 
ding; but  the  exact  relation  expressed  is  not  clear, 
and  this  suggests  that  the  passage  is  not  in  its  orig- 
inal context.  Uncertain  in  date  is  xii.  7-17.  It 
contains  a  lament  for  the  desolation  of  the  land 
and  threats  against  the  neighbors  who  have  done 
the  evil.  It  fits  in  well  with  the  destruction  sug- 
gested by  n  Kings  xxiv.  2,  but  still  better  with 
conditions  during  the  exile.  Indeed,  the  lament 
seems  to  have  been  put  together  out  of  two  diverse 
compositions  of  different  age.  The  hiuniliation  of 
Judah  in  Babylon  is  figuratively  described  in  xiii., 
with  a  lament  for  the  condition  resulting.  Most 
critics  date  the  piece  (by  verses  18-19)  in  the  time 
of  Jeconiah  (Jehoahaz),  Graf  in  that  of  Jehoiakim, 
the  latter  regarding  verses  18-19  as  an  addition  out 
of  Jeconiah's  age.  A  terrible  drought  is  the  occa- 
sion of  xiv.-xv.,  in  which  Jeremiah  prays  for  his 
people — ^unavailingly,  for  even  Moses  and  Samuel 
could  not  save  th^  (xv.  1).  At  the  close  (xv.  10- 
21)  Jeremiah  bewails  his  personal  sorrows  caused 
by  his  foes.  Whether  this  piece  is  in  its  original 
connection  is  uncertain,  but  it  may  be  placed  in 
the  original  book  and  dated  at  tlw  beginning  of 
the  reign  of  Jehoiakim.  In  xvi.-xvii.  the  prophet 
is  forbidden  to  marry,  or  to  participate  in  moumiog 
or  feasting;  the  destruction  of  the  people  is  near, 
since  its  sins  can  not  be  forgotten  and  its  punish- 
ment is  certain.  The  connection  of  this  with  the 
preceding  is  quite  certain,  though  probably  xvii. 
14-18  is  inserted  by  a  later  hand  from  another 
place.  The  genuineness  of  xvii.  19-27  is,  however, 
very  doubtful. 

In  xviii.  1-10  the  work  of  the  potter  pictures 
God's  methods  with  man;    judgment  might  be 

averted  were  it  not  for  the  people's 
8.  Ohapters  wilful  sin  (11-17);  the  prophet  bewails 
xvUL-xxlx.  his  people's  hostility  to  him  (18-23); 

as  an  earthen  vessel  is  broken,  so  shall 
the  people  be  (xix.  1-15);  the  prophet  retorts  upon 
Pashhur,  who  had  put  him  in  the  stocks,  with  a 
prophecy  of  personal  evil  and  general  doom  (xx. 
1-6),  and  then  bewails  his  own  sad  lot  (7-18). 
The  indications  favor  the  time  of  Zedekiah,  espe- 
cially the  mention  of  Pashhur  and  the  imprisonment 
of  Jeremiah  in  the  stocks.  Some  have  seen  in  chap, 
xvii.  an  earlier  piece,  and  regard  xix.-xx.  as  pieces 
edited  by  later  hands  and  containing  genuine  ex- 
periences of  the  prophet.  To  the  time  of  Zedekiah 
belongs  xxi.  1-10,  and  to  the  time  of  the  siege 
verses  4-5,  but  11-14  has  no  connection  with  the 
preceding,  and  perhaps  goes  with  xxii.  The  kings 
of  Judah  are  dealt  with  in  xxii.  1-xxiii.  8.  A  king, 
not  identified,  is  warned  to  do  justice  in  order  to 
escape  judgment  (xxii.  1-5);  in  succeeding  verses 
Shallum  (i.e.  Jehoahaz),  Jehoiakim,  and  Jeconiah 
are  dealt  with;  better  shepherds  are  to  be  given 
(xxiii.1-4),  and  a  new  shoot  is  to  spring  from  the 
Davidic  stump  (4-8).  The  principal  part  of  this  is 
of  the  time  of  Zedekiah,  but  xxii.  6-9,  20-23  are 
later  insertions.  The  genuineness  of  xxiii.  1-4 
has  been  questioned  and  is  hard  to  prove,  and  the 
passage  has  been  assigned  to  exilic  times.  A  speech 
against  false  prophets  is  found  in  xxiii.  9-40.     In 


xxiv.  the  exiles  are  compared  with  good  figs,  SSede- 
kiah  and  the  people  remaining  with  bad  ones. 
According  to  the  superscription  xxv.  belongs  to  the 
fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim,  the  year  of  the  battle  of 
Carchemish.  In  it  Jeremiah  foretells  the  desolation 
and  captivity  which  are  to  come  through  Nebu- 
chadrezzar, and  then  after  seventy  years  God  will 
again  rule  his  people.  The  genuineness  of  this 
chapter  has  been  sharply  attacked  (cf.  verses  12- 
14),  though  Giesebrecht  rightly  sees  a  Jeremianic 
basis.  The  cipher  in  verse  26  (cf.  R.V.  margin)  is 
not  in  Jeremiah's  style.  A  report  of  the  danger 
of  death  incurred  by  the  prophet  through  the  ad- 
dress in  the  temple  court,  given  in  chap,  vii.,  is  given 
in  chap.  xxvi.  It  does  not  belong  to  the  groimd- 
work  or  original  basis  of  the  book.  According  to 
xxvii.-xxix.,  ambassadors  had  come  to  Jerusalem 
from  the  neighboring  states  to  urge  common  action 
against  Babylon  (xxvii.).  A  prophet  Hananiah 
foretells  the  return  of  the  exiles  to  Babylon  within 
two  years;  Jeremiah  retorts  with  a  prediction  of 
Hananiah's  death  within  the  year  and  a  contradic- 
tion of  his  prophecy  of  a  speedy  return  (xxviii.).  A 
letter  from  Jeremiah  to  the  eidles  in  Babylon  is  in 
xxix.  These  chapters  appear  to  have  existed  at  one 
time  as  a  separate  and  independent  section. 

A  series  of  prophecies  of  comfort  are  continued  in 
xxx.-xxxiii.,  and  xxxii.  rests  on  a  personal  relation 

of  Jeremiah  regarding  the  purchase 

4.  Chapters  of  a  field,  which  is  made  the  basis  of  a 

ZZX.-111.    prediction  of  return  from  exile.    The 

chapter  bears  the  marks  of  an  editor, 
however,  and  verses  17-23  have  been  especially 
suspected,  while  xxxiii.  14-15  recall  xxiii.  5-6,  the 
genuineness  of  which  is  imder  a  cloud.  Even  if  the 
earlier  passage  is  genuine,  it  does  not  seem  likely 
that  Jeremiah  would  so  modify  the  representation 
as  the  later  passage  does.  Smend  denies  xxx.-xxxi. 
to  Jeremiah,  and  is  possibly  right  as  to  xxx.,  though 
xxxi.  seems  to  contain  more  of  Jeremiah's  work; 
possibly  those  two  chapters  are  exilic.  Chapter 
xxxiv.  belongs  to  the  narrative  part  of  the  book 
and  is  placed  in  the  time  of  the  siege  of  the  city. 
The  Rechabites  appear  in  xxxv.  as  an  example  of 
faithfulness  and  as  a  lesson  to  Judah.  The  time  is 
that  of  the  passing  of  a  C!haldean  army  through  the 
land  in  the  time  of  Jehoiakim,  but  the  occasion  can 
not  be  decided;  it  belongs  to  the  narrative  portion 
of  the  book,  and  Jeremiah  speaks  in  the  first  person. 
Chapter  xxxvi.  is  also  narrative,  and  tells  of  the 
committal  to  writing  of  the  predictions  of  the 
prophet.  Similar  narrative  portions  are  xxxvii.- 
xliv.;  xxxix.  is  an  insert  and  an  expansion  of  part 
of  lii.  Consolation  is  offered  in  xlv.  A  series  of 
prophecies  against  foreign  peoples  is  contained  in 
xlvi.-li.,  the  nations  mentioned  being  ijgypt,  Phi- 
listia,  Moab,  Ammon,  Edom,  Damascus,  Arabia, 
Elam,  and  Babylonia.  C!hapters  l.-li.,  according 
to  li.  59-64  imparted  to  Seraiah  in  the  fourth  year 
of  Zedekiah,  are  by  most  modem  critics  regarded 
as  un-Jeremianic.  These  chapters  depend  not  only 
on  secondary  parts  of  Jeremiah,  but  on  later  parts 
of  Isaiah.  Some  critics  separate  li.  59  sqq.  from  the 
rest  as  genuine;  others  regard  the  chapters  as 
expanded  statements  of  genuine  oracles  of  Jeremiah. 
In  general,  the  use  of  other  predictions  in  these 


Jeremiah 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


182 


chapters  and  the  departure  from  the  accustomed 
forms  of  Jeremiah's  usage  seem  to  warrant  suspicion. 
On  the  other  hand,  in  the  undoubted  portions  of 
the  book  there  are  prophecies  against  foreign  nations, 
and  in  this  portion  Nebuchadrezzar  is  represented 
as  the  medium  of  divine  punishment,  which  is  a 
Jeremianic  conception;  moreover,  the  time  noted 
in  xlix.  34  looks  genuine.  Chapter  lii.  is  not  by 
Jeremiah,  but  is  chiefly  an  excerpt  from  II  Kings 
xxiv,  18-xxv.  30. 

d.  The  Compoeition :  The  foregoing  review  shows 
that  to  the  groimdwork  written  in  the  fourth  year 
of  Jehoiakim  and  rewritten  the  next 
J^^*^*  year  belong  i.  2-6,  xi.  1-17,  vii.  1-9, 
Qpound-  21  xi.  18-xii.  6,  xiii.  (except  verses 
w^oric  and   .o  -rtx  .        ..  *^  /  . 

ita  Bx-  lS-19),  xiv,-xv.,  XV1.-XVU.  (except 
panalon.  some  interpolations),  xxv.  (so  far  as  it 
is  original),  and  xlvi.  1-xlix.  33  (so  far 
as  they  are  Jeremianic),  referring  to  the  times  of 
Josiah  and  Johoiakim.  To  the  time  of  Zedekiah 
belong  xxiv.,  xxi.,  xxiii.  9-40,  and  xlix.  34  sqq.  (if 
genuine).  Of  the  rest  which  may  be  ascribed  to  this 
prophet  the  time  of  writing  is  less  evident,  though 
xxxi.,  iii.  14-16,  and  perhaps  the  genuine  parts  of 
xxiii.  1-8,  seem  to  belong  to  the  time  of  the  capture 
of  Jerusalem.  Larger  parts  which  can  not  be  cer- 
tainly ascribed  as  a  whole  to  Jeremiah  are  x.  1-16, 
xvii.  19-27,  l.-lii.  The  narrative  portions  present 
a  difficult  problem,  and  the  boundaries  between 
them  and  the  oracle  portions  are  not  always  easy 
to  fix.  Some  of  these  are  in  the  first  person,  and 
were  doubtless  dictated  to  Baruch.  Sucdi  pieces  are 
xviii.  (probably  from  the  beginning  of  Jehoiakim's 
reign),  xxxii.  (under  Zedekiah),  and  xxxv.  (under 
Jehoiakim).  Other  pieces  speak  in  the  third  person 
of  **  Jeremiah  "  or  '*  the  prophet  Jeremiah,"  and 
can  be  only  secondarily  Jeremianic;  such  are  xix.- 
XX.,  xxvi.,  xxvii.-xxix.,  xxxiv.,  xxxvi.,  xxxvii.-xliv. 
These  rest  on  Baruch's  authority,  as  does  xlv.,  an 
oracle  of  consolation  imparted  to  him  by  the  prophet. 
So  that  in  the  Book  of  Jeremiah  there  are  earlier 
and  later  pieces,  passages  in  Jeremiah's  words  and 
those  reported  of  him,  and  some  not  at  aU  Jeremianic, 
boimd  up  together  in  variegated  fashion.  Chrono- 
logical order  can  not  always  be  determined.  The 
history  of  the  book  is  not  one  that  can  at  the  present 
be  made  out.  Certainly  the  composition  of  the 
fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim  lies  at  the  basis,  and  this 
is  expanded  by  later  oracles  and  by  narrative  por- 
tions. The  latter  is  in  part  no  doubt  from  Baruch 
and  contains  reports  of  Jeremiah's  discourses  de- 
livered to  him  by  the  prophet.  The  supposition 
that  a  life  of  the  prophet  has  been  interwoven  into 
the  book  is  improbable,  since  the  earlier  life  of  the 
prophet  is  not  related.  More  likely  is  it  that  a 
literature  of  Jeremiah  including  his  later  speeches 
and  narratives  about  him  grew  up,  out  of  which 
our  book  is  edited.  Little  dependence  can  be 
placed  in  i.  3,  since  that  verse  is  probably  only  a 
secondary  title. 

To  the  foregoing  considerations  is  to  be  added  the 
fact  that  the  Book  of  Jeremiah  belongs  to  those 
portions  of  the  Old  Testament  in  which  the  Sep- 
tuagint  diverges  essentially  from  the  Massoretio 
text,  a  divergence  which  is  very  variously  ex- 
plained.   Some  esteem  the  Septuagint  so  highly 


that  they  speak  of  two  recensions,  a  Palestinian 
and  an  EJgyptian;  while  others  speak  of  arbitrary 
changes  by  the  translator.  Both  of 
^J«  ^e  these  hypotheses  have  been  shown 
thHb**^  unfounded  (Kuenen,  Giesebrecht,  and 
Sxt'*^  others).  While  evidences  of  misun- 
derstanding by  the  Greek  translator 
and  indeed  of  wilful  change  exist,  there  are  passages 
where  the  text  at  the  base  of  the  Septuagint  points 
to  a  text  more  original  than  the  Massoretic.  One 
such  passage  is  that  relating  to  the  foreign  nations, 
in  which  in  the  Greek  xlvi.-li.  follow  xxv.  13,  and 
the  order  of  arrangement  is  different.  The  original 
connection  of  these  parts  is  evident,  though  the 
entire  section  should  not  stand  before  xxvi.  15,  and 
the  Alexandrine  order  is  less  natural  than  the 
Massoretic.  The  difference  in  the  length  of  the  two 
texts,  altogether  apart  from  proofs  of  arbitrariness 
on  the  part  of  the  translator,  show  that  at  the  time 
of  the  translation  the  book  had  not  yet  reached  a 
fixed  form,  a  conclusion  which  is  strengthened  by 
observation  of  the  evidence  of  inclusion  of  glosses. 

8.  The  Importance  of  the  Book:  This  can  not  be 
appreciated  if  only  the  contents  of  the  predictions 
are  kept  in  mind.  In  this  particular  Jeremiah  is 
not  specially  original,  and  particularly  so  if  the 
purely  Messianic  passages,  such  as  xxiii.  5-6,  xxxiii. 
15-16,  are  the  basis  of  estimate,  since  these  are 
lusterless  in  comparison  with  such  passages  as 
Isa.  ix.  5-6,  xi.  1-2.  One  might  say  in  general  that 
Jeremiah  took  over  the  prophecies  of  Amos  and 
Hosea,  being  in  his  earlier  deliverances  especially 
dependent  upon  Hosea.  For  twenty  years  the 
prophet  preached  the  insecurity  of  the  basis  of  the 
people's  hopes  and  trust.  Even  by  the  captivity 
of  597  the  people  were  not  awakened,  but  supposed 
that  the  deportation  of  Jeconiah  was  the  excision 
of  a  worthless  limb.  For  Jeremiah  it  was  the  fulfil- 
ment of  prophecy  which  demanded  submission  and 
humility  instead  of  new  pride  and  the  waking  of 
hopes  to  be  unrealized.  The  complete  destruction 
of  Jerusalem  awaited  persistence  in  the  people's 
wilful  course.  Yet  the  prophet  was  not  without 
hope  in  its  truest  sense.  A  new  generation  was  to 
arise  which  was  to  bear  Yahweh's  law  on  the  inner 
tablets  of  the  heart,  not  on  tablets  of  stone.  In  all 
this  there  was  little  that  was  not  already  existent 
in  prophecy.  Jeremiah's  originality  stands  out  in 
the  vivid  impression  of  his  work  as  that  of  a  prophet 
who  was  accoimted  a  traitor  to  his  people  and  a 
godless  despiser  of  the  sanctuary  while  he  was  yet 
the  mouthpiece  for  the  utterance  of  divine  truths. 
It  was  this  which  made  of  him  the  greatest  martyr 
among  the  prophets,  and  the  evidence  of  it  exists 
in  his  prayers  written  in  his  book,  which  give  the 
clearest  insight  into  the  motive  of  his  life.  He 
bewails  the  hate  with  which  the  people  pursued  him 
who  was  that  people's  truest  mediator  with  God, 
and  reveals  himseljf  not  merely  as  a  prophet,  but 
as  a  man  living  in  the  closest  fellowship  with  God. 
In  this  respect  he  is  creative  and  a  pattern  of 
religious  sincerity,  and  thus  he  inspired  the  poets 
of  the  Psakn-book  and  the  great  poet  of  the  Book 
of  Job.  The  sense  of  the  personal  relation  of  the 
individual  to  God  which  appeared  in  later  Judaism 
is  a  result  of  his  work.    In  view  of  the  importance  of 


1/ 


188 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


JerttmlAh 


this  servioe,  the  question  of  external  form  becomes 
a  minor  one.  The  disturbed  conditions  of  his  times 
did  not  minister  to  esthetic  expression.  The  beauty 
of  the  book  lies  not  in  its  poetic  form,  but  in  its 
deep  and  noble  expression  of  the  life  of  tenderness 
^'hich  it  portrays.  (F.  Buhl.) 

in.  The  Lamentations  of  Jeremiah:  This  is  the 

name  given  by  tradition  to  five  elegies  bearing  a 

close  resemblance  to  one  another  and 

1.  Hamea,  bewailing   the   sad   lot   which   befell 

Plaoeln  Jerusalem  and  its  inhabitants  during 
the  Canon,  and  after  the  siege  by  the  Chaldeans 
(587-586  B.C.).  In  Hebrew  manu- 
scripts and  editions  these  elegies  usually  bear  the 
title  ekhah,  "  how/'  from  the  opening  word  of  three 
of  them;  the  Jews  were,  however,  familiar  with  the 
designation  kinoth,  "  lamentations  "  (Jerome,  Pref- 
ace to  Lamentations,  cf.  Baba  Baihra,  I4b;  LXX, 
Threnoi;  Lat.  Threm  or  LamerUationes).  In  the 
Greek  version,  which  differs  in  character  from  that 
of  the  prophecies  of  Jeremiah,  they  are  placed  next 
to  the  prophecies  (after  Baruch),  and  are  counted 
with  the  prophecies  as  one  book.  Only  in  this  way 
could  twenty-two  canonical  books  be  counted 
(Josephus,  Apion,  i.  8;  Origen  in  Eusebius,  Hist, 
ecd.,  vi.  25;  Jerome  in  Proiogus  galeaiua).  Still  the 
number  twenty-four  was  common,  in  which  com- 
putation Ruth  and  Lamentations  were  coimted 
separately  and  placed  among  the  Hagiographa. 
This  arrangement  differs  from  that  followed  by  the 
Christians,  which  was  the  same  as  that  of  the  Sep- 
tuagint,  but  is  in  accord  with  that  of  the  Talmud 
(Bcia  Bathra  14b),  which  places  Lamentations 
among  the  Kethubimj  where  they  probably  stood 
from  the  time  of  the  formation  of  the  third  division 
of  the  canon. 

In  form  the  first  four  of  these  five  elegies  are 
characterized  by  an  acrostic  use  of  the  alphabet. 
They  are  also  composed  in  the  rhythm 
3.  The  Ar-  which  Budde  has  shown  to  be  that  of 
tlstio  the  lament  or  threnody.  In  chaps. 
Form,  i.-ii.  a  group  of  three  lines  in  this 
meter  (composed  of  a  normal  and  a 
shortened  member)  is  placed  under  each  of  the 
acrostic  letters;  the  same  is  true  in  chap,  iii.,  except 
that  each  of  the  three  lines  (in  this  case  a  verse) 
begins  with  the  same  letter,  which,  therefore,  ap- 
pears three  times.  In  chap,  iv.,  on  the  other  hand, 
each  acrostic  letter  includes  two  lines.  No  acrostic 
is  found  in  chap,  v.,  although  the  elegy  consists 
of  twenty-two  verses  presenting  the  usual  parallel- 
ism, though  the  peculiar  meter  of  the  dirge  is  not 
very  manifest.  The  five  elegies  refer  to  the  same 
national  misfortune  and  have  many  similarities  in 
thought  and  form;  yet  each  has  its  own  peculiar 
quality.  So  chap.  i.  shows  the  sorrowing  Zion, 
deserted  and  abandoned;  chap.  ii.  describes  the 
act  of  the  angry  God,  the  just  enemy,  who  has 
destroyed  the  city;  chap.  iii.  presents  a  more  in- 
dividxial  point  of  view;  chap.  iv.  describes  the  sad 
fate  of  the  populace  of  the  city  during  and  after 
the  siege;  chap.  v.  sketches  briefly  the  resulting 
miserable  state  of  the  people.  That  the  five  songs 
were  all  produced  imder  one  inspiration  is  psycho- 
logically improbable;  but  in  any  event  they  did 
not  arise  without  regard  to  one  another.   Style  and 


language  show  many  points  of  resemblance,  and  the 
historical  situation  is  essentially  the  same  in  aU. 
They  can  not  have  appeared  during  the  siege  itself; 
the  misfortime  ia  already  complete,  intense  agony  is 
already  changing  into  a  softer  sadness,  and  feeling 
finds  relief  in  seeking  for  a  form  of  artistic  expression. 

Ancient  tradition  unanimously  names  Jeremiah 
as  the  author.  The  Preface  to  the  Septuagint  de- 
clares that  "  after  the  captivity  of 
ti^'  '5^"  Israel,  and  the  desolation  of  Jerusa- 
of^u^  1^  ^^*  Jeremiah  sat  down  weeping  and 
i^m  ~  sang  this  lamentation  over  Jerusalem 
and  said."  This  same  tradition  ap- 
pears in  the  Taknud  and  is  accepted  by  the  ChiU'ch 
Fathers.  Jerome  is  indeed  mistaken  when  (on 
Zech.  xii.  II)  he  refers  to  Lamentations  the  state- 
ment in  II  Chron.  xxxv.  25,  where  mention  is  made 
of  elegies  composed  by  Jeremiah  on  the  death  of 
Josiah.  Perhaps  he  was  misled  by  Lam.  iv.  20. 
Josephus  had  already  fallen  into  the  same  error. 
The  Chronicler's  notice  shows  that  the  prophet  was 
accustomed  to  compose  such  elegies,  and  was 
naturally  qualified  to  compose  a  kina  on  a  grand 
scale,  treating  of  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  just  as 
Ezekiel  composed  a  series  of  such  "  threnodies  " 
over  other  cities  and  peoples.  Many  passages  in 
the  Lamentations  are  in  agreement  with  the  thought 
and  diction  of  the  prophet;  indeed,  a  prophetic 
note  runs  through  these  poems.  The  older  author- 
ities, almost  without  exception,  hold  the  traditional 
view;  only  in  modem  times  has  the  Jeremianic 
authorship  been  contested,  and  on  grounds  of  im- 
portance. Thenius  attributed  only  chaps,  ii.  and 
iv.  to  Jeremiah,  Meier  chaps,  i.-iii.;  others,  for  in- 
stance, Ewakl,  Noldeke,  Schrader,  Nfigelsbach, 
L6hr,  Budde,  entirely  abandon  Jeremianic  author- 
ship. 

The  arguments  against  Jeremiah's  authorship  are 

partly  formal  and  founded  on  esthetic  grounds  and 

partly  refer  to  the  contents  of  the 

4.  Arm-  poems  and  their  theological  quality, 
ments  Con-  Nftgelsbach  (Conmientary,  p.  xi.  sqq.) 
J^^^o  ^^  L6hr  (ZATW,  1894)  have  noted 

Origin.  statisticaUy  the  agreements  and  differ- 
ences in  the  vocabulary  of  Lamenta- 
tions and  of  the  prophecies  of  Jeremiah,  and  the 
probability  appears  to  favor  difference  of  authorship 
or  a  reediting  of  Jeremianic  elegies.  This  prob- 
ability is  strengthened  by  linguistic  similarities 
with  the  writings  of  Ezekiel.  It  was  believed  that 
an  important  distinction  had  been  discovered  be- 
tween the  writings  of  the  prophet  and  these  songs, 
in  that  these  lacked  the  strong  emphasis  upon  the 
sins  of  the  people  which  would  be  expected  from 
the  prophet.  Thus  v.  7  is  cited,  according  to  which 
the  unhappy  generation  suffered  not  so  much  for 
its  own  sins  as  for  those  of  its  forefathers  (contrast 
Jer.  xxxi.  29).  That,  in  addition  to  inherited 
suffering,  the  measure  has  been  filled  up  by  the 
people's  own  faults  and  that  thus  a  judgment  has 
been  called  down  upon  them  is  a  thought  which 
runs  through  Lamentations  also  and  finds  partic- 
ular expression  in  v.  16,  21.  Budde  finds  that  the 
consciousness  of  the  guilt  of  the  people  is  little 
developed  in  chaps,  iv.  and  ii.  (but  cf.  iv.  6).  If 
Jeremiah  was  the  author  he  does  not  here  appear 


Jersmiah 
Jeroboam 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


ld4 


as  God's  advocate  to  bring  an  accusation  against 
his  people,  but  he  gives  free  expression  to  natural 
sympathy,  which  he  had  suppressed  until  at  last 
judgment  was  fully  executed.  Jeremiah  loved  his 
people  and  his  rulers  more  than  did  the  patriots, 
although  a  higher  power  had  set  him  in  opposition 
to  them  (Jer.  i.  18).  In  this  way  iv.  20  must  be 
explained,  where  the  manner  in  which  the  long  is 
spoken  of  might  be  thought  strange  as  coming  from 
Jeremiah,  while  iv.  17  offers  no  difficulties  since  he 
may  well  have  voiced  the  timid  hopes  of  the  people 
in  the  last  period  of  their  trials,  although  these  hopes 
were  not  shared  by  him.  On  the  other  hand,  an 
unsolved  difficulty  for  all  who  reject  Jeremiah's 
authorship  is  offered  by  the  imconditional  condem- 
nation of  the  prophets  of  Jerusalem  (ii.  9, 14,  iv.  13). 
Jeremiah  might  indeed  have  expr^sed  lumself  in 
this  way  (cf.  Jer.  xiii.  13,  xiv.  13  sqq.,  xxiii.  15); 
but  if  another  had  composed  a  lament  over  these 
events  he  could  scarcely  have  forgotten  the  prophet 
who  had  won  the  highrat  reverence  from  the  whole 
people  through  his  sufferings.  It  was  the  general 
opinion  that  only  Jeremiah's  personal  sufferings 
were  described  in  chap,  iii.,  and  this  seems  most 
probable  according  to  verse  8  (cf.  Jer.  vii.  16,  xi.  14, 
xiv.  11).  Verses  37-38  would  then  refer  to  those 
prophecies  of  misfortune  with  which  he  was  re- 
proached. Smend  (ZATW,  1888,  pp.  62-63)  and 
many  others  suppose  that  in  chap.  iii.  the  poet 
speaks  in  the  name  of  the  conununity;  in  that  case 
the  very  beginning, ''  I  am  the  man,"  is  exceedingly 
harsh  and  without  analogy  in  this  manner.  The 
family  of  Shaphan  (Gedaliah)  has  been  especially 
considered  in  this  connection  (LOhr,  ZATW,  1894, 
p.  55).  As  there  is  no  mention  of  the  rebuilding  of 
Jerusalem  and  of  the  temple,  and  as  dependence 
upon  the  second  Isaiah  can  not  be  proved  by  a  few 
lexical  similarities,  the  exilic  origin  of  Lamentations 
seems  most  reasonable.  Whether  these  songs 
originated  in  Palestine,  in  Egypt,  or  in  Babylonia 
is  indeterminable,  but  it  seems  most  probable  that 
Jeremiah  had  a  share  in  their  production.  This 
does  not  mean  that  they  came  from  his  hand  in 
their  present  poetical  form;  the  artificiality  of  form 
suggests  the  work  of  a  school  or  of  a  group  of  dis- 
ciples who,  collecting  and  completing  such  thren- 
odies, wove  them  together  into  the  form  in  which 
they  now  appear.  C.  von  Orblu. 

Biblioorapht:  On  the  life  and  times  of  Jeremiah  oonmilt: 
T.  K.  Chesme,  Jtremiah,  hU  Life  and  Ti$iu9,  London, 
1888;  C.  H.  Comill,  Jeremia  und  uins  Zmi,  Heidelberg. 
1880;  K.  Marti,  Dtr  Frophei  Jertmia,  Basel.  1889;  M. 
Lasanis,  Der  Prophet  Jeremia,  Braslau,  18M;  W.  Erbt, 
Jermnia  und  teine  Zeit,  G^ttinsen,  1002;  F.  B.  Meyer, 
•  Jeremiah,  Prieet  and  Prophet,  London,  1902;  J.  R.  Gil- 
lies, Jeremiah;  the  Man  and  hie  Meeeage,  ib.  1907;  J.  F. 
MoCurdy,  Hietory,  Prophecy,  and  the  Monumente,  vol.  iii.. 
New  York,  1001. 

Questions  of  eritieism  oonceming  the  propheeies  of 
Jeremiah  are  discussed  in:  G.  C.  Workman,  The  Text  c/ 
Jeremiah,  or  a  Critical  Examination  eS  <A«  Qretk  and  the 
Hebrew  with  the  VariaHone  in  the  LXX,  Edinburgh,  1889; 
E.  Kohl,  Da*  VerhAltniee  der  Maeeora  eur  Septuaoint  im 
Jeremia,  Halle,  1882;  E.  Bruston,  De  Vimportanee  du 
livre  de  Jtrhnie  dane  la  critique  de  V  A.  T„  Montauban, 
1898;  A.  von  Bulmerinoq,  Dae  ZukunftabUd  dee  Prophcten 
Jeremia,  Riga,  1894;  C.  H.  Comill.  in  8BOT,  1895;  Idem. 
Die  metrieehen  StfUke  dee  Budtee  Jeremia,  Leipno,  1902; 
A.  W.  Streane,  The  Double  Text  qf  Jeremiah,  London, 
1896. 
Coomientaii0s  which  cover  both  the  propheeies  and 


lamentations  ai«  by:  B.  Bla3mey,  London.  1836;  E. 
Henderson,  Andover,  1868:  H.  Cowles,  New  York,  1860; 
C.  W.  E.  Nftgelsbach,  in  Lange's  Commentary,  New  York. 
1871;  R.  P.  Smith,  in  Bible  Commentary,  London,  1876; 
A.  W.  Streane,  in  Cambridoe  Bible,  Cambridge,  1881; 
T.  K  Gheyne  and  others  in  the  Pulpit  Commentary,  2 
vok.,  London,  1886-98. 

COTunentaries  on  the  Propheeies  are:  8.  R.  Driver. 
London,  1896;  W.  Lowth,  London,  1718;  J.  G.  Dahler, 
2  vols.,  Strasbuig,  1826;  W.  Neumann.  2  vok..  Leipsic 
186e-«8;  C.  H.  Graf,  ib.  1862;  F.  Hitsig,  ib.  1866;  H. 
Ewald,  G6ttingen,  1868,  Eng.  transl..  Ix>ndon,  1876; 
C.  F.  Keil,  2  vols.,  Edinburgh,  1873-74;  S.  Schols,  Wdrs- 
buig,  1880;  L.  A.  Schneedorfer,  Prague,  1881;  C.  von 
OreUi,  2d  ed.,  Munich,  1906.  Eng.  transl.,  Edinburgh,  1880; 
C.  F.  Ball,  in  Bxpoeitor'e  Bible,  London,  1890;  F.  Giese- 
brecht,  Gdttingen,  1894;  W.  H.  Bennett,  London,  1895;  B. 
Duhm.  Tdbingen.  1901;  G.  Douglas.  London,  1003;  A. 
Ramsay,  ib.  1906;  A.  Maclaren,  ib.  1906. 

Commentaries  on  Lamentations  are:  W.  Engelhardt, 
Leipsic  1867;  E.  Gerlach,  BerUn,  1868;  C.  F.  KeU.  Leip- 
sic, 1872;  L.  A.  Schneedorfer.  Prague.  1876;  J.  M.  Schon- 
felder.  Munich,  1887;  8.  Oettli.  Ndrdtingen,  1889;  M. 
L6hr,  G6ttingen.  1891,  1907;  P.  Mayriel  Monteuban. 
1894;  C.  Budde,  Freiburg,  1898;  J.  P.  Wiles.  Haif-Houra 
with  the  Minor  Prophete  and  Lamentatione  (London,  1900). 
Consult  also:  DB,  u.  669-678;  EB,  u.  236^-96;  JE,  vu. 
06-107;  and  the  works  on  O.-T.  Theology,  on  Introduction 
to  the  O.  T.,  on  Prophecy  in  general,  and  on  Messianic 
Prophecy. 

JERBMIAS  n.y  jer^'e-mcd'os:  Patriarch  of  Con- 
stantinople; b.  at  Anchialoe  (now  Ahiolo,  130  m. 
n.w.  of  Constantinople)  about  1530;  d.  at  Constan- 
tinople 1595.  He  received  no  systematic  education 
in  his  youth.  After  officiating  as  metropolitan  of 
Larissa,  he  was  patriarch  of  Constantinople  from 
1572  to  1573  or  1579,  from  1580  to  1584,  and  again 
from  1586  to  1595.  In  his  efforts  to  reoiganize  the 
Greek  Church  he  reenforced  the  existing  laws  and 
ordinances,  and  reached  the  dimaz  of  his  endeavors 
in  the  synod  held  at  Constantinople  in  1593,  which 
assailed  simony,  demanded  a  better  education  of  the 
deigy,  who  were  also  required  to  preach  frequently, 
took  up  the  question  of  conunon  schools,  and  re- 
instituted  the  "  national  synod."  In  his  foreign 
relations  Jeremias  is  noteworthy  as  the  foimder  of 
the  patriarchate  of  Russia,  during  a  visit  to  that 
country  in  1588-89,  while  he  vigorously  maintained 
the  independence  of  the  Greek  Church  against  the 
Jesuits  sent  by  Gregory  XIII.  to  the  Ekist  to  win 
it  over  to  the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  In  the  same 
spirit  he  refused  to  accept  the  Gregorian  calendar, 
which  was  regarded  by  the  Greeks  as  heretical. 

Jeremias  is  particularly  interesting  on  account  of 
his  correspondence  with  the  Lutherans  of  Ttlbingen, 
the  letters  being  contained  in  the  Ada  et  8cripta 
theologorum  Wirtembergensium  et  Patriarchae  Corir 
ttantinopolitani  D,  Hieremiae  (Wittenberg,  1584). 
Although  the  replies  of  the  patriarch  were  not  ac- 
tually written  by  him,  but  by  his  pronotaiy,  Theo- 
dosios  Zygomalas,  and  are  merely  compilations  from 
such  Church  Fathers  as  Basil  and  Chrysostom,  and 
modem  authors  like  Joseph  Bryennios,  Nikolaos 
Kabasilas,  and  Symeon  of  Thessalonica,  they  are 
important  for  an  evaluation  of  the  modem  Greek 
Church,  since  they  manifest  genuine  Greek  ortho- 
dozy  and  contain  its  first  official  verdict  on  Luther- 
anism,  which  they  definitely  rejected. 

The  history  of  the  affair  was  as  follows?  In  1573 
Stephen  Gerlach  went  to  Constantinople  as  preacher 
to  the  German  ambassador  with  letters  of  recom- 
mendation to  the  patriarch  from  Jakob  Andre& 


125 


REUGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jeremiah 
Jeroboam 


(q.v.),  ohanoellor  of  the  univeraity  at  TQbixigen,  and 
Martin  CrusiuSi  the  celebrated  Hellenist  and  his- 
torian.  The  letters  were  well  received;  and  the 
Tubingen  professors  were  not  slow  to  avail  them- 
selves of  the  opportimity  of  establishing  communica- 
tion between  the  Greek  Church  and  the  Lutherans, 
especially  as  Gerlach  had  become  a  personal  friend 
of  Zygomalas.  They  accordingly  sent  a  second 
letter,  dated  Sept.  15,  1574,  together  with  a  Greek 
translation  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  and  a  third 
letter,  dated  Mar.  20, 1575,  with  a  Greek  translation 
of  two  sermons  by  Andre&  and  a  request  for  an 
opinion  concerning  the  Lutheran  creed.  The  pa- 
triarch's answer,  dated  Bfay  15,  1576,  consisted  of 
an  elaborate  treatise,  in  which  he  praised  the 
articles  on  the  church,  the  ecclesiastical  office,  the 
marriage  of  priests,  and  eschatology,  but  cen- 
sured the  introduction  of  "  filiogue  "  in  the  creed, 
and  the  depreciation  of  good  works.  He  also  in- 
sisted on  seven  virtues,  vices,  and  sacraments,  trine 
inmiersion,  monastic  vows,  and  the  invocation  of  the 
saints  at  the  consecration  of  the  elements.  The 
treatise,  however,  induced  the  Ttlbingen  theologians 
to  give  a  systematic  defense  of  the  principles  on 
which  their  confession  rested,  and  a  new  letter  was 
sent,  dated  June  18,  1577,  but  it  took  two  years 
before  the  patriarch's  answer  arrived  (BCay,  1579), 
and  it  read  more  like  a  rebuke  than  an  answer. 
Nevertheless,  the  Lutherans  determined  to  try  once 
more,  and  in  the  spring  of  1580  sent  a  defense  to 
Constantinople,  but  the  patriarch's  answer  of 
June  0, 1581,  was  curt  and  final,  and  the  Protestants 
were  obliged  to  close  the  correspondence. 

(Phiupp  Meteb.) 

BzBuooRArHY:  P.  Mayer*  Die  Aeologiadte  LiUeratur  der 
ffrie^UAen  Kirdt*  im  16.  Jahrhundert,  Leipsie,  1690; 
Hefele.  in  TQS,  1843,  p.  544;  P.  Kenmeiu.  in  Bytanti- 
niaiAe  ZeiiBdiri/t,  1809,  pp.  302  sqq. 

JBREMIAS,  y^^re-mi'Os,  ALFRED:  German  Lu- 
theran; b.  at  Bfarkersdorf  (a  village  near  Chemnitz), 
Saxony,  Feb.  21,  1864.  He  was  educated  at  the 
University  of  Leipsic  (Ph.D.,  1886);  was  a  teacher 
at  a  high  school  for  girls  in  Dresden  from  1887  to 
1890,  and  deacon  at  the  Lutherkircbe,  Leipsic,  from 
1890  to  1901.  Since  1901  he  has  been  pastor  of  the 
Lutherkirche,  and  since  1905  privat-docent  for  the 
history  of  religion  and  Old  Testament  in  the  Uni- 
versity of  Leipsic.  In  theology  he  is  a  believer  in 
revealed  religion.  He  has  written  Die  HdUenfahrt 
der  IstoTf  eine  aUbabyloniache  Beschwdrungslegende 
(Munich,  1886);  Babylamech-assyrische  VorieUungen 
vom  Leben  naeh  dem  Tode  unter  BerUcknchtigung  der 
aUtestamentlichen  ParaUelen  (Leipsic,  1886);  Izdvbar 
Nitnrod,  eine  aUbabylonische  Hddensage  nach  den 
KeiUchriftfragmenten  dargesteUU  (1891);  Im  Kampfe 
urn  Babel  und  Bibd  (1903);  MonotheiHiache  Strdm- 
ungen  innerhaJb  der  habyloniechen  ReHgum  (1904); 
Dae  AUeTeetamenlimLichtedesaUenOriente  (1904); 
BabyUmiechee  im  Neuen  Teetameni  (1905) ;  and  Die 
Pofiabykmiaten,  Der  alte  Orient  und  die  dgupHeehe 
Rdiffian  (1907). 

JERICHO.    See  Jttdba,  II.,  2,  i  1. 

JEROBOAM,  jer^'o-bO^om:  The  name  of  two 
kings  of  Israel. 

1.  Jeroboam  L:    First  king  of  Israel,  son  of 


Nebat  and  Zeruah,  an  Ephraimite  of  Zereda  (Zare- 
tan  and  Zartanah;  Gk.  Sareira  or  Sarida)  north  of 
Jericho  and  not  far  from  Beth  Shean  (Josh.  iii.  16; 

I  Kings  iv.  12).  His  dates,  according  to  the  old 
chronology,  are  975-958  B.C.;  according  to  Riehm, 
938-917  B.C.;  according  to  Cooke  (DB,  ii.  582)  937- 
915  B.C.  According  to  the  narrative  in  I  Kings  xi. 
26  sqq.,  he  was  a  servant  of  Solomon  who,  on  ac- 
count of  his  industry,  was  raised  to  a  place  of 
command  in  the  region  which  he  afterwand  ruled. 
On  one  occasion,  when  leaving  Jerusalem,  he  was 
met  by  the  prophet  Ahijah  from  Shiloh,  who  rent 
his  own  (not  Jeroboam's,  as  Ewald  has  it)  mantle 
into  twelve  pieces  and  gave  ten  of  them  to  Jeroboam 
as  a  sign  that  he  was  to  rule  over  ten  tribes,  while 
one  tribe  was  to  remain  imder  the  Davidic  dynasty. 
The  Deuteronomic  editor  gives  as  the  reason  for 
this  division  of  the  kingdom  the  idolatry  of  Solomon; 
but  there  were  probably  also  political  and  religious 
motives,  among  the  former  the  old  jealousy  of  the 
northern  tribes  and  among  the  latter  a  prophetic 
interest  (Ahijah  was  a  Shilonite).  Solomon  heard 
of  the  incident  and  Jeroboam  was  forced  to  flee  to 
Egypt,  where  he  remained  under  Shishak  till 
Solomon's  death. 

In  I  Kings  xii.  3  (probably  a  later  report)  Jero- 
boam appears  as  spokesman  for  Israel  at  the  gather- 
ing at  Shechem  to  make  Rehoboam  king;  but  verse 
20  makes  it  appear  that  Jeroboam  was  made  king 
inmiediately  on  his  return  from  £!gypt.  Reho- 
boam's  intention  to  subject  the  revolted  tribes  by 
force  of  arms  was  overruled  by  the  prophet  She- 
maiah  on  the  ground  that  the  division  was  of  divine 
provision.  Probabilities  are  against  the  representa- 
tion of  a  long  war  between  Jeroboam  and  Reho- 
boam (I  Kings  xiv.  30,  xv.  6;  II  Chron.  xiii.  2  sqq.); 
but  it  is  not  unlikely  that  an  alliance  was  formed 
between  Abijam  and  Damascus,  renewing  that 
which  had  been  broken  under  Solomon  (I  Kings 
xi.  24). 

Important  measures  of  Jeroboam  were  the  for- 
tification of  Shechem  and  the  selection  of  it  as  his 
capital,  and  the  fortification  of  Penuel  to  secure 
his  eastern  possessions.  Tirzah,  often  a  residence  of 
the  kings  of  Israel  until  the  time  of  Omri,  was  also 
a  place  of  note  in  his  time  (I  Kings  xiv.  17).  Of 
supreme  importance  was  Jeroboam's  measure  in 
sanctioning  the  cult  of  Bethel  and  of  Dan  to  remove 
the  necessity  of  going  to  Jerusalem  to  worship. 
This  was  probably  only  the  legitimating  of  existing 
worship,  and  was  not  intended  to  be  a  rejection  of 
the  Yaihweh  cult  (see  Calf,  The  GoLnEN,  anb  Calf 
Worship).  The  later  (Judaic)  reports  make  Jero- 
boam create  priests  of  the  lower  classes  of  the 
populace,  the  Levites  being  deposed.  The  festival 
established  by  Jeroboam  is  regarded  by  the  narrator 
as  intended  to  replace  the  Feast  of  Tabemades 
(I  Kings  xii.  32).  Of  the  narratives  in  I  Kings 
xiii.-xiv.  that  in  chap.  xiii.  is  a  midrash  upon 

II  Kings  xxiii.  17  sqq.;  that  in  chap.  xiv.  has  made 
use  of  an  earlier  source,  and  is  in  Deuteronomistic 
spirit. 

2.  Jeroboam  IL:  Thirteenth  king  of  Israel,  son 
and  successor  of  Joash.  His  dates  according  to  the 
old  chronology  are  825-784  b.c.  ;  according  to  Curtis 
(DB,  I  401)  782-741  B.C.,  according  to  Cooke  (DB, 


J«rome 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


186 


ii.  583)  790-749  B.C.;  Jeroboam  II.  was  one  of  the 
most  important  and  powerful  kings  of  the  northern 
kingdom,  his  rule  extending  "  from  Hamath  to  the 
sea  of  the  plain  ''  (II  Kings  xiv.  23-29),  probably 
including  Moab  under  his  power.  According  to 
Schrader  (KAT,  pp.  212  sqq.)  his  extraordinary 
success  is  to  be  explained  from  his  relations  with 
Assyria.  Ramman-nirari  III.  of  Assyria  had  over- 
thrown Mari  of  Danuiscus,  and  in  his  inscription 
he  claims  to  have  laid  the  land  of  Omri  (i.e.,  Israel) 
under  tribute.  It  is  not  improbable  that  the  con- 
quered Damascus  and  its  territory  was  turned  over 
to  Jeroboam  in  return  for  tribute.  Coounentators 
are  at  variance  over  the  meaning  of  the  reference  in 
Hos.  X.  14,  *'  as  Shalman  spoiled  Beth-arbel/' 
whether  it  refers  to  a  conquest  of  the  Galilean  city 
under  Shalmaneser  III.  or  IV.,  or  to  a  calamity 
experienced  by  the  Moabite  King  Salamanu  men- 
tioned by  Tiglath-Pileser.  II  Kings  xiv.  25  regards 
the  success  of  Jeroboam  as  the  fulfilment  of  the 
prophecy  of  Jonah  the  son  of  Amittai;  but  the 
prophecies  of  Hosea  and  Amos  give  a  far  different 
impression  of  the  state  of  his  kingdom,  which  under 
the  external  glory  carried  the  seeds  of  decay, 
speedily  to  bear  fruit.  (E.  Kautzsch.) 

Biblioo&afby:  1.  Tb«  boutoob  are:  I  Kio^s  zi.  26-40,  xii. 
1-ziT.  20:  II  Chron.  x.  2>1Q,  xi.  14-16.  xu.  16.  xiu.  2. 
SourooB  are:  II  Kincs  xiv.  23-29,  xv.  1.  8;  and  especially 
the  books  of  Amoe  and  Hosea.  For  literature  on  both 
kings  see  the  pertinent  sections  in  the  works  cited  under 
Ahab;  Jjouml,  HiaroKT  of. 

JEROME. 

L  Life,  Historical  (I  2). 

Studies    and  Travels  to        Docmatto  and  Polemical 

878  (I  1).  (I  3). 

Sojourn   in   Rome,   382-        Letters  (|  4). 

886  (I  2).  IIL  Theological  Potttion. 

Sesidenoe     in    Palestine        His  Excellences  and  De- 
after  386  (I  3).  fects  (|  1). 

n.  Works.  His  Lack  of  Independence 

Biblical    and   Exegetical  (|  2). 

(ID.  • 
L  Life:  The  famous  ecclesiastical  author  com- 
monly known  as  St.  Jerome,  whose  full  name  was 
Eusebius  Sophronius  Hieronymus,  was 
I.  Studies  bom  at  Stridon,  on  the  border  between 
and  Txavels  Pannonia  and  Dalmatia,  in  the  second 
to  378.  quarter  of  the  fourth  century;  d.  near 
Bethlehem  Sept.  30,  420.  He  came  of 
Christian  parents,  but  was  not  baptized  until  about 
360,  when  he  had  gone  to  Rome  with  his  friend 
Bonosus  to  pursue  his  rhetorical  and  philosophic 
studies.  These  were  principally  secular,  probably 
including  Greek  literature;  he  seems  as  yet  to  have 
had  no  thought  of  studying  the  Greek  Fathers,  or 
any  Christian  writings.  His  journey  with  Bonosus 
to  Gaul  seems  to  have  followed  immediately  upon 
a  stay  of  several  years  in  Rome.  During  this  so- 
journ in  eastern  Gaul  and  '*  on  the  semi-barbarous 
banks  of  the  Rhine,"  he  seems  to  have  been  occu- 
pied with  theological  studies,  and  to  have  copied 
for  his  friend  Rufinus  Hilary's  commentary  on  the 
Psalms  and  treatise  De  synodis.  Next  came  a  stay 
of  at  least  several  months,  possibly  years,  with 
Rufinus  at  Aquileia,  where  he  made  many  Christian 
friends.  Some  of  these  accompanied  him  when  he 
set  out  about  373  on  a  journey  through  Thrace  and 
Asia  Minor  into  northern  Syria.    At  Antioch,  where 


he  made  the  longest  stay,  two  of  his  companions 
died  and  he  himself  was  seriously  ill  more  than  onoe. 
During  one  of  these  illnesses  (about  the  winter  of 
373-^74)  he  had  a  vision  which  determined  him 
to  lay  aside  his  secular  studies  and  devote  himself 
to  the  things  of  God.  In  any  case  he  seems  to  have 
abstained  for  a  considerable  time  from  the  study 
of  the  classics  and  to  have  plunged  deeply  into  that 
of  Holy  Scripture,  under  the  impulsion  of  Apol- 
linaris  of  Laodioea,  then  teaching  in  Antioch  and 
not  yet  suspected  of  heresy.  Seised  with  the  desire 
for  a  life  of  ascetic  penance,  he  went  for  a  time  to 
the  desert  of  Chalcis,  to  the  southwest  of  Antioch, 
known  as  the  Syrian  Thebaid,  from  the  number  of 
hermits  inhabiting  it.  During  this  period,  however, 
he  seems  to  have  found  time  for  study  and  writing. 
He  made  bis  first  attempt  to  learn  Hebrew  under 
the  guidance  of  a  converted  Jew;  and  at  this  time 
he  seems  to  have  been  in  relation  with  the  Jewish 
Christians  in  Antioch,  and  perhaps  as  early  as  this 
to  have  interested  himself  in  the  Gospel  according 
to  the  Hebrews,  asserted  by  them  to  be  the  source 
of  the  canonical  Matthew. 

Returning  to  Antioch,  in  378  or  379,  he  was  or- 
dained by  Bishop  Paulinus,  apparently  with  some 
unwillingness  and  on  condition  that  he 
2.  Sojourn  still  continue  his  ascetic  life.  Soon 
in  Rome,  afterward  he  went  to  Constantinople 
382-385.  to  pursue  his  study  of  Scripture  under 
the  instruction  of  Gregory  Nazianzen. 
There  he  seems  to  have  spent  two  years;  the  next 
three  (382-385)  he  was  in  Rome  again,  in  close 
intercourse  with  Pope  Damasus  and  tb»  leading 
Roman  Christians.  Invited  thither  originally  to 
the  synod  of  382,  held  for  the  purpose  of  ending  the 
schism  of  Antioch,  he  made  himself  indispensable  to 
the  pope,  and  took  a  prominent  place  in  his  councils. 
Among  other  duties  he  undertook  the  revision  of 
the  text  of  the  Latin  Bible  on  the  basis  of  the  Greek 
New  Testament  and  the  Septuagint,  in  order  to 
put  an  end  to  the  marked  divergences  in  the  current 
western  texts  (see  Bible  Versions,  A,  XL,  2).  This 
commission  determined  the  course  of  his  scholarly 
activity  for  many  years,  and  gave  occasion  to  his 
most  important  achievement.  He  undoubtedly 
exerdsed  an  important  influence  diu-ing  these  three 
years,  to  which,  outside  of  his  imusual  learning, 
his  zeal  for  ascetic  strictness  and  the  realization  of 
the  monastic  ideal  contributed  not  a  little.  He  was 
surroimded  by  a  circle  of  well-bom  and  well-edu- 
cated women,  including  some  from  the  noblest 
patrician  families,  such  as  the  widows  Marcella 
and  Paula  (qq.v.)  with  their  daughters  Blaesilla 
and  Eustochium.  The  resulting  inclination  of  these 
women  for  the  monastic  life,  and  his  unsparing 
criticism  of  the  life  of  the  secular  clergy,  raised  a 
growing  hostility  against  him,  especially  in  the  class 
just  named.  Soon  after  the  death  of  his  patron, 
Damasus  (Dec.  10,  384),  he  decided  to  retire  from 
a  position  which  was  fast  becoming  impossible. 

In  August,  385,  he  returned  to  Antioch,  accom- 
panied by  his  brother  Paulinianus  and  several 
friends,  and  followed  a  little  later  by  Paula  and 
Eustochium,  who  had  resolved  to  leave  their  pa- 
trician surroundings  and  to  end  their  days  in  the 
Holy  Land.    In  the  winter  of  385  Jerome  accom- 


197 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


JeroBM 


panied  them  and  acted  as  their  spiritual  adviser. 
The  pilgrims,  joined  by  Bishop  Paulinus  of  Antiochi 
visited  Jerusalem,  Bethlehem,  and  the 
3.  Resi-  holy  places  of  Galilee,  and  then  went 
dence  hi  to  £^ypt,  the  home  of  the  great 
Psalestine  heroes  of  the  ascetic  life.  In  Alexan- 
after  385.  dria  Jerome  listened  to  the  blind  cate- 
chist  Didymus  expounding  the  prophet 
Hooea  and  telling  his  reminiscences  of  the  great 
Anthony,  who  had  died  thirty  years  before;  he 
spent  some  time  in  Nitria,  admiring  the  disciplined 
community  life  of  the  numerous  inhabitants  of  that 
*'  city  of  the  Lord,"  but  detecting  even  there  "  con- 
cealed serpents,"  i.e.,  the  poison  of  Origenistic 
heresy.  Late  in  the  simmier  of  386  he  was  back 
in  Palestine,  and  settled  down  for  the  remainder  of 
his  life  in  a  hermit's  cell  near  Bethlehem,  sur- 
rounded by  a  few  friends,  both  men  and  women 
(including  Paula  and  Eustochium),  to  whom  he 
acted  as  priestly  guide  and  teacher.  Amply  pro- 
vided by  Paula  with  the  means  of  livelihood  and 
of  increasing  his  collection  of  books,  he  led  a  life  of 
incessant  activity  in  literary  production.  To  these 
last  thirty-four  years  of  his  career  belong  the  most 
important  of  his  works — ^his  version  of  the  Old 
Testament  from  the  original  text,  the  best  of  his 
scriptural  conunentaries,  his  catalogue  of  Christian 
authors,  and  the  dialogue  against  the  Pelagians, 
the  literary  perfection  of  which  even  a  controversial 
opponent  recognized.  To  this  period  also  belong 
the  majority  of  his  passionate  polemics,  which  dis- 
tinguished him  among  the  orthodox  Fathers,  in- 
cluding notably  the  treatises  occasioned  by  the 
Origenistic  controversy  against  Bishop  John  of 
Jerusalem  and  his  early  friend  Rufinus.  As  a  result 
of  his  onslaughts  on  the  Pelagians,  he  was  subjected 
to  actual  persecution  at  their  hands  about  the  be- 
ginning of  416,  when  a  body  of  excited  partisans 
broke  into  the  monastic  buildings,  set  them  on  fire, 
and  laid  violent  hands  on  the  inmates,  killing  a 
deacon,  and  forcing  Jerome  to  seek  safety  in  a 
neighboring  fortress.  The  date  of  his  death  is  given 
by  the  Chranicon  of  Prosper.  His  remains,  orig- 
inally buried  at  Bethlehem,  are  said  to  have  been 
later  translated  to  the  church  of  Santa  Maria 
Maggiore  at  Rome,  though  other  places  in  the  West 
claim  some  relics — ^the  cathedral  at  Nepi  boasting 
the  possession  of  his  head,  which,  according  to  an- 
other tradition,  is  in  the  Escurial. 

n.  Works:  The  writings  of  Jerome  cover  nearly 
all  the  principal  departments  of  Christian  theology; 
but  the  most  numerous  and  important 
X.  Biblical  belong  to  that  of  Biblical  study,  in- 
and        eluding  especially  his  labors  for  the 
ExegeticaL  improvement    or   translation  •  of    the 
Latin  text.    His  knowledge  of  Hebrew, 
primarily  required  for  this  branch  of  his  work, 
gives  also  to  his  exegetical  treatises  (especially  to 
those  written  after  386)  a  value  greater  than  that 
of  most  patristic  oonunentaries,  sJthough  he  is  as 
a  rule  too  much  hampered  by  Jewish  tradition,  and 
indulges  too  often  in  allegorical  and  mystical  sub- 
tleties after  the  manner  of  Philo  and  the  Alexan- 
drian school.    But  he  deserves  credit  for  the  dis- 
tinctness with  which  he  emphasizes  the  difference 
between  the   Old-Testament  Apocrypha  and  the 


Hdiraxca  veritaa  of  the  canonical  books  (cf.  espe- 
cially his  introductions  to  the  Books  of  Samuel,  see 
pROLOOUS  Galeatub,  to  the  Solomonic  writings, 
to  Tobit,  and  to  Judith.  His  exegetical  works  fall 
into  three  groups:  (a)  his  translations  or  recastings 
of  Greek  predecessors,  including  fourteen  homilies 
on  Jeremiah  and  the  same  number  on  Ezekiel  by 
Origen  (translated  c.  380  in  €k)nstantinople);  two 
homilies  of  Origen  on  the  Song  of  Solomon  (in 
Rome,  c.  383);  and  thirty-nine  on  Luke  (c.  389,  in 
Bethlehem).  The  nine  homilies  of  Origen  on  Issiah 
included  among  his  works  were  not  done  by  him. 
Here  should  be  mentioned,  as  an  important  contri- 
bution to  the  topography  of  Palestine,  his  book 
De  situ  et  nominifma  locorum  Hebraeorum,  a  transla- 
tion with  additions  and  some  regrettable  omissions 
of  the  OnomasHcon  of  Eusebius.  To  the  same  period 
(c.  390)  belongs  the  Liber  interpretationia  nominum 
Hebraicorum,  based  on  a  work  supposed  to  go  back 
to  Philo  and  expanded  by  Origen.  (b)  Original 
commentaries  on  the  Old  Testament.  To  the  period 
before  his  settlement  at  Bethlehem  and  the  f oUowing 
five  years  belong  a  series  of  short  Old-Testament 
studies — De  eeraphim,  De  voce  Oeanna,  De  tribua 
quaeetianibua  veteris  legie  (usually  included  among 
the  letters  as  xviii.,  xx.,  xxxvi.);  Quaeatumea  he- 
braicae  in  Oenesin;  CommerUariua  in  Ecdeeiaeten; 
Tradatus  aeptem  in  Psalmae  x.-xvi.  (lost);  Ex- 
planatianee  in  Mickaeam,  Saphoniam,  Nahum, 
Habaeue,  Aggaeum.  About  395  he  composed  a 
series  of  longer  commentaries,  though  in  rather  a 
desultory  fashion — ^first  on  the  remaining  seven 
minor  prophets,  then  on  Isaiah  (c.  395-c.  400),  on 
Daniel  (c.  407),  on  Ezekiel  (between  410  and  415), 
and  on  Jeremiah  (after  415,  left  unfinished),  (c) 
New-Testament  commentaries.  These  include  only 
Philemon,  Galatians,  Ephesians,  and  Titus  (hastily 
composed  387^388);  Bfatthew  (dictated  in  a  fort- 
night, 398);  Mark,  selected  passages  in  Luke,  the 
prologue  of  John,  and  Revelation.  Treating  the 
last-named  book  in  his  cursory  fashion,  he  made 
use  of  an  excerpt  from  the  commentary  of  the  North- 
African  Tichonius,  which  is  preserved  as  a  sort  of 
argimient  at  the  beginning  of  the  more  extended 
work  of  the  Spanish  presbyter  Beatus  of  Libana. 
But  before  this  he  had  already  devoted  to  the 
Apocalypse  another  treatment,  a  rather  arbitrary 
recasting  of  the  commentary  of  Victorinus  (d.  303), 
with  whose  chiliastic  views  he  was  not  in  accord, 
substituting  for  the  chiliastic  conclusion  a  spiritu- 
alizing exposition  of  his  own,  supplying  an  introduc- 
tion, and  making  certain  changes  in  the  text. 

One  of  Jerome's  earliest  attempts  in  the  depart- 
ment of  history  was  his  Temporum  liber,  composed 
c.  380  in  Constantinople;   this  is  a  re- 
2.  His-      casting  in  Latin  of  the  chronological 
torical.      tables  which  compose  the  second  part 
of  the  Chromcon  of  Eusebius,  with  a 
supplement  covering  the  period  from  325  to  379. 
In  spite  of  numerous  errors  taken  over  from  Euse- 
bius, and  some  of  his  own,  Jerome  produced  a  valu- 
able work,  if  only  for  the  impulse  which  it  gave  to 
such  later  chroniclers  as  Prosper,  Caitiodorus,  and 
Victor  of  Tannuna  to  continue  his  annals.    Three 
other  works  of  a  hagiological  nature  are  the  ViUi 
Pauli  monachi,  written  during  his  first  sojourn  at 


Jmromm 

Jerome  otTrmguB 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


128 


Antioch  (c.  376),  the  legendary  material  of  wMch 
is  derived  from  Egyptian  monastic  tradition;  the 
Vita  Malcki  monaehi  capHvi  (c.  391),  probably 
based  on  an  earlier  work,  although  it  purports  to 
be  derived  from  the  oral  communications  of  the  aged 
ascetic  Malchus  originally  made  to  him  in  the  desert 
of  Chalcis;  and  the  Vita  HUanonis,  of  the  same 
date,  containing  more  trustworthy  historical  mat- 
ter than  the  other  two,  and  based  partly  on  the 
biography  of  Epiphanius  and  partly  on  oral  tradi- 
tion. The  so-called  Martt/rologium  aaneti  Hienmymt 
is  spurious;  it  was  apparently  composed  by  a 
western  monk  toward  the  end  of  the  sixth  or  begin- 
ning of  the  seventh  century,  with  reference  to  an 
expression  of  Jerome's  in  the  opening  chapter  of 
the  Vita  Malcki,  where  he  speaks  of  intending  to 
write  a  history  of  the  saints  and  martyrs  from  the 
apostolic  times.  But  the  most  important  of  Je- 
rome's historical  works  is  the  book  De  wis  HitLS- 
tribus,  written  at  Bethlehem  in  392,  the  title  and 
arrangement  of  which  are  borrowed  from  Suetonius. 
It  contains  short  biographical  and  literary  notes  on 
135  Christian  authors,  from  St.  Peter  down  to 
Jerome  himself.  For  the  first  seventy-eight  Euse- 
bius  (Hist,  eod,,  i.-viii.)  is  the  main  source;  in  the 
second  section,  beginning  with  Amobius  and  Lac- 
tantius,  he  includes  a  good  deal  of  independent  in- 
formation, especially  as  to  western  writers. 

Practically  all  of  Jerome's  productions  in  the 
field  of  dogma  have  a  more  or  less  violently  po- 
lemical character,  and  are  directed 
3.  Dog-  against  assailants  of  the  orthodox  doo- 
matic  and  trines.  Even  the  translation  of  the 
PolemicaL  treatise  of  Didymus  on  the  Holy  Spirit 
into  Latin  (begun  in  Rome  384,  com- 
pleted at  Bethlehem)  shows  an  apologetic  tendency 
against  the  Arians  and  Pneumatomachi.  The  same 
is  true  of  his  version  of  Origen's  De  prineipiis  (c. 
399),  intended  to  supersede  the  inaccurate  transla- 
tion by  Rufinus.  The  more  strictly  polemical 
writings  cover  every  period  of  his  life.  During  the 
sojourns  at  Antioch  and  Constantinople  he  was 
mainly  occupied  with  the  Arian  controversy,  and 
especially  with  the  schisms  centering  around 
Meletius  and  Lucifer.  Two  letters  to  Pope  Damasus 
(xv.  and  xvi.)  complain  of  the  conduct  of  both 
parties  at  Antioch,  the  Meletians  and  Paulinians, 
who  had  tried  to  draw  him  into  their  controversy 
over  the  application  of  the  terms  oustd  and  hypo- 
stans  to  the  trinity.  At  the  same  time  or  a  little 
later  (379)  he  composed  his  lAber  contra  Lucifer- 
ianoe,  in  which  he  cleverly  uses  the  dialogue  form 
to  combat  the  tenets  of  that  faction,  particularly 
their  rejection  of  baptism  by  heretics.  In  Rome 
(c.  383)  he  wrote  a  passionate  counterblast  against 
the  teaching  of  Helvidius,  in  defense  of  the  doctrine 
of  the  perpetual  virginity  of  Mary,  and  of  the 
superiority  of  the  single  over  the  married  state.  An 
opponent  of  a  somewhat  similar  nature  was  Jovin- 
ianus,  with  whom  he  came  into  conflict  in  392 
{Adverme  Jovinianum,  and  the  defense  of  this  work 
addressed  to  his  friend  Pammachius,  numbered 
xlviiL  in  the  letters).  Once  more  he  defended  the 
ordinary  catholic  practises  of  piety  and  his  own 
ascetic  ethics  in  406  against  the  Spanish  presbyter 
Vig^lantius,  who  oppmed  the  oultus  of  martyrs 


and  relics,  the  vow  of  poverty,  and  clerical  celibacy. 
Meanwhile  the  controversy  with  John  of  Jeriisalem 
and  Rufinus  concerning  the  orthodoxy  of  Origen 
occurred.  To  this  period  belong  some  of  his  most 
passionate  and  most  comprehensive  polemical  works 
— the  Contra  Joannem  Hieroeolymitanum  (398  or 
399);  the  two  dosely-coimected  Apologiae  contra 
Rufinum  (402);  and  the  "  last  word  "  written  a  few 
months  later,  the  Liber  tertius  aeu  uUima  reeponsio 
advereua  ecripta  Rufini.  For  further  details  see 
Oriqenibtic  Controvbrsies.  The  last  of  his 
polemical  works  is  the  skilfully-composed  Dialogiis 
contra  Pelagianos  (415). 

Jerome's  letters,  both  by  the  great  variety  of 
their  subjects  and  by  their  qualities  of  style,  form 
the  most  interesting  portion  of  his 
4*  LettefB.  literary  remains.  Whether  he  is  dis- 
cussing problems  of  scholarship,  or 
reasoning  on  cases  of  conscience,  comforting  the 
afflicted,  or  saying  pleasant  things  to  his  friends, 
scouiging  the  vices  and  corruptions  of  the  time, 
exhorting  to  the  ascetic  life  and  renunciation  of  the 
world,  or  breaking  a  lance  with  his  theological  op- 
ponents, he  gives  a  vivid  picture  not  only  of  his  own 
mind,  but  of  the  age  and  its  peculiar  characteristics. 
The  letters  most  frequently  reprinted  or  referred  to 
are  of  a  hortatory  nature,  such  as  xiv..  Ad  Hdio- 
dorum  de  laude  vitae  aolitariae;  xxii.,  Ad  Euetochium 
de  cuetodia  virginitaiie;  lii..  Ad  NepoHanum  de  vita 
clericorum  et  monachorum,  a  sort  of  epitome  of  pas- 
toral theology  from  the  ascetic  standpoint;  liii.,  Acf 
Patdinum  de  studio  scripturarum;  Ivii.,  to  the  same, 
De  institutione  monaehi;  Ixx.,  Ad  Magnum  de  scrip- 
toribus  ecdesiasticis;  and  cvii.,  Ad  Laelam  de  in- 
stitutione fiUae. 

UL  Theological  Positton:    Jerome  undoubtedly 
ranks  as  the  most  learned  of  the  western  Fathers. 
He  surpasses  the  others  especially  in 
z.  His      his  knowledge  of  Hebrew,  gained  by 
Excellences  hard  study,  and  not  unskilfully  used, 
and        It  is  true  that  he  was  perfectly  con- 
Defects,     scious  of  his  advantages,  and  not  en- 
tirely  free   from   the   temptation   to 
despise   or  belittle   his   literary  rivals,   especially 
Ambrose.     His  own  scholarship  is  by  no  means 
without  its  weak  points.     His  acquaintance  with 
Greek  and  Latin  literature,  both  pagan  and  Chris- 
tian, is  great,  but  by  no  means  without  its  gaps 
and  its  traces  of  superficial  reading;  and  his  knowl- 
edge of  Hebrew  offers  innumerable  points  of  attack 
to  modem  criticism.    As  a  gene^  rule  it  is  not  so 
much  by  absolute  knowledge  that  he  shines   as 
by  an  almost  poetical  elegance,  an  incisive  wit,  a 
singular  skill  in  adapting  recognized  or  proverbial 
phrases  to  his  purpose,  and  a  successful  aiming  at 
rhetorical  effect.    His  weaknesses  are  most  notice- 
able in  dogmatic  subjects.    He  was  so  little  of  a 
dogmatic  theologian  that  he  contributed  only  in- 
directly to  the  development  of  doctrine.    The  same 
may  be  said  of  his  contribution  to  moral  theology, 
in  which  he  showed  less  an  interest  in  abstract 
ethical  speculation  than  a  morbid  ascetic  seal  and 
passionate  enthusiasm  for  the  monastic  ideal. 

It  was  this  attitude  that  made  Luther  judge  him 
so  severely.  In  fact.  Evangelical  readers  are  gener- 
aUy  little  inclined  to  accept  his  writings  as  authori- 


ISO 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


7oroiii6 

Jeroma  of  Vrmgnm 


tative,  especially  in  consideration  of  his  lack  of  in- 
dependence as  a  dogmatic  teacher  and  his  submis- 
sion to  orthodox  tradition.  He  ap- 
2.  His  proaches  his  papal  patron  Damasus 
Lack  of     with  the  most  utter  submissiveness, 

Independ-  making  no  attempt  at  an  independent 
ence.  decision  of  his  own.  The  Church 
founded  upon  the  rock  of  Peter  is  to 
decide  whether  he  is  to  recognize,  with  the  Mele- 
tians,  three  hypostases  in  the  divine  ousia,  or,  with 
the  Paulinians,  one  hypostasis  with  three  pros&pa  or 
persons.  "  Decide,  I  pray  thee,  and  I  shaU  not 
fear  to  speak  of  three  hypostases.'*  He  may  be 
called  not  only  the  forerunner  of  modem  ultra- 
montanismi  but  even  of  the  Jesuit  unreasoning 
obedience.  The  tendency  to  recognize  a  superior 
comes  out  scarcely  less  significantly  in  his  corre- 
spondence with  Augustine  (cf .  the  letters  numbered 
Ivi.,  Ixvii.,  di.-cv.,  cx.-cxii.,  cxv.-cxvi.  in  his  own, 
and  zxviii.,  zcdx.,  xl.,  Ixvii.-lxviii.,  Ixxi.-lxxv., 
Ixxyi.-lxxxii.  in  Augustine's). 

Yet  in  spite  of  the  defects  and  weaknesses  already 
mentioned,  Jerome  has  retained  a  rank  among  the 
western  Fathers.  This  would  be  his  due,  if  for 
nothing  else,  on  account  of  the  incalculable  influence 
exerdsed  by  his  Latin  version  of  the  Bible  upon 
the  subsequent  ecclesiastical  and  theological  devel- 
opment. But  that  he  won  his  way  to  the  title  of  a 
saint  and  doctor  of  the  catholic  Church  was  possible 
only  because  he  broke  away  entirely  from  the 
theological  school  in  which  he  was  brought  up, 
that  of  the  Origenists.  In  the  artistic  tradition  of 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church  it  has  been  usual  to 
represent  him,  the  patron  of  theological  learning, 
as  a  cardinal,  by  the  side  of  the  Bishop  Augustine, 
the  Archbishop  Ambrose,  and  the  Pope  Gregory. 
Even  when  he  is  depicted  as  a  half-clad  anchorite, 
with  cross,  skull,  and  Bible  for  the  only  furniture 
of  his  cell,  the  red  hat  or  some  other  indication  of 
his  rank  is  as  a  rule  introduced  somewhere  in  the 
picture.  (O.  ZAcKLBRt.) 

Bibuoobapht:  The  aitiele  in  W.  Smith,  Dietionary  cf  Oreek 
and  Reman  Biography  and  Mylhologu,  ii.  4£0  aqq.,  London, 
1800,  is  ▼aluable  as  a  bird'»^ye  view  of  Jerome's  works, 
putioalariy  in  giving  a  table  showing  the  numbers  of  the 
letters  as  they  appear  in  the  three  principal  arrangements. 
A  valuable  biblioipaphy  is  given  in  Potthast,  WegvoeUer, 
pp.  Wy-Me,  1870-71;  another  is  in  the  BrUUh  Muaeum 
CataloauB  and  SupplemnU;  still  another  in  U.  Chevalier, 
RiporMn  ds§  souroas  hiatonquM  du  mioyen  dge,  pp.  1263- 
1266,  Paris.  1894  sqq. 

>  The  edition  of  the  **  Works  "  by  Erasmus,  including  all 
then  known,  appeared,  9  vols.,  Basel,  1616-20.  followed 
by  that  of  Marianus  Viotorinus,  9  vols.,  Rome,  1666-72; 
then  came  editions  by  U.  Calixtus  and  A.  Tribbeohovius 
12  vols.,  Frankfort,  1684-90,  the  Benedictine  by  J.  Mer- 
tianay,  6  vols.,  Paris,  1693-1706;  the  edition  of  Vallarsi, 
11  vols.,  Verona,  1734-42,  reproduced  in  most  subsequent 
editions,  mduding  that  of  MPL,  xxii.-xxx.  NPNF,  2d 
•er..  vol.  V.  contains  Eng.  transl.  of  many  of  the  160  Letters, 
the  Prefaces  to  his  works,  and  a  number  of  treatises,  includ- 
ing his  "  Life  of  Hilarion,"  "  Dialogue  against  Jovinianus  " 
and  "  Dialogue  against  the  Pelagians,"  with  a  valuable 
Introduetien  and  lAfe. 

The  best  sources  for  a  Ufe  are  his  own  writings,  par- 
tieularly  his  Letters  and  Prefaces,  the  latter  of  which  often 
give  a  dear  insight  into  his  mental  states  as  well  as  a 
knowledge  of  external  events  in  his  life.  Augustine  refers 
to  him  in  EpUt,  261,  Ad  OeeanuMt  Contra  Julianum  /., 
and  "  City  of  God,"  zviii.  42;  Sulpidus  Sevenis  records 
his  impression,  received  during  a  stay  with  Jerome  at 
Bethlehem  lasting  six  months,  in  his  Dialogi,  i.  7-9.  £lab- 
VI.— 9 


orate  modem  treatments  of  the  life  are  O.  Zdckler,  Hierony' 
miis,  tein  Loben  und  Wirken,  Ootha,  1866,  and  A.  Thieiry. 
8.  Jir&me,  la  oocUU  ehritimne  h  Rome  H  VimgrQiiton 
romaino  en  tern  eainte,  2  vols.,  Paris,  1876.  Consult  far 
ther:  F.  C.  CoUombet,  Hit,  de  S.  Jirdnu:  ea  vie,  m§ 
Merita,  et  §a  doctrine,  2  vols.,  Paris,  1844;  W.  8.  GiUy. 
VigOanHue  and  hie  Times,  pp.  91-124,  London,  1844; 
C.  F.  de  T.  Montalembert,  Les  Moinee  d'ooeideni,  i.  144- 
187,  Paris,  1861;  £.  Bernard,  Lee  Voyages  de  8.  Jtr&me, 
ib.  1864;  E.  L.  Cutta,  SL  Jerome,  in  Fathere  for  Engliak 
Readere,  London,  1878;  A.  P.  F.  de  Lambel.  8,  Jir&me, 
Tours.  1880;  C.  Martin,  Life  of  8i.  Jerome,  London.  1888; 
F.  W.  Farrar,  Lives  of  the  Faihere,  it  160-297.  New  York, 
1889;  P.  Largent,  8.  Jir&me,  Paris,  1898,  Eng.  transl., 
London,  1900;  G.  Grfltsmaeher,  Hieronymue,  8  vols., 
Leipsic,  1901-06;  J.  Brochet,  8.  Jir&me  et  see  smiemM. 
Paris,  1906;  J.  Tunnel.  8aint  Jir&me,  ib.  1906;  Jose 
de  Segufinaa  (Father  Fray),  lAfe  of  8%,  Jerome,  London. 
1907;  Tillemont,  Mimoiree,  vol.  xii.;  Gsillier,  AtUeun 
eaeria,  vii  646-711  et  passim  (other  volumes  contain  much 
useful  matter,  consult  Index);  Bchaff,  Christittn  Churtk, 
iii  20&-214,  967-988,  and  in  general,  the  diunsh  historiet 
deating  with  the  period;  DB,  iv.  873-«74;  DCB,  iii.  29-60. 
Volumes  dealing  with  special  phases  of  Jerome's  activity 
are:  M.  Rahmer,  Die  hebr&ieeKen  TradiHonen  in  den 
Werken  dee  Hieronymue,  Breslau,  1861;  Aemil.  LObeck, 
Hieronymiue  quae  noverit  eeriptoree  et  ex  qvnbue  haueerii, 
Lttpdc,  1872;  A.  Ebert,  AUgemeine  GeeeMdUe  der  Litter- 
aiur  dee  MittelaUere,  L  176-203.  ib.  1874;  W.  Nowack, 
Die  Bedeutung  dee  Hieronymue  fUr  die  aUteetamenUidtt 
TextkriHk,  GdtUngen,  1876;  H.  Goelaer,  6tude  lexieo- 
graphique  et  gram$naHeale  de  la  latiniU  de  8.  Jir&me,  Paris, 
1884;  A.  RAhrieht,  Eeeai  eur  8.  Jir&me,  sxigite,  ib.  1891. 

JEROME  OF  PRAGUE:  One  of  the  chief  follow- 
ers and  most  devoted  friends  of  John  Hubs;  b.  at 
Prague  about  1379;  burned  at  the  stake  at  Con- 
stance May  90,  1416.  His  family  were  well-to-do, 
and,  as  he  was  desirous  of  seeing  the  world,  after 
taking  his  bachelor's  degree  at  the  University  of 
Prague  in  1398  he  secured  in  1399  permission  to 
travel.  In  1401  he  returned  to  Prague,  but  in  1402 
visited  England,  and  at  Oxford  copied  out  the 
Dialogtis  and  TrUdogus  of  Wydif,  and  thus  evinced 
his  interest  in  the  great  Oxford  doctor.  He  also 
became  an  ardent  and  outspoken  advocate  of 
realism,  and  ever  afterward  Wyclifism  and  reaUsm 
were  charges  which  were  constantly  getting  him 
into  trouble.  In  1403  he  was  in  the  Holy  Land,  in 
1405  in  Paris.  There  he  took  his  master's  degree, 
but  Gerson  drove  him  out.  In  1406  he  took  the 
same  degree  in  the  University  of  Cologne,  and  a 
little  later  in  that  of  Heidelbeig.  Nor  was  he  any 
safer  in  Prague,  to  which  he  returned,  and  where, 
in  1407,  he  took  the  same  degree.  In  that  year 
he  returned  to  Oxford,  but  was  again  compelled 
to  flee.  During  1408  and  1409  he  was  in  Prague, 
and  there  his  pronounced  Czech  preferences  aroused 
opposition  to  him  in  some  quarters.  Early  in 
Jan.,  1410,  he  made  before  the  university  a  cautious 
speech  in  favor  of  Wydif 's  philosophical  views,  and 
this  was  cited  against  him  at  the  council  of  Con- 
stance four  shears  later.  In  Mar.,  1410,  the  buU 
against  WycUf's  writings  was  issued,  and  on  the 
charge  of  favoring  them  Jerome  was  imprisoned  in 
Vienna,  but  managed  to  escape  into  Moravia.  For 
this  he  was  excommunicated  by  the  bishop  of 
Cracow.  Returned  to  Prague,  he  appeared  publicly 
as  the  advocate  of  Huss.  In  1413  he  was  in  the 
courts  of  Poland  and  Lithuania,  making  a  deep 
impression  by  his  eloquence  and  learning.  In 
Cracow  he  was  publicly  examined  as  to  his  accept- 
ance of  the  forty-five  articles  which  the  enemies  of 


Jerome  of  Prague 
JemMdem 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


180 


Wydif  had  made  up  from  Wydif's  writings  and 
which  they  aBserted  represented  Wyclif  s  heretical 
teachings.  Jerome  declared  that  he  rejected  them 
in  their  general  tenor. 

When,  on  Oct.  11,  1414,  Huss  left  for  the  council 
of  Constance,  Jerome  assured  him  that  if  need  be 
he  would  come  to  his  assistance.  This  promise  he 
faithfully  kept,  for  on  Apr.  4,  1415,  he  arrived  at 
Constance.  Ais  he  had,  unlike  Huss,  come  without 
a  safe-conduct,  his  friends  persuaded  him  to  return 
to  Bohemia.  But  on  his  way  back  he  was  arrested 
at  Hirschau  on  Apr.  20  and  taken  to  Sulzbach, 
where  he  was  imprisoned,  and  was  returned  to  Con- 
stance on  May  23,  and  immediately  arraigned  before 
the  council  on  the  charge  of  fleeing  a  citation — one 
having  been  really  issued  against  him,  but  as  he 
was  away  at  the  time  he  was  ignorant  of  it.  His 
condenmation  was  predetermined  in  consequence  of 
his  general  acceptance  of  the  views  of  Wyclif,  and 
also  because  of  his  open  admiration  of  Huss.  Con- 
sequently he  had  not  a  fair  hearing.  His  imprison- 
ment was  so  rigorous  that  he  fell  seriously  ill  and 
so  was  induced  to  recant  at  public  sessions  of  the 
ooimcil  held  on  Sept.  11  and  23,  1415.  The  words 
put  into  his  mouth  on  these  occasions  made  him 
renounce  both  Wyclif  and  Huss.  The  same  ph3rsi- 
cal  weakness  made  him  write  in  Bohemian  letters 
to  the  king  of  Bohemia  and  to  the  University  of 
Prague,  which  were  declared  to  be  entirely  volun- 
tary and  to  state  his  own  opinions,  in  which  he 
annoimoed  that  he  had  become  convinced  that 


Huss  had  been  rightfully  burned  for  heresy.  But 
this  pitiful  course  did  not  secure  his  liberation  nor 
decrease  the  likelihood  of  his  condenmation.  For 
on  May  23,  1416,  and  on  May  26,  he  was  put  on 
trial  by  the  ooimcil.  On  the  second  day  he  boldly 
recanted  his  recantation,  and  so  on  May  30  he 
was  finally  condenmed  and  immediately  thereafter 
burned.    He  died  heroically. 

Jerome  was  of  blameless  life,  and  his  attachment 
to  the  Roman  Church  was  sincere;  consequently, 
as  he  rejected  Wyclif 's  teachings  as  to  the  Lord's 
Supper,  the  council  really  had  slender  groimds  for 
his  execution.  His  extensive  travels,  his  wide  eru- 
dition, his  eloquence,  his  wit,  made  him  a  formidable 
critic  of  the  degenerate  church  of  his  day,  and  it  was 
for  his  criticisms  rather  than  for  heresy  that  his 
death  was  compassed. 

Bxblioorapht:  The  contemporary  souroes  of  his  life  are  the 
well-known  letter  of  Poggio  Bracdolini  describing  his  trial 
(Opera,  pp.  301-305.  translated  by  William  Shepherd. 
Life  of  Poggio  Bracciolini,  2d  ed.,  1837.  pp.  60-79).  and  the 
chronicle  of  Jan  Ziskovi.  edited  by  Jaroslav  Goll  in 
Bohemian  and  published  in  Prague  in  1878,  Vyptani  o 
MiMru  Jeronymopi  §  Prahu.  It  has  been  followed  by  the 
Bohemian  scholars,  A.  H.  Wratislaw  in  his  John  Hum, 
London,  1882,  pp.  376-406;  and  Count  LOtsow,  Jokn 
Hua,  ib.  1009.  pp.  321-334.  Consult  further:  L.  Heller, 
Hieronjffnua  von  Prog,  Lflbeck.  1836;  C.  Becker,  Die 
heiden  bOhmiKhen  Reformatoren  .  .  .  Hu»  und  Hirrony- 
muM  von  Prog,  Ndrdlingen,  1858;  E.  H.  Gillett,  Life  and 
Tims9  qf  John  Hum,  2  vols..  New  York,  1871 ;  and  the 
literature  under  Huss,  John. 

JEROME,  SAIRT,  ORDERS  OF.  See  Hikbont- 
MiTEs;  Jesuatbs. 


JERUSALEM. 


I.  Topography. 
n.  Water  Supply, 
ni.  Soil  and  Formation. 
IV.  Climate. 
V.  History  of  the  City. 

Pre-Israelitic  Jerusalem  ((  1). 


Davidic   and    Solomonic    Jerusalem 

(»2). 
From  Solomon  to  the  Exile  (|  3). 
From  the  Exile  to  Herod  (§  4). 
From  Herod  to  the  Destruction,  70 

A.D.  (I  5). 


Until  Constantine  the  Great  (ft  6). 
From  Constantine  to  the  Capture  by 

the  Arabs  (ft  7). 
Under  the  Arabs  to'the  Crusades  (ft  8). 
During  the  Crusades  (ft  9). 
From  1187  to  the  Present  (ft  10). 


L  Topography:  The  ground  upon  which  Jeru- 
salem stands  is  formed  by  a  plateau  extending 
southward  from  the  Palestinian  mountain  range, 
and  cut  by  valleys  into  several  heights.  The  cul- 
mination of  the  range  or  watershed  runs  west  of 
the  city,  and  the  surface  on  which  the  city  is  built 
slopes  to  the  east  and  south,  and  on  the  south  and 
southeast  sinks  abruptly  into  deep  valleys.  The 
watershed  northwest  and  north  of  the  city  rises  to 
a  height  of  2,675  feet  above  the  Mediterranean;  the 
lowest  place  in  modem  Jerusalem  is  2,360  feet  in 
elevation;  while  the  whole  city  is  situated  at  a 
lower  elevation  than  the  ooimtry  round  about.  The 
heights  about  the  city  are  in  part  still  known  by 
their  old  names.  That  to  the  east  is  the  Moimt  of 
Olives  (Zech.  xiv.  4;  Matt.  xxi.  1),  in  early  times 
the  site  of  a  sanctuary  (II  Sam.  xv.  32).  Looking 
from  the  city,  it  is  seen  to  have  four  summits,  of 
which  the  second  from  the  north  (Karam  aJr^yyad) 
is  the  highest  (2,680  feet),  while  the  third  {Jabalr 
alr'rur),{Tom  twenty  to  forty  feet  lower,  on  which 
are  several  consecrated  buildings,  passes  in  common 
speech  as  the  Mount  of  Olives.  The  most  southern 
peak  {Batn  oL-Hawa,  2,430  feet  high)  was  known  as 
the  Moimt  of  Corruption  or  Destruction  (II  Kings 
xxiii.  13;  of.  I  Kings  zi.  7).  The  hill  to  the  west 
oorrespondB  probably  to  the  hill  Gareb  of   Jer. 


xxxi.  39,  rising  to  the  height  of  2,555  feet;  that  to 
the  south,  called  Goah  in  Jer.  xxxi.  39  (2,545  feet 
high),  is  the  modem  Abu  T^r,  called  by  Europeans 
the  Hill  of  Evil  Counsel,  on  the  basis  of  John  xi. 
47-53.  The  elevation  north  of  the  city  is  called 
Skopos  by  Josephus  (Ant.  XI.,  viii.  5). 

The  principal  valley  is  that  of  the  Kidron,  rising 
north  of  the  city,  bending  east  and  then  south,  and 
dividing  the  city  from  the  Moimt  of  Olives,  all  the 
time  deepening  rapidly.  At  present,  parts  of  this 
valley  bear  different  names.  Of  tributary  valleys 
may  be  mentioned  one  which  in  early  times  emptied 
opposite  the  Garden  of  (jrethsemane  of  the  Latios 
immediately  below  the  Golden  Gate  of  the  present 
east  wall  of  the  Haram  al-Sharif;  it  is  now  prac- 
tically filled  up.  Formerly  it  was  formed  of  two 
branches  which  served  to  divide  the  city,  as  is 
shown  by  the  researches  of  Warren  and  Wilson. 
Another  tributary  valley  used  to  empty  inmiediately 
north  of  the  Virgin's  Foimt,  opposite  the  upper 
part  of  the  village  of  Silwan,  but  is  now  completely 
filled.  A  third  empties  below  the  Pool  of  Siloam, 
opposite  the  lower  part  of  the  village  of  Silwan. 
and  rises  in  two  hollows  above  the  Damascus  Gate. 
It  runs  first  southeast,  then  south,  and  then  again 
southeast,  being  joined  about  the  middle  of  its 
course  by  a  valley  coming  from  the  west.    Both 


131 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jerome  of  Vrmgnm 
Jerusalem 


this  and  the  valley  which  joins  it  are  now  filled  up, 
but  their  importance  for  the  old  city  must  have 
been  great.  The  name  as  given  by  Josephus  (War, 
v.,  iv.  1)  is  the  Tyropoeon  valley.  A  fourth  trib- 
utary valley  empties  into  the  Kidron  still  farther 
south  than  the  Tyropoeon.  It  begins  in  the  water- 
shed west  of  the  present  Jaffa  Gate,  runs  south  and 
then  east  till  it  joins  the  Kidron  opposite  the  south- 
em  end  of  Silwan,  falling  a  distance  of  650  feet  in 
its  course.  It  has  different  names  for  different 
parts,  but  is  in  general  known  as  the  valley  of 
Hinnom  (Josh.  zv.  8  and  often;  cf.  Gehenna).  It 
is  remarkable  that  Eusebius  and  Jerome  plaoe  the 
valley  of  Hinnom  to  the  east  of  Jerusalem,  but  they 
were  probably  influenced  by  Zech.  xiv.  Z-4,  In 
the  eighteenth  century  it  became  the  erroneous 
fashion  to  call  the  upper  and  middle  part  of  this 
valley  the  Gihon. 

XL  Water  Supply:  The  preceding  description 
shows  that  the  drainage  of  the  region  is  from  north 
to  south  or  from  northwest  to  southeast.  While 
the  watershed  is  at  an  elevation  of  2,675  feet,  the 
union  of  the  Kidron  and  Hinnom  valleys  is  only 
2,065  feet  above  the  Mediterranean;  there  is  there- 
fore no  deadwater  in  the  brooks  which  in  the 
rainy  season  flow  through  these  valleys.  Part  of 
the  drainage  is  subterranean.  The  hiU  country  of 
Palestine  is  poor  in  water,  and  such  expressions  bh 
**  the  brook  Kidron  "  may  convey  a  false  impression 
if  it  is  not  recalled  that  ''  brook  "  means  no  more 
than  the  Arabic  '*  wadi,"  a  natural  channel  of 
drainage  for  the  flow  of  the  rainy  season,  dry  the 
rest  of  the  year  except  near  a  spring.  In  the  upper 
and  lower  parts  the  valleys  are  tilled;  between  the 
city  and  the  Moimt  of  Olives  the  floor  of  the  vaUey 
is  denuded  of  soil.  In  the  Kidron  water  flows  only 
during  exceptional  rainfall  or  when  there  is  a  quick 
melting  of  a  heavy  snowfall.  A  shallow  brook  runs 
even  yet  in  the  Tyropceon  after  long-continued  rains, 
forming  a  pool  called  the  Birkat  al-Qamra.  In 
the  Hinnom  valley  a  small  ditch  between  the  garden 
plats  suffices  to  carry  off  the  drainage.  The  region 
is  poor  in  springs,  the  Old  Testament  naming  only 
three,  Gihon,  En-rogel,  and  the  Dragon's  Well.  The 
Gihon  was  in  the  Kidron  valley  (II  Chron.  xxxiii. 
14),  and  its  waters  were  led  by  Hezekiah  into  the 
City  of  David  (II  Chron.  xxxii.  30).  These  data 
serve  to  identify  it  with  the  only  spring  which  is 
found  to-day  in  the  Kidron  valley  near  Jerusalem 
and  feeds  the  pool  of  Siloam  through  the  Siloam 
conduit.  It  is  known  now  as  the  Viigin's  Fount 
and  the  Foimtain  of  Steps,  the  second  name  due 
to  the  fact  that  the  water  is  reached  by  a  stone 
stairway.  The  spring  is  covered  by  an  arch  to 
protect  it  from  debris,  and  lies  in  a  deep  hollow 
some  seventy-five  feet  lower  than  the  heaps  of 
debris  round  about.  It  is  intermittent,  but  rather 
irregularly  so;  in  winter  it  may  flow  three  or  four 
times  a  day,  in  summer  once  or  twice,  in  autumn 
at  most  once.  This  peculiarity  is  probably  to  be  ex- 
plained by  the  fact  that  the  spring  has  two  sources 
in  the  hill,  one  constant  and  one  variable,  the  latter 
intermittent  and  fed  from  below.  Doubtless  the 
action  of  this  spring  influenced  the  prophetic  repre- 
sentations in  Ezek.  xlvii.  1-12;  Joel  iv.  (iii.)  18;  Zech. 
xiv.  8,  which  went  upon  the  supposition  that  there 


were  great  chambers  of  water  in  the  interior  of  the 
mountain.  Josephus  calls  the  water  of  this  spring 
sweet;  at  present  it  is  brackish.  The  second  spring, 
En-rogel  (Josh.  xv.  7,  xviii.  16),  was  on  the  boundary 
between  Judah  and  Benjamin,  and  at  some  distance 
from  the  city  (II  Sam.  xvil.  17;  I  Kings  i.  9,  41 
sqq.),  in  the  royal  gardens  south  of  the  city  (Jose- 
phus, Ant,  VII.,  xiv.  4);  therefore  it  is  to  be  sought 
near  the  union  of  the  valley  of  Hinnom  with  that 
of  Kidron.  There  is  now  no  spring  in  the  region, 
but  there  is  a  well,  called  by  the  Arabs  Job's  Well, 
by  Jews  Joab's  Well,  and  by  Christians  Nehemiah's 
Well,  having  a  depth  of  122  feet,  partly  walled 
and  partly  simk  in  the  rock.  In  very  wet  seasons 
it  fills  up  and  drains  off  a  part  of  its  water,  a  cir- 
cumstance regarded  by  the  inhabitants  as  presaging 
a  fruitful  season.  From  this  overflow  it  probably 
got  its  name  as  a  spring,  though  in  earlier  times, 
when  the  country  was  wooded,  its  overflow  may 
have  been  constant  and  so  justified  the  name  of 
spring.  About  a  third  of  a  xiule  south  and  on  the 
west  side  of  the  valley  is  a  spring  which  flows  during 
the  rainy  season,  and  in  early  times  may  have  been 
constant.  A  third  spring,  the  Dragon's  Well,  ap- 
pears to  be  mentioned  in  Neh.  ii.  13  (LXX,  "  Spring 
of  Figs ''),  as  approached  from  the  valley  gate, 
which  was  probably  at  the  southwest  comer  of  the 
old  city.  It  should  therefore  lie  in  the  lower  Hin- 
nom valley  or  in  the  Kidron  valley;  but  no  spring 
or  well  besides  those  already  mentioned  is  now 
known. 

m.  Soil  and  Formatton:  The  old  city  was  built 
upon  the  naked  rock.  The  situation  is  altogether 
unfavorable  to  the  formation  of  vegetable  soil  and 
to  the  retention  of  any  which  may  be  artificially 
created,  since  the  heavy  rainfall  of  winter  washes 
it  into  the  crevices  of  the  rocks  or  sweeps  it  into 
the  valleys.  Disintegration  of  the  rock  produces  a 
rich  loamy  soil  which  adheres  well  to  the  rocky 
substratum  where  the  lie  of  the  land  permits  it. 
The  rock  is  a  crystalline  chalk  of  the  middle  cre- 
taceous period,  and  of  dark  gray  color.  Varieties 
distinguished  at  the  present  are:  a  pure  hippuritic 
chalkstone,  granular,  not  hard,  esteemed  for  build- 
ing, not  blemished  by  cracks,  when  quarried  gen- 
erally pure  white,  and  hardening  with  exposure 
to  the  atmosphere;  a  second  variety,  of  three  kinds, 
either  gray  or  marked  with  red  and  gray  veins  and 
not  foimd  in  such  large  masses  as  the  first  variety; 
a  variety  which  laminates  and  does  not  break  in 
the  fire;  a  fourth  variety,  so  soft  as  to  receive  and 
retain  the  imprint  of  the  fingers,  sometimes,  how- 
ever, hard  and  worked  with  the  saw,  reddened  often 
through  infiltration  of  iron,  and  generally  used  for 
the  little  sarcophagi  so  numerous  in  the  neighbor- 
hood. 

IV.  Climate:  The  usual  rainy  season  is  from 
October  to  May,  rarely  September  to  June,  while 
the  average  rainfall  for  the  year  is  about  twenty- 
three  inches,  and  the  southwest  and  west  winds 
carry  the  rain  clouds.  Snow  may  fall  from  Decem- 
ber to  March,  rarely  in  April,  though  it  does  not 
often  lie  long.  The  temperature  ranges  from  25^  to 
102^  Fahrenheit,  with  high  average  for  July  of  77^ 
and  for  January  of  43^.  Ice  may  form  at  night  in 
January,  but  melts  during  the  day  except  in  shady 


Jenualem 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


183 


spots.  The  atmospheric  humidity  ranges  widely. 
The  prevaQing  winds  are  from  the  northwest, 
though  the  radiation  of  the  land  in  summer  often 
produoes  a  sea  breeze  from  the  Mediterranean  which 
lasts  well  through  the  night  and  brings  much  mois- 
ture. East  winds  blow  in  autunm,  winter,  and 
spring,  rarely  in  summer.  The  sirocoo  blows  from 
the  southwest.  The  months  in  which  sickness  pre- 
vails are  May  to  October.  The  preceding  data  are 
the  result  of  observations  taken  during  the  second 
half  of  the  nineteenth  century,  and  the  question 
has  been  raised  whether  the  climate  is  the  same  as 
it  was  in  early  times  (see  Palestine).  Here  it  need 
be  said  only  that  great  changes  are  improbable; 
such  changes  as  may  have  taken  place  are  most 
likely  in  the  direction  of  greater  contrast  of  tem- 
perature and  of  reduced  rainfall.  But  Jerusalem 
must  always  have  been  a  city  not  abundantly  sup- 
plied with  water,  as  is  proved  by  the  many  devices 
for  conserving  the  rainfall. 

V.  History  of  the  City:  It  is  dear  that  the  name 
Jerusalem  was  not  given  by  the  Israelites,  since  it 

appears  c.  1400  b.c.  in  the  Amama 

I.  Pn-      Tablets  (q.v.)  in  the  form  Unutdim, 

Jsnelitic    which  corresponds  consonantally  with 

Jenssalem.  the  Hebrew  form  of  the  name,  though 

the  vocalization  of  the  last  syllable  is 
different  in  the  Old  Testament  but  not  in  the  Ara- 
maic or  Septuagint.  The  form  Yerushalayim  is 
Massoretic.  The  legend  of  the  founding  of  the  city 
reported  by  Josephus  (Apum,  i.  14  sqq.)  and  Plu- 
tarch (Im  et  Osiris,  xxxi.)  goes  back  to  Manetho, 
who  attributes  the  building  of  the  city  to  the  Hyksos 
when  they  left  Egypt,  But  the  legend  unites  the 
Hyksos  and  the  Hebrews  in  a  maimer  which  pre- 
vents giving  credit  to  the  story.  The  earliest  men- 
tion is  that  of  the  Amama  Tablets  ut  sup.,  in  which 
Ebed-Qiba  appears  as  tributary  to  the  Pharaoh, 
while  the  correspondence  suggests  that  the  ruler 
of  Jerusalem  was  charged  with  oversight  of  the 
princelings  of  southern  S3rria  (cf .  the  representation 
in  Judges  i.  5-7  of  Adoni-bezek  with  his  seventy 
subject  kings).  The  Israelitic  accoimts  dealing 
with  the  time  c.  1020  b.c.  make  the  Jebusites  mas- 
ters of  Jerusalem  and  the  immediate  surroimdings, 
and  Zion  the  stronghold  (II  Sam.  v.  7).  Until  the 
second  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  Zion  and  the 
City  of  David  w^re  located  between  the  vaUeys  of 
Hinnom  and  the  Tyropoeon  at  the  southwest  cor- 
ner of  the  city.  At  present  scholars  agree  that  Zion 
was  applied  to  the  eastern  part  of  the  city  and  that 
the  southeastern  hill  corresponds  to  the  fortress  of 
Jebus.  The  ''  city  of  David  "  is  not  to  be  confused 
with  "  Jerusalem,"  since  it  formed  only  a  part  of 
the  greater  whole  (cf.  II  Kings  xiv.  20).  The  city  of 
David  was  situated  on  lower  ground  than  the  temple 
and  the  palace  of  Solomon  (II  Sam.  xxiv.  18;  I 
Kings  viii.  1-4),  and  Solomon's  palace  lay  lower 
than  the  temple  (II  Kings  xi.  19),  from  which  it 
was  separated  only  by  a  wall  (Ezek.  xliii.  8).  The 
location  of  the  temple,  it  is  agreed,  was  on  the  site 
of  the  present  Mosque  of  Omar,  whence  the  direc- 
tions implied  in  the  foregoing  data  can  lead  one  only 
to  the  southeastern  hill  between  the  Kidron  and 
the  Tyropoeon.  This  conclusion  is  fully  corrobora- 
ted by  the  indications  in  Neh.  iii.  15-26,  xii.  31-39 


compared  ^th  ii.  13-14.  According  to  II  Sam.  v.  6 
the  fortress  of  Zion  was  difficult  of  access,  which 
corresponds  with  the  situation  to  the  east  and  the 
south  of  the  southeastern  comer  of  Jerusalem,  and 
it  must  have  been  protected  to  the  west  by  the 
Tyropoeon  before  the  latter  was  filled  with  debris. 
Similarly  on  the  north  a  ravine  extended,  men- 
tioned above  as  one  of  the  tributary  valleys  of  the 
Kidron.  Consequently  at  that  early  time  the  for- 
tress was  entirely  isolated  by  ravines,  while  the 
boundaries  suggested  probably  marked  out  the  dty 
of  the  Jebusites,  placed  on  the  lowest  of  the  emi- 
nences in  the  neighborhood.  The  Jerusalem  of  the 
Amama  Tablets  has  been  placed  westward  of  Jebus 
and  on  the  southwest  hill  of  the  modem  city. 

With  the  capture  of  the  Jebusite  fortress  Jerusa- 
lem fell  into  David's  hands,  and  this  may  have  been 
while  he  was  still  king  of  Hebron.   He 

2.1>avidic  was  thus  placed  in  contact  with  the 
and        northern  tribes  and  in  command  of  the 

Sok>monic  roads,  while    the  stronghold   became 

Jenwalem.  the  capital  of  his  kingdom,  a  place  be- 
longing neither  to  Judah  nor  to  the 
'northern  tribes,  and  therefore  neutral.  But  because 
of  David's  relationship  to  Judah,  it  is  sometimes 
ascribed  to  Judah,  while  elsewhere  it  is  called  Ben- 
jamin's territory  because  of  its  situation.  David 
did  not  exterminate  the  Jebusites,  but  left  them  life 
and  property  (II  Sam.  xxiv.  18);  he  forced  them, 
however,  to  evacuate  Zion,  whence  they  went  to 
the  southwest  elevation,  while  he  and  his  following 
occupied  **  the  city  of  David."  The  old  fortress  was 
completely  transformed,  being  built  up  by  David, 
and  a  palace  erected  there  (II  Sam.  v.  9,  11;  cf. 
Neh.  xii.  37)  upon  one  of  the  westem  levels  of  the 
hill,  while  the 'tombs  were  hewn  out  still  lower; 
the  fortification  was  completed  by  walls  and  towers, 
the  remains  of  which  have  been  traced.  In  this 
part  of  the  city  was  the  tabernacle-sanctuary  (II 
Sam.  vi.  17),  and  here  were  the  residences  for  the 
people  of  the  court,  as  well  as  a  great  number  of 
cistems  for  water  supply.  Solomon  extended  the 
building  toward  the  north  and  built  the  Millo  for 
protection,  though  as  yet  the  exact  location  of  tins 
defensive  work  is  not  determined  and  the  same  is 
tme  as  to  its  exact  character — ^whether  it  was  a 
wall  or  a  tower.  Solomon's  palace  and  temple  were 
to  the  north  and  on  higher  groimd,  the  temple  on 
Moriah  and  the  palace  on  Ophel,  the  latter  sur- 
rounded by  defensive  walls,  probably  pierced  with 
great  gates  on  the  south,  where  were  the  principal 
approaches.  The  arrangement  included  three  parts, 
a  greater  court  with  an  inner  court  containing  the 
temple,  and  a  second  or  middle  court  (I  Kings 
vii.  8,  12;  II  Kings  xx.  4),  the  temple  thus  being 
the  farthest  north,  while  these  separate  parts  were 
probably  upon  different  levels.  In  the  great  court 
to  the  south  were  the  house  of  Lebanon,  the  hall 
of  pillars,  and  the  throne  hall.  The  middle  court 
contained  Solomon's  palace  and  the  palace  of  his 
Eg3^tian  queen.  To  Solomon  is  ascribed  the  build- 
ing of  the  wall  which  surrounded  Jerusalem  (I 
Kings  iii.  1,  ix.  15).  The  question  of  the  extent  of 
the  city  in  those  times  and  therefore  of  the  extent 
and  course  of  this  wall  is  much  debated.  It  must  be 
borne  in  mind  that  a  distinction  was  made  between 


133 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


J«nuialem 


the  "  eity  of  David  "  and  Jerusalem,  and  by  the 
latter  was  meant  the  dty  on  the  southwest  hill, 
which  must  have  been  the  part  so  protected  by 
Solomon's  wall,  the  course  of  which  Josephus  claims 
to  give  (War,  V.,  iv.  2).  Remains  of  a  wall  which 
may  have  been  the  northern  part  of  Josephus's  wall 
have  been  discovered  south  of  David  Street,  viz., 
the  so-called  Wilson's  arch;  but  the  latter  can 
hardly  be  ascribed  to  the  time  of  Solomon.  Inves- 
tigations respecting  the  course  of  Solomon's  wall 
have  been  carried  on  by  the  English  engineer,  H. 
Maudsley,  and  the  American,  F.  J.  Bliss,  during 
which  several  gates  have  been  discovered  as  well  as 
the  direction  of  the  fortification,  but  whether  these 
belonged  to  the  erection  of  Solomon  or  to  later  times 
is  not  fully  determined.  The  valley  gate  was  prob- 
ably at  the  southwest  comer  of  the  old  city,  the 
dung  gate  on  the  south,  and  the  fountain  gate  to 
the  east  by  the  TyropoBon  valley  (formerly  called 
the  gate  between  the  two  walls,  Jer.  xxxix.  4). 

The  successors  of  Solomon,  according  to  the  Old 
Testament,  often  added  to  the  fortifications  of  the 
city,  and  probably  all  the  additions 
3.  From  made  are  not  mentioned  in  the  records. 
Solomon  Of  special  importance  is  the  report  that 
to  the  Hezekiah  built  ''  the  other  wall  "  (II 
Exile.  Chron.  xxxii.  5),  i.e.,  one  outside  what 
had  been  till  then  the  dty  limits,  called 
by  Josephus  the  second  wall  (TTar,  V.,  iv.  2).  A 
good  basis  for  tracing  this  wall  is  foimd  in  Neh.  iii. 
(cf.  xii.  31,  37-40),  and  some  remains  have  been  dis- 
covered which  are  with  good  reason  identified  with 
the  wall  of  Nehemiah.  These  remains  are  to  the 
north  of  the  so-called  David's  Tower,  under  the 
foundation  of  the  German  Evangelical  Church,  and 
still  farther  near  the  northwest  comer  of  the  Haram 
al-Sharif.  This  wall  was  pierced  by  two  gates, 
called  the  old  gate  and  the  fish  gate  (Neh.  iii.  6, 
xii.  39);  the  first  was  probably  near  the  quarter  of 
the  Holy  Sepulcher  comer  of  the  dty,  by  the  Prus- 
sian Hospice  of  St.  John;  the  fish  gate  must  have 
led  to  the  Tyroposon.  From  Zeph.  i.  10  it  may  be 
deduced  that  in  this  quarter  or  new  city  the  Phe- 
nician  traders  had  their  shops.  The  towers  of 
Hananeel  and  Hammeah  (Jer.  xxxi.  38;  Neh.  iii.  1) 
are  usually  located  on  the  site  of  the  later  Antonia, 
and  not  far  to  the  east  must  have  been  the  sheep 
gate  (Neh.  iii.  1),  perhaps  identical  with  the  gate 
of  Benjamin  (Jer.  xxxvii.  13).  A  short  distance 
east  of  the  sheep  gate  the  wsJl  bent  southward  to 
follow  the  bank  of  the  Kidron;  the  complete  course 
of  the  wall  is  not  yet  made  out,  but  that  it  changed 
direction  several  times  is  clear  from  Neh.  iii.  19-20, 
24-25,  while  iii.  26  compared  with  xii.  37  leaves 
doubtful  the  location  of  the  water  gate  giving  toward 
the  east.  Other  gates  mentioned  are  the  middle 
gate  (Jer.  xxxix.  3),  the  gate  of  potsherds  (Jer.  xix. 
2),  the  first  gate  of  Zech.  xiv.  10  near  the  comer 
gate,  the  gate  of  the  guard  (II  Kings  xi.  19,  be- 
longing to  Solomon's  palace),  and  the  horse  gate 
(Neh.  iii.  28),  the  locations  of  which  have  not  been 
found.  The  residents  continued  to  make  provision 
for  water  supply  by  hewing  or  constmcting  dstems 
in  which  to  collect  rain-water.  Neh.  iii.  16  men- 
tions an  artificial  pool  in  the  city  of  David,  called 
''  the  pool  that  was  made,"  probably  to  distinguish 


it  from  the  natural  pools  theretofore  used.  It  is 
diffibult  to  locate  all  the  cisterns  or  pools  mentioned 
in  the  Old  Testament.  The  upper  pool  of  Isa. 
XXX vi.  2  seems  to  have  been  to  the  north  or 
northwest  of  the  old  dty,  perhaps  therefore  the 
Emilia  pool  west  of  the  daza  gate  or  the  pool  of 
Hezekiah;  but  many  have  distinguished  the  former 
as  the  upper  pool  and  the  latter  as  the  lower  pool 
(Isa.  xxii.  9).  The  reservoir  between  the  two 
waUs  of  Isa.  xxii.  11  is  to  be  sought  in  the  Tyro- 
poBon  valley  between  the  dty  of  David  and  Jerusa- 
lem; the  pool  of  Shelah  of  Neh.  iii.  15  is  identified 
by  many  with  that  of  Siloam.  The  inhabitants 
sought  in  three  ways  to  make  available  the  waters 
of  the  Gihon  spring;  an  approach  through  the 
rock  of  the  hill,  a  channel  from  the  foot  of  the 
hill  southward  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  water 
gate,  and  a  tunnel  conducting  the  water  into  the 
city.  The  first  was  discovered  by  (Charles  Warren 
in  1867-68;  the  second,  in  part,  by  Conrad  von 
Schick  m  1886  and  1890,  found  to  be  partly  a  cov- 
ered channel,  partly  a  tunnel;  the  third  is  the 
famous  Siloam  tunnel  (in  which  is  the  Siloam  in- 
scription, q.v.),  hewn  not  in  a  straight  line,  but  first 
leading  west  from  the  spring,  then  south,  and  finally 
west  again  into  the  king's  pool  of  Neh.  ii.  14.  If  it 
be  right  to  attribute  this  tunnel  to  Hezekiah,  the 
other  means  of  leading  the  water  into  the  dty  belong 
to  an  earlier  age,  the  first  perhaps  going  back  to  the 
time  of  David  or  of  the  Jebusites.  Signs  indicate 
that  during  the  Davidic  dynasty  numerous  attempts 
were  made  to  supply  the  dty  with  water  from  a 
distance.  To  the  south  of  Bethlehem  is  a  group  of 
waterworks  which  divide  into  three  parts.  To  the 
west  of  the  little  village  of  Artas,  three  hours  south 
of  Jerusalem,  are  three  great  pools  called  the  pools 
of  Solomon,  fed  partly  by  springs  in  the  neighbor^ 
hood,  partly  by  two  canals,  the  one  leading  from 
the  Wadi  id-Biyar  emptying  into  the  upper  pool, 
the  other  from  the  Wadi  al-'Amib  emptying  into 
the  middle  pool.  The  connection  with  Jerusalem 
was  by  two  channels,  an  upper  and  a  lower,  of 
which  the  upper  has  a  remarkable  peculiarity.  At 
first  an  ordinary  canal,  at  the  grave  of  Rachel  it 
becomes  a  hne  of  piping,  which  sinks  and  then 
rises  farther  on,  built  of  stones  bored  into  hollow 
cylinders  fitting  dosely  together  and  laid  in  a  bed 
of  masonry.  This  breaks  off  north  of  the  tomb  of 
Rachel,  and  from  there  only  indistinct  traces  are 
discoverable.  This  must  be  regarded  as  andent, 
possibly  Solomonic  or  Davidic;  the  date  of  the  lower 
channel  is  about  that  of  Herod  the  Great.  Besides 
these  two  conduits,  traces  of  a  third  have  been 
found. 

The  capture  of  Jerusalem  by  Nebuchadrezzar, 

587-586  B.C.,  resulted  in  the  burning  of  the  temple, 

the  royal  palace,  and  the  laiger  dwell- 

4.  From     ings  of  the  dty;    the  encireling  wall 

the  Exile    was  also  thrown  down.    The  remnant 

to  Herod,    of  inhabitants  left  by  the  conqueror  in 

the  city  was  too  poor  and  dispirited  to 

think  of  rebuilding.    Gedaliah  had  his  residence  in 

Mizpah,  which  indicates  the  unfitness  of  Jerusalem 

as  a  capital.    From  Haggai  (i.  4)  is  first  heard  the 

story  of  rebuilding  in  the  year  519  B.C.  and    of 

the  rebuilding  of  the  temple  519-15  b.c,  though  the 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


184 


Btreas  of  circumstanoes  continued  to  be  felt.  In 
445  B.C.  Nehemiah  came  with  full  powers  from 
Artaxerzes  I.,  rebuilt  the  wall  and  erected  its  gates 
in  fifty-two  days  (Neh.  iii.,  xii.  27-43),  finishing 
with  a  festival.  The  most  of  the  repairs  had  to  be 
made  on  the  north,  east,  and  south,  while  mention 
is  made  of  the  house  of  the  mighty  men,  the  great 
tower  of  the  upper  palace,  and  David's  palace 
(Neh.  iii.  16,  25,  xii.  37)  as  though  stiU  standing. 
The  priests  were  masters  of  the  temple  and  its 
vicinity,  while  some  dwelt  in  the  neighborhood  of 
the  old  Davidic  residence  (Neh.  iii.  20  sqq.).  From 
Neh.  zi.  4-19  it  may  be  gathered  that  the  popu- 
lation when  Nehemiah  came  was  about  10,000,  a 
small  number  for  so  laige  a  space  (Neh.  vii.  4). 
But  during  the  next  two  centuries  the  city  must 
have  grown  greatly  in  spite  of  the  damage  it  suf- 
fered from  Persians  and  Egyptians.  In  198  B.C. 
it  came  into  the  power  of  the  Seleucidae.  It  is  after 
this  that  mention  is  made  of  a  fortress  inside  the 
city  held  by  a  foreign  force  and  called  the  Akra  (or 
the  acropolis).  It  is  related  in  I  Mace.  i.  33-37  that 
the  officers  of  Antiochus  IV.  fortified  the  city  of 
David  with  a  strong  wall,  and  that  this  became  a 
menace  to  the  sanctuary.  In  thus  distinguishing 
the  city  of  David  from  the  rest  of  the  city,  and  both 
of  these  from  the  temple  hill,  the  author  of  Mac- 
cabees follows  Old-Testament  usage.  The  supposi- 
tion that  the  Akra  hill  overlooked  the  temple  con- 
tradicts all  testimony  regarding  the  relative  levels. 
The  importance  of  David's  city  was  gradually  less- 
ened by  means  of  the  temple  hill.  Tlie  high  priest 
Simon  (Ecclus.  1. 1)  and  later  the  Hasmcmean  Judas 
(I  Mace.  iv.  60)  fortified  the  temple,  and  Jonathan 
renewed  the  protection  after  Antiochus  Eupator 
had  destroyed  it.  Thus  Zion  became  a  fortress  in- 
side the  unwalled  city.  The  encircling  wall  of 
the  city  was  restored  by  the  Hasmoneans  several 
times,  and  they  also  cut  off  the  Akra  by  a  high 
wall  to  shut  out  the  garrison  from  the  market. 
Another  work  of  this  period  was  the  palace  of  the 
Hasmoneans,  west  of  the  temple  and  on  higher 
ground,  probably  on  the  edge  of  the  southwest  hill, 
the  upper  city  of  Josephus  (Ant.  XIV.,  i.  2).  It 
came  later  into  the  possession  of  the  Herods,  and 
was  occupied  by  Agrippa  II.  when  he  stayed  in 
Jerusalem.  Near  it,  but  lower  in  the  Tyropoeon 
valley,  was  the  Xystoe,  either  a  great  hall  or  an 
open  place,  while  across  on  the  east  side  of  the 
vaUey  was  the  coimcil-house  of  the  Sanhedrin  and 
near  it  the  hall  of  records.  Toward  the  end  of  this 
period  belongs  probably  the  description  of  Jerusalem 
found  in  the  letter  of  Aristeas,  in  all  likelihood 
based  on  Hecataios  of  Abdera. 

For  the  next  period  Josephus  is  the  authority, 

and  he  distinguishes  between  the  upper  city,  or  the 

upper  market,  the  lower  city,  the  tem- 

5.  From    pie  or  the  temple  hill,  the  proasteion, 

Herod      and  the  new  city  or  Bezetha,  but  never 

to  the      uses  the  name  Zion.    The  upper  city 

Destruction,  lay  opposite  the  temple  and  the  lower 

70  A.D.  city;  the  latter  was  the  Akra,  south 
of  the  temple  and  situated  on  the  low- 
est level  within  the  walls;  the  proasteion  coincided 
with  the  new  city  enclosed  within  the  so-called 
second  wall  of  the  post-Solomonic  kings;  the  new 


city  of  Josephus  arose  in  the  decade  after  Herod 
to  the  north  of  the  temple  and  westward  about  the 
wall  to  the  tower  of  Hippicus.  Still  farther,  Josephus 
distinguishes  between  Besetha,  the  new  city,  and 
the  wood  market;  Beietha  lay  north  of  the  temple 
and  Antonia  and  east  of  the  street  leading  from  the 
gate  by  the  Women's  Tower  to  Antonia.     His  ac- 
count can  not  be  followed  without  a  knowledge  of 
the  earlier  arrangement  of  the  city.   Through  Her- 
od's building  operations  the  city  took  on  some- 
thing of  the  splendor  of  a  Grecian  city.   Besides  the 
temple  he  erected  a  stately  tower,  which  he  named 
Antonia  in  honor  of  the  Roman  triumvir,  and  the 
palace  of  Herod  (located  by  its  three  great  towers, 
Hippicus,   Fhasael,  and   Mariamne)   which   com- 
manded the  city  as  the  Antonia  commanded  the 
temple  hill.    The  three  towers  served  as  a  protec- 
tion for  the  city  as  well  as  for  the  palace  (cf.  for 
description  of  towers  and  palace  Josephus,  War, 
v.,  iv.  3-4).     The  palace  was  occupied  later  by 
Archelaus  and  Agrippa  I.;   when  the  Romans  ap- 
pointed a  procurator  over  Judea,  it  was  ceded  to 
him  and  his  guard.    Gessius  Floras  and  Pontius 
Pilate  are  said  to  have  had  their  judgment  seat  in 
front  of  the  stracture,  hence  here  must  be  sought 
the  pretoriimi.    In  the  upper  city  was  the  hippo- 
drome, and  Herod  is  said  to  have  built  a  theater 
in  Jerusalem  and  an  amphitheater  in  the  plain  (the 
latter  probably  discovered  in  1887  by  Dr.  Schick 
above  Bir  Eyyub).   Finally,  Herod  took  care  for  the 
water  supply  of  the  city.    Schick  has  shown  that  the 
lower  of  the  two  conduits  from  the  pools  south  of 
the  city  near  Artas  is  of  Herod's  building.    It  begins 
inmiediately  below  the  lowest  of  the  three  pools 
and  is  carried  in  a  winding  course  past  Bethlehem 
to  Jerusalem  as  a  masonry  or  hewn  canal  covered 
with  flat  stones,  only  twice  taking  the  character  of 
a  tunnel.    It  has  been  repaired  or  improved  several 
times — by  Pontius  Pilate,  again  in  the  fourteenth 
and  sixteenth  centuries,  and  in  1865.    The  third 
wall  to  the  north  of  Jerusalem  protects  the  "  new 
city  "  of  Josephus.    Agrippa  I.  began  to  build  it, 
but  ceased  because  of  the  distrust  of  the  Romans. 
At  the  outbreak  of  the  Jewish  war  it  was  again 
undertaken  and  speedily  finished.    It  was  pierced 
by  many  gates,  the  names  of  which  are  unknown; 
one,  protected  by  the  so-called  Women's  Tower, 
was  probably  where  the  Damascus  Gate  now  is. 
Its  course  was  approximately  that  of  the  present 
north  wall.    The  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  at  this 
time,  including   the   guests  at  the  Passover,  are 
reckoned    by   Josephus   at  2,700,000   (War,  VI., 
ix.3;  cf.  II.,  xiv.  3);  Schick  would  place  the  normal 
population  at  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  era 
at  from  200,000  to  250,000.    In  the  reign  of  the 
Emperor  Claudius  (41-54  a.d.).  Queen  Helena  of 
Adiabene  on  the  upper  Tigris,  her  son  Izates,  and 
other  members  of  her  family  became  converts  to 
Judaism  and  built  residences  for  themselves  in  the 
lower  dty  (Josephus,  War,  IV.,  ix.  11,  V.,  vi.  1). 
Agrippa  I.  had  the  streets  of  the  city  paved  to 
give  occupation  to  the  great  number  of  Jaborers  left 
without  work  (Josephus,  Ant,,  XX.,  ix,  7).    The 
Amygdalon  pool  mentioned  in  War,  V.,  xi.  4  is 
doubtless  the  pool  of  Hezekiah;  the  name  ia  a  Greek 
form  of  the  Hebrew  mighdal,  "tower,"  and  the 


135 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jemsalem 


pod  was  near  the  Mariamne  tower  of  the  palace. 
The  Struthion  pool  of  War,  V.,  xi.  4  lay  north  of 
Antonia,  but  its  aite  is  not  yet  certainly  recovered. 
The  location  of  the  pool  of  Bethesda  is  also  uncer- 
tain; it  seems  to  have  been  near  the  sheep  gate 
&nd  north  of  the  temple.  Dr.  Schick  has  located 
the  Bethesda  of  the  Middle  Ages  to  the  west  of  the 
church  of  St.  Anne  north  of  the  temple.  Gethsem- 
ane  lay  at  the  foot  of  the  Mount  of  Olives,  cer- 
tainly not  far  from  the  city,  according  to  John 
xriii.  1  a  garden,  and  the  site  of  the  betrayal  of 
Jesus.  The  present  garden  in  the  possession  of  the 
Franciscans  has  been  known  since  the  tenth  or 
eleventh  century,  but  there  are  indications  that  the 
earlier  site  was  farther  to  the  north.  The  Herodian 
monument  was  located  to  the  west  of  this,  above 
the  valley  of  Hinnom,  and  has  been  identified  by 
Dr.  Schick.  The  tomb  of  Queen  Helena  of  Adia- 
bene  was  about  a  third  of  a  mile  from  the  north 
wall  of  the  city  (Ant.  XX.,  iv.  3);  it  is  probably 
the  crypt  with  court,  portal,  and  numerous  cham- 
bers known  as  the  King's  Tomb  north  of  the 
Damascus  Gate. 

The  city  suffered  greatly  during  the  siege  and 
gradual  capture  imder  Titus.    His  express  command 
to  destroy  the   dty  received   willing 
6.  Until     obedience  from  the  embittered  Roman 
Constan-    soldiery.    Titus  regarded  only  the  three 
tine  the     towers  of  the  palace  as  worth  preserv- 
Great.       ing,  and  he  spared  the  western  part  of 
the  city  wall,  as  it  guarded  the  camp 
of  the  garrison  on  the  southwest  hill  in  the  upper 
dty.    The   investment  of  the  dty  began  at  the 
Passover,  when  there  was  present  a  vast  number  of 
visitors,  so  that  the  count  of  Josephus  (War,  VI., 
ix.,  z.)  is  not  improbable.    The  place  where  the 
iaitb  of  the  Jews  had  received  so  severe  a  blow  was 
naturally  avoided  by  them  and  Jabne  (Jamnia) 
became  the  center  of  Jewish  life  in  Palestine.    The 
young  Christian  community,  which  before  the  in- 
vestment by  Titus  withdrew  to  Pella,  east  of  the 
Jordan,  bad  as  headquarters  the  house  of  John  Mark 
and  his  mother  Mary  (Acts  xii.  12-17).     Probably 
there  was  the  great  upper  chamber  (Mark  xiv.  15) 
in  which  Jesus  celebrated  the  last  supper  and  also 
the  chamber  mentioned  in  Acts  i.  13  and  ii.  Although 
the  site  of  this  place  is  pointed  out  by  a  tradition 
reaching  to  the  fourth  century,  there  is  no  doubt 
oonceming  its  correctness.    Epiphanius  of  Salamis 
(392  A.D.)  reports  (De  mensuria,  xiv.)  that  when 
Hadrian  made  his  visit  to  Jerusalem  in   130-131 
he  found  dty  and  temple  destroyed  except  for  a 
few  dwellings  and  the  little  Christian  church  on 
what  was  then  called  Mount  Zion.    Since  the  time 
ot  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  this  church,  or  another  built 
on  its  site,  has  been  well  known;  it  corresponds  to 
the  present  Nebi  Da*ud  on  the  southwest  hill  south 
of  the  wall  and  above  the  tombs  of  the  Davidic 
dynasty.    The  name  Zion  was  probably  attached 
to  thb  church  through  an  extension  of  usage  out  of 
the  Old  Testament,  since  the  name  is  not  found 
used  of  a  part  of  the  city  by  Josephus.     According 
to  this  usage  the  place  of  assemblage  of  the  early 
Christian  community  came  to  be  called  "the  holy 
Zion";    out  of  this  grew  the  identification  of  the 
southwest  hill  as  Mount   Zion,  and  so  the  topo- 


graphic signification  of  the  term  was  lost.  Hadrian 
made  an  end  of  the  desolation  of  the  dty  and  com- 
manded that  it  be  rebuilt  as  a  Roman  colony; 
during  the  rising  of  Bar  Kokba  it  was  for  a  few 
years  a  free  dty,  after  that  again  a  Roman  colony, 
but  without  the  jua  Italicum,  and  was  called  M&a 
.  Capitolina,  shortened  in  common  speech  to  iBlia,  in 
the  Arabic  to  Iliya,  till  the  late  Middle  Ages.  The 
city  deity  was  Jupiter  Capitolinus,  whose  temple 
was  on  the  site  of  the  Jewish  temple.  Jews  were 
excluded  from  the  new  city  under  pain  of  death. 
The  area  was  diminished,  and  the  old  dty  of  David 
was  outside  the  city  limits.  In  this  period  were 
fixed  the  form  and  topography  of  the  dty  which 
have  survived  till  the  present. 

The  heathen  character  of  the  city  did  not  prevent 
Christians  from  visiting  or  settling  there;   pilgrim- 
ages began  in  the  third  century  and 

7.  From  were  numerous  in  the  fourth.  Helena, 
Constan-  the  mother  of  Constantine,  came  there 
tine  to  the  in  326-327  and  had  churches  built  on 

Capture  the  sites  of  the  birth  and  ascension  of 
by  the  Christ,  in  Bethlehem,  and  on  the  Mount 
Arabs,  of  Olives  (for  Constantino's  building 
see  Holt  Sefulcheh).  Constantine 
relaxed  the  harsh  laws  against  the  Jews,  Julian  gave 
them  permission  to  restore  their  temple,  but  after 
Julian  the  earlier  prohibitions  against  the  Jews  seem 
to  have  been  renewed.  In  the  second  half  of  the 
fourth  century  eremites  and  monks  from  £igypt 
and  Syria  began  to  crowd  into  Palestine,  in  the 
fifth  and  sixth  centuries  causing  bloody  feuds 
through  dogmatic  strife.  The  first  monastery  in 
Jerusalem  seems  to  have  been  built  in  the  fifth 
century.  The  conung  of  the  Empress  Eudocia, 
consort  of  Theodosius  II.,  in  438  had  great  conse- 
quences for  the  dty.  To  her  is  ascribed  the  renewal 
of  the  old  wall  to  the  south,  and  various  sacred 
sites  were  joined  to  the  city.  She  built  the  Church 
of  St.  Stephen  (possibly  included  in  the  present 
possessions  of  the  Dominicans).  The  Emperor 
Justinian  had  the  architect  Georgios  of  Constan- 
tinople erect  a  great  basilica  (that  of  theTheotokos) 
in  connection  with  a  pilgrims'  house  and  a  hospital 
in  the  middle  of  the  city,  perhaps  south  of  the 
Church  of  the  Holy  Sepulcher.  The  capture  of  the 
city  by  the  Persians  under  Chosroes  II.  (614)  re- 
sulted in  the  destruction  of  most  of  the  ecclesiastical 
structures,  in  the  restoration  of  which  the  abbot 
Modestus  showed  great  zeal,  though  when  the 
Emperor  Heraclius  marched  in  (638),  much  of  the 
city  was  in  ruins.  In  638  the  (}aliph  Omar  took 
Jerusalem. 

The  stipulations  of  the  surrender  to  the  effect 

that  civic  and  ecdesiastical  protection  should  be 

given  and  that  the  churches  were  not 

8.  Under  to  be  used  as  dwellings  were  observed 
the  Arabs   with   comparative   good   faith.     The 

to  the  Arabs  named  the  city  Bait  al-Mukaddaa 
Crusades,  or  alrMakdia,  '*  Place  of  the  Sanctuary," 
shortened  to  oZ-J^uds,  but  made  Lydda 
their  first  military  capital  in  Palestine.  Only  oc- 
casionally had  the  pilgrims  cause  to  complain  of 
hard  usage,  the  relations  between  the  East  and  the 
West  being  good  under  the  friendship  of  Charle- 
magne and  Harun  al-Raschid.    In  the  tenth  oen- 


JcmaalMB,  BUhoprio  In 


THE  NEW    SCHAFF-HERZOG 


186 


tury  began  the  strife  between  lalam  and  Chris- 
tianity, furthered  by  the  bad  faith  of  the  Egyptian 
Fatimides,  who  disregarded  all  treaties;  the  pil- 
grims were  compelled  to  pay  a  fee  for  entrance  into 
the  dty,  and  the  Galiph  al-Hakim  in  1010  began  a 
severe  persecution  of  the  Christians.  Merchants 
from  Amalfi,  however,  gained  a  footing  in  Jerusa- 
lem with  permission  to  trade,  and  soon  had  a  church 
(Sancta  Biaria  Latina)  and  a  monastery  (Monas- 
terium  de  Latina)  to  the  south  of  the  Church  of 
the  Holy  Sepulcher. 

When  Godfrey  of  Bouillon  captured  the  city, 
July  15,  1099,  only  two  churches  were  found  unin- 
jured, that  of  the  Holy  Sepulcher  and 

9.  During   that  of  the  Italian  merchants,  for  the 
the        latter  of  which  tribute  was  paid.    Dur- 

CrusadM.  ing  the  continuance  of  the  kingdom  of 
Jerusalem  great  seal  was  displayed  in 
building.  The  principal  gates  of  this  period  were 
David's  gate  (Jafifa  gate),  Stephen's  (Damascus), 
Jehoshaphat's,  and  Zion  gate  in  the  south.  Near 
David's  gate  was  David's  tower  (the  present  cita- 
del, often  repaired  from  the  ruins  of  Herod's  palace), 
hence  the  later  location  of  the  "city  of  David." 
Extensive  building  operations  went  on  within  the 
grounds  of  the  Amalfi  merchants;  the  Benedio- 
tines  built  a  hospital  in  honor  of  Johannes  Elee- 
mon  (q.v.)  in  connection  with  which  a  community 
dressed  in  black  robes  with  a  white  cross  came  into 
being — the  beginning  of  the  Knights  of  St.  John. 
The  Hospitalers  imder  the  patronage  of  John  the 
Baptist  took  over  the  woman's  guest-house.  Since 
the  Latins  located  the  pretorium  north  of  the  Zion 
Churoh,  later  northwest  of  the  temple  square,  the 
direction  of  the  Via  Dolorosa  was  placed  accordingly. 
The  pool  of  Bethesda  (John  v.  2)  was  placed  by 
them  near  the  Churoh  of  St.  Anna,  discovered  in 
1888  northwest  of  this  site;  later  it  was  located 
north  of  the  Haram  al-Sharif.  The  Cbmcti  of  St. 
Anne  was  known  as  early  as  the  seventh  century, 
was  repaired  by  the  Franks,  and  later  was  con- 
nected with  a  nunnery.  The  hills  to  the  west  and 
south  of  the  Hinnom  valley  were  called  Gihon.  In 
the  vaUey  of  Jehoshaphat  the  Franks  repaired  the 
tomb  of  the  Virgin  ICary  and  its  churoh;  while  on 
the  third  peak  of  Olivet  stood,  about  1130,  a  great 
Churoh  of  the  Ascension,  where  Constantine  had 
built  a  sanctuary. 

Jerusalem  opened  its  gates  to  the  victorious 

Saladin  Oct.  2,  1187.    Most  of  the  Latm  Christians 

departed;  the  Greeks  remained.    The 

10.  From    Christian    and    Occidental    character 
ii87tothe  which  the  city  had  assumed  during 

Praient  the  crusades  soon  changed  as  Christian 
churohes  and  cloisters  became  mosques 
or  Mohammedan  schools.  Saladin  had  the  walls  re- 
newed when  Richard  the  Lion-hearted  threatened 
a  siege  in  1191-92,  but  the  Sultan  Malik  al-Muazzam 
of  Damascus  ordered  them  destroyed  that  they 
might  not  become  a  protection  to  the  Christians 
(1219-20).  A  treaty  between  the  Gennan  Frederick 
II.  and  the  EJgyptian  Sultan  al-Kamil  secured  the 
city  for  the  (Christians  (except  the  Haram  al-Sharif) 
for  about  ten  yea,n  and  a  half  from  Feb.  1,  1229, 
after  which  Nasir  Daud,  prince  of  Kerak,  took  the 
city  and  destroyed  the  walls.   The  E^gyptian  Sultan 


Eyyub  took  it  in  1244,  in  1517  it  fell  under  the 
power  of  the  Turks  under  Selim  I.,  and  his  successor 
Solyman  in  1542  gave  to  the  walls  of  the  city  their 
present  form.  Syria  was  in  the  poaseflsion  of 
Mehemet  All  of  Ej^t  1831-10.  In  1219  the  Fran- 
ciscans gained  a  footing  in  the  city,  in  the  thirteenth 
century  held  firmans  under  the  Egyptian  sultans, 
in  1333  came  into  possession  of  the  Zion  Churoh 
and  perhaps  of  other  sacred  places,  some  of  which 
they  had  to  yield  to  Solyman  in  1523  and  1551; 
their  present  location,  northwest  of  the  Church  of 
the  Holy  Sepulcher,  was  obtained  in  1559.  Since 
the  conquest  of  Jerusalem  by  the  Turks  the  Chria- 
tian  powers,  with  France  in  the  lead,  have  protected 
the  Roman  Catholic  Christians  in  Palestine,  Russia 
has  cared  for  the  Greek  Christians.  A  revolution  in 
the  situation  at  Jerusalem  was  brought  about  by  the 
English  (1826)  and  American  (1821)  missionaries; 
an  English  consulate  was  established  there  in  1839, 
a  Prussian  in  1842.  England  and  Prussia  had  the 
Evangelical  bishopric  of  St.  James  created  (see  Jebu- 
BALEM,  Anoligan-Gehman  Bibhopric  in).  Other 
Christian  powers  thus  had  their  attention  drawn  to 
the  situation.  The  Greek  patriaroh  C^yril  transferred 
his  seat  from  Constantinople  to  Jerusalem  in  1845, 
and  Rome  reestablished  the  Latin  patriarohate  in 
1847.  Pilgrim-houses,  hospitals,  churches,  schools 
and  monasteries  have  been  erected,  and  these  mark 
the  character  of  the  peaceful  crusade  of  the  nine- 
teenth century,  with  the  result  that  Jerusalem  is 
no  more  an  Oriental  city.  Of  its  60,000  inhabitants, 
41,000  are  Jews,  12,800  are  (Christians,  7,000  are  Mo- 
hammedans. ()f  the  Christians,  6,000  are  Greeks, 
4,000  Latins,  1,400  Protestonts,  800  Armenians, 
200  Uniate  Greeks,  150  Copts,  100  Abyssinians, 
100  Syrians,  and  50  Uniate  Armenians.  The  Jews 
are  poverty-stricken  and  do  not  exert  an  influence 
corresponding  to  their  numbers.         (H.  Guths.) 

Bibuoorapht:  LiaU  of  literature  are  the  BihUdhsea  geo- 
ffrophiea  PaluUnoB,  by  R.  Rohrioht,  Berlin,  1890,  and  by 
T.  Tobler,  Leipme.  1867.  Indupensable  for  foUowinc  re- 
cent invesUgationB  are  the  Quarterly  SUUemnUa  of  the 
PEF.  also  the  files  of  ZDPV,  the  Mitteaungen  und  Nach- 
ridden  of  the  Deutscber  Palftstina-Verein.  the  files  of 
ZDMG,  RecueU  d'ardUologie  orieniaU,  and  JBL,  Valuable 
as  summaries  are  the  articles  in  Z>B,  ii.  684-601;  SB,  u. 
2407-2432;   JE,  vii.  118-157;   DCO,  i.  84^-859. 

For  excavations  and  topofcraphioal  details  consult: 
C.  Warren,  C.  R.  Conder.  Survey  <ff  WeeUm  PaleaUne, 
Jeruealem,  London,  1884;  E.  Q.  Schults,  Jeruealem,  Ber- 
lin, 1845:  W.  Krafft,  Die  Topooraphie  Jeruealeme,  Bonn, 
1846;  T.  Tobler,  Die  SiloahqueOe  und  der  Oetberg,  St.  Gall, 
1852;  idem,  Zvoei  BOcHer  Topoffraphie  von  Jeruaalem,  ib. 
1853-^:  E.  Pierotti,  JerueaUm  Explored,  2  Tola..  London. 
1864;  C.  J.  M.  de  VogQ^  Le  Temple  de  Jeruealem,  Paris, 
1864;  C.  W.  Wilson,  Ortfnanee  Survey  ofJeruealem,  2  vols., 
Southampton,  1867-70;  C.  Wilson  and  C.  Warren,  Re- 
covery oS  JerueaUm,  London,  1871;  P.  Wol£F,  Jsrusojem. 
Leipeic,  1872;  C.  Warren,  Underground  Jeruealetn,  Lon- 
don, 1876;  H.  Outhe,  Auegrabungen  bei  JerueaJem,  Leipsic, 
1883;  C.  WUson,  Jeruedlem  Ike  Holy  Ciiy,  London,  1888; 
F.  J.  Bliss,  ExoavaHone  at  Jeruealem,  l89JhS7,  London, 
1898;  G.  lfommert»  Topographie  dee  dUen  Jeruealem,  4 
vols.,  Leipsic,  1902-06;  8.  Merrill,  AndeniJeruealemt  New 
York,  1906;  Q.  A.  Smith,  The  Topography,  Beonomiee  and 
Hietory  of  Jeruealem  to  70  AM.,  2  vols.,  London,  1906; 
Robinson,  Reeeartkee,  and  Later  Reeeardtee,  On  the  ques- 
tion of  the  Akra  consult  C.  E.  Caspari,  in  TSK^  1864,  pp. 
309-328;  O.  Gatt.  in  7Q.  bcvi  (1884),  34r«4,  Ixzi  (1880), 
77-125;  idem,  Die  HQgel  von  Jeruealem,  FnXbmg,  1897. 

For  descriptions  of  the  dty  consult:  J.  F.  Thmpp, 
Ancient  Jeruealem,  London,  1855;  A.  B.  MaeOrigor,  index 
of  Paeeagee  .  .  .  upon  the  Topography  of  Jeruealem,  Glai- 


137 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


JeruflaUm,  BUhoprlo  In 


cow,  1876;  C.  Zimmermaim,  JCorfm  und  Plane  siir  T&po-^ 
9nvkU  dM  alien  Jenualtm,  Basel.  1876;  Q.  Williami, 
The  Hoiy  City,  2  vols.,  London,  1840;  C.  Ritter.  Com- 
pttnUifMOeo(fnphv<^PaU9Hnt^  !▼.  1-212,  Edinbuish,  1866; 
W.  M.  Thonuon,  The  Land  and  the  Book,  vol.  i..  New  York, 
1880;  F.  Spieae,  Dae  Jeruealem  dee  Joeephue,  BerUn.  1881; 
H.  Nicole,  Plan  iopooraphique  de  Jeniealem  et  eee  environe, 
Pkria,  1886-87;  J.  H.  Lewie,  The  Holy  Plaeee  of  Jeruealem, 
London.  1888;  O.  R.  Lees,  Jeruealem  lUuetraied,  ib.  1894; 
G.  A.  South,  Hietorieal  Geography  of  the  Holy  Land, 
pewim,  ib.  1897;  F.  Diekamp,  Hippolytue  von  Theben, 
pp.  96  eqq.,  MOnster,  1898;  W.  Sanday,  Saered  Sitee  of 
the  OoepeU,  Oxford,  1903;  Miae  A.  Qoodrioh  Freer,  Inner 
Jerueaiem,  London,  1904  (an  excellent  deecription  of  the 
preaent  dty);  Baedeker's  Handbook  on  Syria  and  Pales- 
tine, 6th  Germ,  ed.,  Leipsic.  1904,  4th  Eng.  ed.,  1906. 
Pietoraal  productions  are  Q.  Ebers  and  H.  Guthe,  PaULeUna 
in  Biid  uni  Wort,  vol.  L,  Stuttgart,  1883;  Hartmann- 
Benainser,  PalOeiina,  Hamburg,  1889;  and  the  Tiews 
published  by  the  PEF. 

On  the  history  of  the  dty  in  the  Biblical  period  consult 
L.  B.  Paton,  Jeruealem  in  Bible  Timee,  Chicago,  1908; 
E.  BeTan,  Jeruealem  under  the  Hifpi  Prieeie,  London,  1904; 
and  the  works  on  the  history  of  Israel  dted  under  Arab. 
For  later  periods  consult:  C.  J.  M.  de  Vogfl^,  Lee  iglieee 
de  la  ierre  eainU,  Paris,  1860;  T.  Lerin.  Siege  of  Jeruealem 
by  Titue,  London,  1863;  V.  Qu^rin,  La  Terre  eainie,  2 
parte,  Paris,  1884;  J.  Guy  le  Strange,  PoUeeUne  under  the 
Moeleme,  London.  1890;  G.  Dodu,  Hiet.  dee  inetiiuHone 
manarehi^iuee  dane  le  royaume  laUn  de  Jeruealem^  Paris, 
1894;  Jeruealem  el  eee  principalis  sanetaatrts,  ib.  1895; 
C.  A.  Couret,  La  Priee  de  Jeruealem  .  .  .  «n  614;  *roi» 
doatmenle,  ib.  1896;  C.  R.  Conder,  The  LaUn  Kingdom  of 
Jeruealem,  1009-1991,  London,  1897;  S.  Lane  Poole, 
Saladin  and  the  Fall  of  the  Kingdom  of  Jeruealem,  New 
York.  1896;  R.  R5hrieht,  Oeedaehte  dee  K&ni4froiehe 
Jeruealem,  Berlin,  1898;  W.  Beeant  and  E.  H.  Pahner, 
Jeruealem,  the  City  of  Herod  and  Saladin,  London,  1899; 
A.  Aohleitner,  Jeruealem,  Mains,  1905;  W.  S.  Oaldeoott, 
Tlie  Second  Temple  in  Jeruetdem,  London,  1908;  and  the 
publications  of  the  Palestine  Pilgrim  Text  Society. 

Haps  of  value  are  the  Plan  of  Jeruealem  prepared  by  the 
PEF.  and  Karte  der  Maierialen  eur  Topographs  dee  AUen 
Jeruealem,  accompanied  by  Maierialen  eur  Topographie 
dee  Allen  Jeruealem,  both  by  A.  KQmmel,  Halle,  1904-06. 

JERUSALBH,  ANGLICAN-GERMAR  BISHOP- 
RIC m :  An  epiaoopal  see  founded  in  Jerusalem  in  the 
nineteenth  century  by  joint  agreement  of  the  Angli- 
can and  the  German  Lutheran  churches.  As  a 
result  of  more  than  one  missionary  effort  in  the  Holy 
Land  in  the  earlier  years  of  the  century,  and  of  the 
expedition  sent  thither  in  1840  by  the  so-called 
Quadruple  Alliance,  Frederick  William  IV.  of  Prus- 
sia thought  the  occasion  favorable  for  establishing 
a  firm  position  for  Evangelical  Christians  in  that 
country.  The  Armenian,  Greek,  and  Latin  churches 
had  long  possessed  the  advantage  of  permanent 
corporations  imder  treaty  sanction,  the  two  latter 
having  also  powerful  protectors,  while  Protestants 
had  no  regular  standing.  The  king  therefore  sent 
Bunsen  on  a  special  mission  to  Queen  Victoria  to 
lay  before  the  archbishop  of  Canterbury  and  the 
bishop  of  London,  who  welcomed  the  proposal,  a 
plan  for  the  joint  erection  of  a  Protestant  bishopric 
under  the  protection  of  England  and  Prussia.  The 
endowment  of  the  see  was  fixed  at  £90,000  in  order 
to  secure  an  annual  income  of  £1,200  for  the  bishop, 
who  was  to  be  appointed  by  Prussia  and  England 
alternately;  the  archbishop  of  Canterbury,  how- 
ever, had  a  veto  on  the  Prussian  nomination;  in 
other  particulars  the  organization  of  the  see  was 
practically  that  of  an  Anglican  bishopric,  and  its 
holder  was  at  first  subject  to  the  metropolitan  au- 
thority of  Canterbury.  His  jurisdiction,  which  ex- 
tended provisionally  beyond  Palestine  over  the 


Protestants  of  all  Syria,  Chaldea,  Egypt,  and  Abys- 
sinia, was  to  be  exercised  according  to  the  canons 
and  usages  of  the  Church  of  England.  An  act  of 
Parliament  (Oct.  5,  1841)  authorised  the  consecra- 
tion of  a  bishop  for  a  foreign  country  who  need  not 
be  a  subject  of  the  British  crown  nor  take  the  oath 
of  allegiance,  while,  on  the  other  hand,  the  deigy 
ordained  by  him  would  have  no  right  to  officiate 
in  England  or  Ireland.  It  was  agreed  by  both 
parties  that  the  bishop  should  protect  and  aid  Ger- 
man communities,  among  whom  the  cure  of  souls 
should  be  provided  for  by  German  clergy,  ordained 
according  to  the  English  rite  after  examination  and 
subscription  of  the  three  ecumenical  creeds;  that 
the  hturgy  was  to  be  compiled  from  those  received 
in  the  Lutheran  church  of  Prussia  and  authorized 
by  the  archbishop  of  Canterbury;  that  confirmation 
was  to  be  administered  to  the  Germans  by  the 
bishop  after  the  English  form.  These  far-reaching 
concessions  aroused  great  dissatisfaction  among  the 
German  Lutherans,  and  the  project  was  unfavorably 
received  by  the  High  Church  party  in  England  on 
opposite  grounds.  The  first  bishop  appointed  under 
the  agreement  was  a  Jewish  convert,  Michael  Sol- 
omon Alexander  (b.  at  Sch6nlanke,  50  m.  n.n.w.  of 
Posen,  1790;  became  a  rabbi,  and  while  serving  at 
Plymouth  was  converted,  1825.  He  entered  the 
ministry  of  the  Church  of  England,  became  a  mis- 
sionary of  the  London  Society  for  the  Conversion  of 
the  Jews,  and  professor  of  Hebrew  and  rabbinical 
literature  at  King's  College,  London).  He  took  up 
his  residence  in  Jerusalem  at  the  beginning  of  1842, 
and  died  in  the  desert  near  Cairo  Nov.  23,  1845. 
He  was  succeeded  by  Samuel  Gobat  (q.v.),  a  native 
of  Cr6mine  in  the  Bernese  Alps,  and  a  former  mis- 
sionary in  Abyssinia.  In  his  time  it  became  evident 
that  the  joint  bishopric  could  not  endure.  The 
German  community  showed  a  notable  increase,  num- 
bering 200  members  in  1875,  and  important  chari- 
table works  were  connected  with  it;  a  provisional 
chapel  for  their  worship  was  erected  in  1871,  to  be 
replaced  by  the  larger  church  dedicated  in  the 
presence  of  the  German  emperor  on  Oct.  31,  1898. 
Meantime  the  relations  between  the  German  and 
English  congregations  had  become  more  and  more 
merely  nominal.  Bishop  Gobat  was  succeeded  in 
1879  by  an  Englishman,  Joseph  Barclay  (q.v.),  who 
died  two  years  later,  and  the  next  nomination  came 
to  Germany.  The  final  separation  was  brought 
about  by  the  insistence  of  the  English  Church  that 
the  bishop  should  subscribe  the  Thirty-nine  Articles 
and  be  consecrated  according  to  the  English  rite. 
Germany  objected  to  this,  and  the  agreement  was 
finally  abolished  by  the  emperor  on  Nov.  3,  1886, 
[since  which  time  the  bishopric  has  been  maintained 
by  the  English  Church  alone.  The  present  incum- 
bent, George  Francis  Popham  Blyth  (q.v.),  was  con- 
secrated Mar.  25^  1887.  His  title  is  "  Bishop  of  the 
Church  of  England  in  Jerusalem  and  the  East,"  and 
his  jurisdiction  includes  the  English  congregations 
in  Egypt,  the  regions  about  the  Red  Sea,  Pa&stine, 
Syria,  Asia  Minor  (except  portions  attached  to  Gib- 
raltar), and  the  Island  of  Cyprus]. 

(Phiupp  Mbtbb.) 

BnuooBArar:  Consult  tba  litAratun  under  Gobat.  Sahvbl; 
W.  H.  Heekler.  The  Jeruealem  Biehaprie,  London,  1888; 


Jemoalem  Ohamber 
Jcraaalon,  Synod  of 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


188 


H.  Smith,  Ths  ProieBtant  Bi»Kopne  in  JeruaaUm,  ib.  1846; 
A.  MeCaul.  JenuaUm,  ita  BiaKop,  iU  MiMaumariM,  ib.  1866; 
A.  Riley,  Frogrtaa  and  ProapaeU  of  the  AreMiiaihop  cf  Can^ 
tarbury'a  Miaaion  to  tha  Aaayrian  Ckriatiana,  ib.  1889;  Der 
Harr  bout  Jaruaalam,  Etna  Dankadirift  abar  daa  Werk  der 
avanffaliadtan  Kirdian  in  JaruaaUtn^  Berlin,  1805. 

JERUSALEM  CHAMBER:  A  large  hall  in  the 
deanery  of  Westminster,  London,  adjacent  to  the 
abbey.  The  origin  of  the  name  is  obscure;  possibly 
it  is  derived  from  the  tapestries  with  which  it  is 
hung,  representing  in  part  scenes  from  Jerusalem  or 
vicinity,  including  the  adoration  of  the  magi,  the 
circumcision,  and  also  the  wanderings  in  the  wilder^ 
ness.  The  hall  was  built  by  Abbot  Littlington  be- 
tween 1376  and  1386,  and  served  as  the  guest-room 
or  parlor  of  the  abbot.  In  it  Henry  IV.  died  (Mar. 
20,  1413)  when  about  to  set  out  on  a  pilgrimage  to 
Jerusalem,  and  the  prophecy  that  he  was  to  die  in 
Jerusalem  was  supposed  thus  to  be  fulfilled  (cf. 
Shakespeare,  Henry  IV.,  part  II.,  act  iv.,  scene  4). 
It  became  the  meeting-place  of  the  Westminster 
Assembly  (q.v.)  when  cold  weather  came  on  in  Sep- 
tember, 1643,  the  hall  being  heated  from  its  huge 
fireplace.  There  Addison  (1719)  and  Congreve 
(1728)  lay  in  state  previous  to  burial  in  the  abbey. 
It  was  the  place  of  session  of  the  company  of  re- 
visers of  the  New  Testament,  and  from  it  the  Revised 
Version  of  the  New  Testament  is  dated:  ''  Jerusa- 
lem Chamber,  Westminster  Abbey,  11th  November, 
1880."  The  revisers  of  the  Old  Testament  also 
met  there  when  the  New-Testament  company  was 
not  in  session.  It  is  the  place  of  meeting  of  the 
lower  house  of  convocation  of  the  province  of 
Canterbury. 
BiBUoaBAPRT:  A.   P.   Stanley,    Mamoriala  <4  TTetCmin^ter 

AVbav,  reimued  in  Everyman'a  Librttry,  1906;  W.  J.  Loftie, 

Waatmnater  Abbey,  London,  1880. 

JERUSALEM,  PATRIARCHATE  OF:    A  see  of 

the  Eastern  Church  (q.v.),  supposed  to  have  been 

founded  by  James,  the  brother  of  the 

Eariy       Lord.   ThoughJerusalem  has  remained 

Bishops,  for  Christianity  the  '*holy  city,''  it 
has  never  occupied  an  authoritative 
position.  Nevertheless  it  produced  some  note- 
worthy men,  and  several  synods  of  importance 
have  been  held  there.  During  the  crusades  it 
was  the  center  of  interest  as  the  object,  not 
as  the  subject,  of  action.  The  patriarchate,  that 
was  established  there  in  451,  could  never  be  com- 
pared to  other  patriarchates,  not  even  to  that  of 
Antioch.  The  city  lost  its  importance  after  its 
capture  by  Titus  and  especially  after  Hadrian  had 
made  it,  in  136,  the  ^lia  CapUolina  in  which  Jews 
were  no  longer  tolerated,  but  the  old  name  of  the 
city  never  entirely  vanished,  although  it  was  offi- 
cially recognized  again  only  in  the  fourth  century. 
Eusebius  states  that  until  the  time  of  Hadrian  there 
were  only  Jewish  Christian  bishops  in  Jerusalem, 
and  afterward  only  Christians  converted  from  pa- 
ganism. The  list  of  bishops  until  c.  300  is  contained 
in  the  church  history  of  Eusebius  and  in  his  Chrorir 
icon,  also  in  Epiphanius,  but  it  is  not  wholly  trust- 
worthy. Among  the  Christian  bishops  of  Jerusalem 
before  Juvenal,  under  whom  the  patriarchate  was 
founded,  may  be  mentioned  especially  Narcissus, 
Alexander,  Macarius,  Maximus,  a  supporter  of  Ath- 


anasius,  Cyril  (q.v.),  and  John  (see  Origenibtic 
Controversies).  The  Council  of  Nicsea  decreed 
that  according  to  ancient  usage  the  bishop  of  £li& 
should  be  honored,  but  the  first  rank  should  be 
given  to  the  bishop  of  the  "  metropolis,"  by  which 
undoubtedly  Cfcsarea  was  understood.  The  rela- 
tion of  Jerusalem  to  Csesarea  was  naturally  dis- 
turbed from  that  time.  Ambitious  and  energetic 
bishops  such  as  Maximus  and  especially  Cyril  did 
not  recognize  the  bishop  of  Csesarea  as  metropol- 
itan. Cyril  was  opposed  successfully  by  Acacius  of 
Csesarea,  a  not  less  vigorous  personality.  But 
Juvenal  especially  won  for  Jerusidem  an  important 
position.  At  the  Council  of  Nicsea,  however,  the 
questions  as  to  the  rank  of  the  bishops  were  still 
comparatively  simple  and  only  slightly  developed 
from  a  legal  standpoint.  Only  under  the  political 
organization  of  the  empire  undertaken  by  Diocletian 
did  the  church  constitution  provide  rigidly  circum- 
scribed eparchies  and  dioceses,  and  only  then  did 
the  capital  of  the  political  eparchy  or  metropolis 
have  also  ecclesiastical  precedence.  Jerusalem ,  bow- 
ever,  obtained  no  political  supremacy.  Even  when 
Palestine  was  divided  into  several  distinct  prov- 
inces by  Valens,  and  afterward,  it  did  not  become  a 
metropolis.  In  Palestina  Prima,  to  which  it  be- 
longed, Csesarea  remained  the  chief  seat  of  the  epis- 
copacy, in  Palestina  Secunda  it  was  Scythopolis,  in 
Palestina  Tertia  Petra.  Jerusalem  was  only  fourth 
in  rank. 

Juvenal  (q.v.)  induced  Emperor  Theodosius  II. 
to  make  him  patriarch,  and  at  the  council  of  Chalce^ 

don  succeeded  in  obtaining  the  three 
During  the  Palestines  as  patriarchate.  At  the  fifth 
Crusades,    ecumenical  council  of  Constantinople 

in  663,  it  was  ordered  definitely  that 
Jerusalem  should  possess  the  fifth  see  in  the  church. 
There  are  only  a  few  prominent  names  in  the  long 
series  of  patriarchs.  The  history  of  the  patriarchate 
is  intinu&tely  connected  with  the  vicissitudes  of 
political  history.  In  637  the  Mohammedans  under 
Caliph  Omar  conquered  Jerusalem,  Patriarch  So- 
phronius  mediating  the  surrender  on  conditions  re- 
garding the  toleration  of  Christian  faith.  Never- 
theless there  followed  a  time  of  great  oppression,  no 
patriarch  being  elected  for  more  than  sixty  years 
(644-705),  but  even  after  the  restoration  of  the 
patriarchate  the  church  was  almost  always  in  a 
destitute  condition.  The  crusades  (conquest  of 
Jerusalem  1099)  caused  a  new  interruption  of  the 
succession  of  patriarehs.  The  first  patriarch  elected 
after  this  period  (in  11427)  resided  at  first  in  Con- 
stantinople; only  after  Saladin  in  1187  had  taken 
Jerusalem  from  the  Franks  did  the  patriarehs  return 
to  Palestine,  although  not  inunediately  to  the  holy 
city.  The  chief  importance  of  Palestine,  especially 
of  the  neighborhood  of  Jerusalem,  from  early  times 
lay  in  the  fact  that  it  had  become  the  coimtry  of 
monks  and  hermits.  In  the  sixth  century  Palestine 
took  the  leadership  in  Greek  monasticism;  through 
men  like  Euthymios  (d.  473),  Sabas  (d.  632),  and 
especially  Theodosius  (d.  529),  Palestine  became  a 
shining  example  for  the  whole  East,  but  after  the 
tenth  century  its  importance  began  to  decrease. 

In  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries  Jeru- 
salem became  so  desolate  that  the  patriarchs,  owin^ 


130 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDU 


Jerusalem  Ohamber 
Jerasalem,  Synod  ot 


to  Uie  failure  of  their  revenues,  traveled  to  collect 
funds.    Tamerlane  conquered  Syria  in  1400,  and 
afterward  Palestine  was  ruled  by  the  Mamelukes 
from  f^gypt.     In  1617  the  Ottoman 
In  Middle   sultan   conquered  Syria,   and    conse- 
Ages  and    quently  the  patriarchate  of  Jerusalem 
Modem     became  dependent  upon  the  ecumen- 
Times,      ical    patriarchate   in   Constantinople. 
While  in  the  time  of  the  Arabs  only 
natives  of  Palestine  were  patriarchs,  now  Greeks 
s^tepped  into  the  foreground.    Many  patriarchs  of 
the   city  fixed  their  residence  at  Constantinople; 
only  since  1845  have  the  patriarchs  permanently 
resided  there.    At  the  time  of  the  foundation  of  the 
patriarchate  the  three  Palestines  comprised  not  less 
than  fifty-nine  bishoprics,  at  present  there  are  only 
a  few.    There  is  still  a  metropolitan  of  Csesarea, 
but  in  1880  he  ruled^Haifa  only,  a  place  of  a  thou- 
sand   inhabitants.      Beside    the    metropolitan    of 
Ceesarea  there  is  stiU  a  metropolitan  of  Scythopohs 
and  Petra,  also  one  of  Ptolemais,  Bethlehem  and 
Nazareth;  beside  them,  six  archbishops  and  one 
bishop.  According  to  Baedeker  (PalesHne  and  Syria, 
pp.  lix.-bdi.,  4th  ed.,   Leipsic,    1906),  Syria  and 
Palestine  with  3,526,160  inhabitants  has  978,068 
Christians.    The  mutessarifat  of  Jerusalem  is  esti- 
mated to  have  341,638  inhabitants  (p.  Ix.),  while 
the  number  of  Christians  in  Jerusalem  amounts  to 
about    13,000  among  60,000  inhabitants  (p.  24). 
There  are  6,000  members  of  the  orthodox  Greek 
church  in  Jerusalem. 

After  the  conquest  of  Jerusalem  in  1099  Godfrey 
of  Bouillon  as  king  of  the  city  established  a  Latin 
patriarchate  which  assumed  the  whole 
Latin       organization  of  the  Palestinian  church. 
Patriarchate  The  orthodox  patriarchate  was  ignored. 
and  Other  There  were  Latin  patriarchs  until  1291, 
Btshoprics.  nominally  even  until  1374.    They  re- 
sided in  Ptolemais  (Accon)  until  1291, 
then  in  Cyprus.    In  1847  Pius  IX.  named  J.  Valerga 
as  patriarch  (d.  1872),  and  at  present  there  are  in 
Jerusalem  4,000  Latin  Catholics,  besides  several 
hundred   "  United "   Catholics   of  different   rites. 
There   are  also  the  patriarchates   of  the  Melch- 
ites   (united  Greeks)  and  that  of  the  Armenians. 
The  Gregorian    Armenians    possess    a    patriarch- 
ate of   Jerusalem,   organized  in  the  seventeenth 
century. 

The  Jacobites  have  a  bishop  and  a  small  church 
in  Jerusalem,  and  the  Abyssinians  abo  have  a 
church.  (F.  Kattbnbusch.) 

Bibuoorapht:  The  fundamental  work  b  in  Greek  by 
Dositheus,  a  patriarch  of  Jenualem  (d.  1707).  "  On  the 
Patriarchs  in  Jenualem,"  ed.  by  his  sacceeBor  Chiysanthos, 
Bucharest,  1716.  Consult  further:  M.  Le  Quien,  Orieiu 
ChrUHanuB,  iii.  101  sqq.,  Paris,  1740  (important);  H. 
Guthe.  in  ZDPV,  xii  (1890),  81  sqq.;  O.  Werner.  Orbi$ 
terramm  CtUhoUeua,  chap,  xvii.,  Freiburi;.  1800;  Schlatter, 
in  BeUrUge  tur  FOrderung  chriaUieher  Theologie,  ii.  3  (1808); 
E.  Hampel,  Untertuchungen  Hber  daa  laUiniBcks  Patriarchalt 
von  Jenualem,  Erlangen,  1890;  Vailh^  in  Revue  de  Vorieni, 
1800.  pp.  44  sqq..  512  sqq.,  1000.  pp.  10  sqq.;  A.  Zagarelli. 
in  ZDPV,  xii  (1800),  35  sqq.;  T.  Zahn,  Forechunoen  tur 
OeeektehU  dee  Kanone,  yi.  281  sqq.,  Leipsic,  1000. 

JERUSALEM,  SYNOD  OF,  1672:  By  far  the  most 
important  of  all  the  synods  held  in  Jerusalem  after 
the  meeting  of  the  apostles  (Acts  xv.;  see  Apos- 
70UC  Council).    From  the  time  of  Cyril  Lucar 


(q.v.),  the  Elastem  Church  had  lain  under  the  sus- 
picion of  Calvinistic  tendencies,  and  not  altogether 
without  cause.  But  Cyril's  violent  death  sealed  the 
fate  of  the  movement  he  had  led.  His  successor, 
Cyril  of  Berrho^,  oondeomed  his  teaching  at  a  Bjnod 
in  Constantinople  in  1638,  and  so  did  his  successor, 
Parthenius,  four  years  later,  in  a  synod  at  Jassy. 
Peter  Mogilas,  the  Russian  metropolitan  of  Kiev, 
put  together  a  confession  of  faith  in  1643,  for  which 
he  obtained  the  sanction  of  Parthenius  and  of  the 
patriarchs  of  Alexandria,  Antioch,  Jerusalem,  and 
Moscow.  Meantime  the  Roman  Catholic  and  the 
Protestant  parties  in  the  West  were  tr3ang  to  sup- 
port their  respective  sides  by  adducing  Eastern  tes- 
timony, not  ajways,  if  the  Greeks  are  to  be  believed, 
quite  accurately.  Thus  the  French  Calvinist 
preacher,  Jean  Claude,  in  his  controversy  on  the 
Eucharist  with  Nicole  and  Amauld,  appealed  to 
the  older  Eastern  writers,  whose  teachhiig;  seemed 
to  have  been  revived  by  Cyril  and  his  adherents; 
the  Jansenists,  supported  by  the  French  court,  to 
the  orthodox  profession  of  the  Greeks.  Nectarius 
(q.v.),  patriarch  of  Jerusalem,  published  a  book 
against  Claude;  and  his  successor  Dositheus  (q.v.) 
considered  it  necessary  to  take  still  more  formal 
action,  not  without  pressure  from  the  French  am- 
bassador, Olivier  de  Nointel,  who  influenced  him 
to  call  a  synod  at  Jerusalem  to  refute  these  accusa- 
tions of  Calvinism.  This  synod  was  attended  by 
most  of  the  prominent  representatives  of  the  East- 
em  Church,  including  six  metropolitans  besides 
Dositheus  and  his  retired  predecessor,  and  its  de- 
crees received  so  universal  a  sanction  as  to  make 
them  more  truly  an  expression  of  the  faith  of  the 
Greek  Church  than  any  later  synod  could  claim  for 
its  own.  Its  occasion  is  seen  in  the  fact  that  the 
first  part  of  its  discussions  is  directed  to  the  refuta- 
tion of  the  **  shameless  "  attempts  of  the  Calvinists 
to  support  their  teaching  by  Eastern  authority. 
This  part  contains  the  acts  of  the  councils  of  Con- 
stantinople and  Jassy,  and  reviews  the  recent  his- 
tory with  the  purpose  of  showing  the  freedom  of  the 
patriarchate  from  error,  while  at  the  same  time 
anathematizing  the  heretical  writings  and  proposi- 
tions which  bore  the  name  of  a  patriarch.  The 
second  part  contains  the  declaration  of  orthodox 
faith  which  Dositheus,  in  the  name  of  the  assembled 
Fathers,  set  forth  in  opposition  to  the  rejected  tenets 
of  Cyril.  It  follows  them  point  by  point,  adhering 
as  far  as  possible  to  their  structure,  but  changing 
their  substance  into  an  orthodox  content.  It  con- 
tains eighteen  decreta  and  four  quuestianea.  The 
former  deal  with  the  Trinity;  Holy  Scripture  and 
its  exposition  by  the  Church;  predestination;  the 
origin  of  evil,  and  the  relation  to  it  of  divine  provi- 
dence; original  sin;  the  incarnation;  the  media- 
torial office  of  Christ  and  the  saints;  faith  working 
by  love;  the  Church,  its  episcopate,  its  membership, 
its  infsdlibility;  justification  by  faith  and  works; 
the  capability  of  natural  and  r^enerate  man;  the 
seven  sacraments;  infant  baptism;  the  Eucharist; 
and  the  condition  of  the  soul  after  death.  The 
questions  cover  the  canon  of  Scripture,  whether  it 
can  be  understood  by  all,  the  matter  of  images,  and 
the  cultus  of  the  saints.  Taken  as  a  whole,  the 
"  Shield  of  Orthodoxy,"  as  the  entire  pronounce- 


jMoita 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOQ 


140 


ment  was  entitled,  is  one  of  the  most  important 
expressions  of  the  faith  of  the  Ektf tern  Church. 
(Rudolf  Hofmann.) 

Bibuoobapht:  A  good  edition  of  the  Aeto  ia  in  HArduin, 
ConcUia,  zi.  170-272,  and  •  eritieal  edition  in  E.  J.  Kimmel, 
Af<mttiiMnto  fldti  eodMiem  ooeid«ntait«,  Jena,  1860;  they 
are  in  English  in  Ths  Acta  and  Deertea  .  .  .  tranal,  from 
Am  Qrmk  .  .  .  eoniainino  tt«  Confeaaion  .  .  ,  cf  Cyril 
Lukar,  wUh  Notaa  hy  J.  JV.  W,  B.  Robartaon,  London.  1890. 
Consult:  W.  Gam,  Syiaibolik  dar  ffriachiaeKan  KvnAa,  pp. 
70  aqq.,  Berlin,  1872;  F.  Ksttenbuaoh.  Varglaiehanda 
KonfaaaUmakunda,  p.  145,  Freiburg.  1800;  KL,  rl  ISfiO- 
1360. 

JERUSALEM,  y6-rQ'ia-lem,  JOHANN  FRIED- 
RICH  WILHELM:  Apologist  and  theologian;  b.  at 
Osnabrack,  Hanover,  Nov.  22,  1709;  d.  at  Wolfen- 
bttttel  (7  m.  s.  of  Brunswick)  Sept.  2,  1789.  He 
began  the  study  of  theology  at  Leipsic  in  1727, 
continued  his  studies  in  Leyden,  and  for  a  time 
preached  in  the  German  church  of  that  city.  He 
was  appointed  court  preacher  to  Duke  Charles  of 
Brunswick  in  WolfenbQttel  and  tutor  of  his  son 
(1742);  in  the  following  year  he  became  provost 
of  the  monasteries  of  the  Holy  Cross  and  St.  JE^id- 
ius;  in  1749  abbot  of  Ifarienthal,  in  1752  abbot  of 
Riddagshausen,  and  in  1771  vice-president  of  the 
consistory  of  Wolfenbflttel.  He  foimded  the  Karo- 
linum,  an  institution  of  learning  in  Brunswick,  and 
organised  the  system  of  the  poor  laws.  His  most 
important  work  is  BetradUungen  Cher  die  vomehm- 
iten  Wahrheiten  der  Rdigion  (2  vols.,  Brunswick, 
1768-79),  which  was  translated  into  many  languages 
and  was  still  used  in  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth 
century  as  a  work  on  apologetics.  Jerusalem  took 
also  a  significant  rank  as  preacher;  two  collections 
of  his  sermons  appeared  in  Brunswick,  1745-53. 
His  son,  Karl  Wilhelm  Jerusalem,  was  the  friend  of 
Goethe  who  oonunitted  suicide  at  Wetslar  in  1772 
and  gave  occasion  for  Die  Leiden  dee  jungen  Werthr 
ere,  (A.  Hauck.) 

BiBUoaBAPRT:  An  autobiography  was  printed  in  his 
NathQtlaaaana  SdvrifUn,  Brunswiok,  1703.  Consult  J.  M. 
H.  Ddring.  Dia  dauiadimi  Kanaatradnar  daa  18,  umd  19.  JoAr- 
hundarta,  Neustadt,  1830;  ADB,  ziii.  770;  XL.  ti,  1366- 
1366. 

JESSOPPJes'ep,  AUGUSTUS:  (Church of  England; 
b.  at  (Theshunt  (13  m.  n.  of  London),  Herts,  Dec.  20, 
1824.  He  was  educated  at  St.  John's  Coll4;e,  Cam- 
bridge (B.A.,  1848),  and  was  ordered  deacon  in  1848 
and  ordained  priest  in  1850.  He  was  curate  of 
Papworth  St.  Agnes,  CJambridgeshire,  in  1848-55, 
master  of  Helston  Grammar  School,  Cornwall,  in 
1855-59,  headmaster  of  King  Edward  VI.^s  School, 
Norwich,  in  1859-79,  and  has  been  rector  of  Scar- 
ning,  Norfolk,  since  1879.  He  has  been  honorary 
canon  of  Norwich,  as  well  as  honorary  fellow  of  St. 
John's  Ck)llege,  Cambridge,  and  of  Worcester  College, 
Oxford,  since  1895,  and  chaplain  in  ordinary  to  the 
king  since  1902.  He  was  select  preacher  at  Oxford 
in  1896,  and  has  written  or  edited  Donne*e  Eeeaye 
in  Divinity  (London,  1855);  Norwich  School  Ser- 
mone  (1864);  DieeertoHone  on  the  Fragmente  of 
Primitive  lAturgiee  and  Cof^eeeione  of  Faith  con- 
tained in  the  Writinge  of  the  New  Testament  (1871); 
Letters  of  F,  Henry  Walpote.from  the  Original  Manur 
ecripte  at  Stonyhuret  College  (Norwich,  1873);  One 
Oeneration  of  a  Norfolk  Hotue:   A  Contribution  to 


Elixabethan  Hietory  (London,  1876);  Hietary  of  the 
Dioceee  of  Norwich  (1884);  AiUiObiography  of  Roger 
North  (1887);  Arcady  for  Better  for  Woree  (1887); 
The  Coming  of  the  Friare^  and  Other  Hietorioal  Eeaays 
(1888);  The  Triale  of  a  Country  Paraon  (1890); 
Studies  <4  a  Reduee  (1892);  Random  Roaming 
(1893);  Simon  Ryan  the  PeteriU  (1896);  Frivola 
(1896);  The  Life  and  Mirades  of  St.  WtUiam  of 
Norwich,  by  Thomas  of  Monmouth  (in  collaboration 
with  M.  R.  James,  Cambridge,  1896);  John  Donrie, 
Sometime  Dean  of  St,  Paul's  (1897) ;  Before  the  Great 
PiUage  (1901);  and  WiUiam  Cedl,  Lord  Burghley 
(1904). 

JBSSUP,  jes'up,  HENRY  HARRIS:  Presbyterian; 
b.  at  Montrose,  Pa.,  Apr.  19,  1832.  He  was  gradu- 
ated at  Yale  in  1851  and  Union  Theological  Semi- 
.  nary  in  1855.  In  the  latter  year  he  went  to  Tripoli, 
Syria,  under  the  auspices  of  the  American  Board  of 
Commissioners  for  Foreign  Missions,  remaining  there 
until  1860,  when  he  went  to  Beirut^  where  he  has 
since  remained.  Since  1870  he  has  worked  under 
the  auspices  of  the  Presbyterian  Board  of  Foreign 
Missions,  and  has  been  professor  of  church  history, 
theology,  and  homiletics  in  the  Syrian  Theological 
Seminary,  Beirut.  He  was  a  member  of  the  Turco- 
American  conunission  on  indemnities  after  the  mas- 
sacres of  Oct.,  1860-July,  1861.  In  theology  he  is 
Calvinistic  according  to  the  Revised  (Confession  of 
Faith  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  and  has  written 
Women  of  the  Arabs  (New  York,  1874);  Syrian 
Home  Life  (1874);  The  Mohammedan  Missionary 
Problem  (Philadelphia,  1880);  and  The  Life  oj 
KamU  (1894).  He  has  in  preparation  A  Hietory  of 
the  Syria  Mission  (2  vols.). 

JBSUATE,  jes'yu-^t:  A  religious  order,  originally 
called  Cterici  apoetolid  Sancti  Hieronymi,  founded  at 
Sienna  about  1360  by  Giovanni  Colombini,  a  weal- 
thy merchant  and  senator.    After  living  with  his 
wife  in  continence  for  some  time,  he  separated  en- 
tirely from  her  and  placed  her  in  a  convent,  with  his 
daughters,  giving  them  a  portion  of  his  property. 
The  rest  he  bestowed  on  the  religious  and  poor  and, 
with  his  friend  Francesco  Miani,  lived  in  poverty, 
caring  for  the  sick  and  preaching.    Expelled  from 
Sienna,  he  continued  his  work  in  Arezxo  and  else- 
where.    In  1367,  when  Urban  V.  returned  from 
Avignon  to  Rome,  he  was  besought  by  Ck>lombini 
and  his  followers  to  permit  them  to  foimd  an  order 
and  to  assign  them  a  habit;  but  this  was  refused  for 
some  months  because  of  a  suspicion  that  the  Jesu- 
ates  were  connected  with  the  heretical  Fratioelli. 
This  Ck>lombini  was  able  to  disprove,  and  the  order 
was  confirmed.    After  the  founder's  death  (July  31, 
1367),  Francesco  Miani  assumed  control.    The  Jes- 
uates  devoted  themselves  chiefly  to  the  care  of 
the  sick  and  to  works  of  mercy,  and  consisted  of 
lay  brothers  with  minor  vows.     Their  rule  was 
originally  a  mixture  of  Benedictine  and  Franciscan 
elements,  but  later  was  changed  to  a  somewhat 
modified  Augiistinian  rule.     In   1668  the  order, 
which  had  already  been  reformed  by  Paul  V.  in 
1606,  became  so  worldly  that  it  was  suppressed  by 
Clement  DC.     The  female  branch  of  the  order, 
founded  at  Sienna  by  Caterina  Colombini  (d.  1387), 


141 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCaLOPEDIA 


JMRlltS 


a  kinawoman  of  Giovanni  Colombini,  preserved  the 
orig;nial  vigor  of  its  rule,  and  consequently  survived 
the  male  Jesuates  fully  two  centuries. 

(O.  ZOCKLBBf.) 
Bibuoobapht:  Viia  J.  Cobmbim,  in  A8B,  July,  viU.  354- 


308.  and  by  O.  Bonafide,  Rome,  1642.  Later  workinc  over 
of  the  material  is  given  in  the  liTee  by  F.  Poeel,  Resene^ 
barg,  1846;  and  Countees  Rambuteau,  Paris,  1880.  Con- 
■ult:  Helyot,  Ordret  monoHiQUM,  iii  407  sqq.;  Heim- 
buoher,  OnUn  und  KongngaHoneH,  li.  240-242;  KL,  ri. 
1871  eqq. 


I.  OriamiatioB  and  Diadpline  of  the 
Society. 

QvaUfieationB  of  Candidates  (ft  1). 

Analysis  of  the  Constitutions  (ft  2). 

"  On  the  Virtue  of  Obedienoe  "  (ft  3). 

Rules  and  Other  Manuals  (ft  4). 
II.  History  of  the  Society. 


JESUITS. 

Privikses  and  Ezamptions  (ft  1). 
Early  Aehieyements  in   Italy,  Portu- 
gal and  France  (ft  2). 
In  Germany  and  Austria  (ft  3). 
In  Belgium,  Holland,  and  England  (ft  4). 
Mission  Work  in  America  (ft  5). 
Unethical  Teaehings  and  Practises  (ft  6). 


Internal  Development   and  Moral 

Declension  (ft  7). 
Decline  and  Proscription  (ft  8). 
niidt  Continuance  and  Restoration 

(ft  9). 
in.  Female   Orders    in    Imitation    of 

Jesuits. 


The  Jesuits  {SodeUu  Jeau,  '*  Company  of  Jesus  ") 
is  *'  the  most  wide-spread  of  all  the  religious  orders 
founded  in  modem  times."  For  an  account  of  the 
founding  of  the  order  see  Iqnatittb  of  Lotola. 

L  Organization  and  Discipline  of  the  Society: 

The  ConstUutumea  Societatis  Jesu  cum  earum  dec- 

laratianibu8f  having  been  approved  by 

I.  Qualifi-  Paul  III.,  JuUus  III.,  and  Paul  IV., 

cations  of  and  conunended  after  careful  exami- 
Candidates,  nation  by  the  Council  of  Trent,  was 
again  emphatically  approved  and  con- 
firmed by  Gregory  XIII.  (Feb.,  1582)  and  printed 
in  Rome  in  1583.  The  text  is  accompanied  by  mar- 
ginal declarations  or  explanatory  notes  printed  in 
italics,  with  a  full  alphabetical  index.  The  end  of 
the  society  is  declared  to  be  the  salvation  and  per- 
fection of  the  souls  of  its  members  as  well  as  of 
men  in  general.  The  ordinary  vows  of  obedienoe, 
poverty,  and  chastity  are  required  of  all  members, 
and  that  of  poverty  is  explained  so  as  to  exclude 
absolutely  not  only  individual  but  collective  posses- 
sions. Receiving  compensation  for  masses,  sermons, 
lectures,  or  any  sort  of  religious  service,  even  in  the 
form  of  ahns,  is  absolutely  prohibited  (Examen,  i.  3). 
An  exception  is  made  in  the  case  of  coU^es  and 
houses  of  probation  with  their  buildings  and  rev- 
enues. SchoUara  take  the  three  ordinary  vows  of 
poverty,  obedience  and  celibacy  and  promise  to 
enter  the  higher  ranks  of  service  if  the  glory  of  God 
should  require  it.  CoadjtUora  or  helpers,  whether 
in  spiritual  or  in  temporal  things,  take  only  the 
same.  Their  promotion  to  the  ranks  of  the  Pro- 
fessed depends  on  their  faithfulness  and  efficiency 
in  the  things  committed  to  them.  The  Profeaaed, 
or  members  of  the  inner  circle,  who  possess  the 
secrets  of  the  order,  and  from  whom  the  officers  are 
diosen,  take  in  addition  to  these  vows  a  special 
vow  to  the  pope,  that  they  will  journey  without 
parleying  and  without  asking  for  traveling  expenses, 
whithersoever  he  may  order,  whether  among  be- 
lievers or  unbelievers.  A  fourth  class  is  made  up  of 
those  whose  position  in  the  order  has  not  yet  been 
determined,  but  who  are  in  readiness  to  enter  either 
grade  that  the  superior  may  direct.  A  period  of 
probation  (novitiate)  usually  lasting  for  two  years, 
m  which  the  candidate  is  trained  in  obedience  and 
thoroughly  tested  as  regards  aptitude,  mental,  phy- 
sical, moral,  and  spiritual,  for  the  purposes  of  the 
order,  precedes  entrance  into  any  of  the  grades  men- 
tioned {Examen,  i.  12).  Inquiry  is  to  be  made  of 
each  candidate  whether  he  has  ever  been  separated 


from  the  Church  by  reason  of  denial  of  the  faith  or 
falling  into  errors  or  into  schism;  whether  he  has 
perpetrated  homicide  or  become  infamous  on  ac- 
count of  enormous  sins;  whether  he  has  belonged 
to  another  order;  whether  he  has  been  bound  by 
the  chain  of  matrimony  or  servitude;  whether  he  is 
afflicted  with  poor  judgment.  Affirmative  answers 
to  these  questions  disqualify  for  admission  (Examen, 
ii.).  Careful  inquiry  is  further  to  be  made  respect- 
ing name,  age,  birth-place,  Intimacy  of  birth,  re- 
ligious character  of  ancestors,  names,  occupations, 
and  worldly  condition  of  parents  (similar  inquiries 
about  brothers  and  sisters);  whether  he  is  under  ob- 
ligation to  marry,  whether  he  has  any  son,  whether 
he  is  in  debt  or  has  civil  liabilities,  whether  he  has 
a  trade  and  can  read  and  write,  whether  he  has  any 
disease,  has  received  ecclesiastical  ordination,  or  is 
under  a  vow;  what  have  been  his  habits  of  religious 
devotion,  reading,  and  meditation;  whether  he  en- 
tertains any  religious  opinions  dififerent  from  those 
of  the  Church,  whether  he  is  ready  to  leave  the 
world  and  to  follow  the  counsels  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
C!hrist,  whether  he  fully  purposes  to  live  and  die  in 
the  society;  and  when,  where,  and  by  whom  was 
he  first  moved  to  take  this  position.  The  answers 
expected  to  these  inquiries  are  manifest  (ibid.  iii.). 
The  candidate  is  required  to  relinquish  his  posses- 
sions, if  not  immediately,  at  latest  after  one  year. 
Intercourse  with  relatives  is  restricted  and  prac- 
tically prohibited.  He  must  agree  to  have  all  his 
defects  and  errors  pointed  out  to  him.  He  must 
submit  to  training  in  the  "  Spiritual  Exercises," 
and  spend  a  month  doing  menial  work  in  a  hospice 
and  another  month  in  traveling  as  a  mendicant. 
For  the  rest  of  the  two  years  of  probation  many 
other  tests  are  applied,  the  aim  being  to  make  the 
candidate  as  a  "corpse  or  a  staff"  in  the  hands  of 
his  superior.  The  candidate  must  express  a  willing- 
ness to  become  a  secular  coadjutor  or  whatever  his 
superiors  may  determine  to  be  for  the  greater  glory 
of  God  and  to  be  willing  in  all  things  to  submit  his 
own  feeling  and  judgment  to  that  of  the  society 
(ibid.  v.).  For  coadjutors  and  scholars  a  still  fur- 
ther testing  of  absolute  obedience  and  requisite  effi- 
ciency is  provided  (ibid,  vi.-viii.). 

The  body  of  the  work  consists  of  eight  books. 
Partl.  treats  of  "Admission  to  Probation."  To  the 
general  belongs  the  final  decision  as  to  whether  an 
applicant  shall  be  accepted  or  rejected.  The  qual- 
ities sought  in  those  to  be  admitted  are  given  in  de- 
tail:   g^    appearance,   health,    youth,  physical 


Jesuits 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


143 


strength  and  endurance,  sound  doctrine  or  aptitude 
for  learning  it,  discretion  in  doing  things  or  good 
judgment  for  acquiring  it,  good  memory,  avidity  for 

all  virtue  and  spiritual  perfection,  quiet- 

a.  Analysis  ness,  constancy,  strenuoeity  in  service, 

of  the      seal  for  the  salvation  of  souls,  grace- 

Constitu-    fulness  of  speech,  honorable  appear- 

tion.       ance,  nobility,  wealth,  good  reputation 

(these  last  not  necessary,  but  highly 
desirable).  Detailed  directions  are  given  (Part  I.) 
concerning  the  manner  of  admitting  those  who  seem 
to  have  in  sufficient  measure  the  qualities  desired. 
Part  II.  pertains  to  dismissing  those  who  have  been 
received  on  probation  and  have  proved  unfit.  The 
main  thing  here  is  to  satisfy  the  person  to  be  dis- 
missed that  no  injustice  is  done  him,  but  that  the 
greater  glory  of  God  requires  his  dismission,  and  so 
to  retain  his  friendship,  and  to  satisfy  the  rest  of 
the  household  that  he  has  not  been  arbitrarily  dealt 
with.  Part  III.  treats  of  the  training  and  pro- 
moting of  those  who  remain  in  probation.  The 
cultivation  of  all  the  mental,  moral,  and  spiritual 
elements  that  are  considered  desirable,  especially  of 
prompt  and  cheerful  obedience  and  deep  interest 
in  the  purposes  of  the  society,  and  such  hygienic 
living  as  will  conserve  and  increase  the  physic^il  fit- 
ness of  the  probationer,  are  described  in  detail.  No 
stress  is  laid  upon  asceticism,  perfect  physical  con- 
dition being  the  thing  sought.  Part  IV.  treats  of 
the  education  of  the  members  and  education  as  a 
means  of  influence  upon  those  that  are  without. 
Conditions  of  admission,  discipline,  and  curricula, 
with  prescribed  texts,  in  theology  and  in  liberal 
arts,  science,  and  philosophy  are  somewhat  minutely 
given.  Public  schools  to  be  open  to  non-Jesuits  are 
to  be  conducted  in  coimection  with  the  colleges. 
Universities  are  to  be  established  under  the  auspices 
of  the  society;  but  it  is  not  thought  wise  for  the 
society  to  burden  itself  with  faculties  of  law  or  med- 
icine. The  ultimate  aim  of  all  educational  effort 
was  evidently  to  gain  an  absolute  mastery  over  the 
pupil  and  the  devotion  of  his  powers  to  the  purposes 
of  the  society.  Part  V.  treats  of  the  things  that  per- 
tain to  admission  into  the  body  of  the  society,  that 
is,  into  the  rank  of  the  "  professed."  The  right  of 
admitting  belongs  to  the  general,  but  he  may  dele- 
gate it  to  subordinates  when  he  thinks  it  expedient 
to  do  so.  Only  those  are  to  be  admitted  into  the 
inner  circle  who  have  manifested  the  possession  in  a 
high  degree  of  the  gifts  and  graces,  the  acquisitions, 
the  enthusiasm,  the  efficiency,  the  absolute  devotion 
to  the  interests  of  the  order  that  the  system  wafi  de- 
signed and  adapted  to  produce.  Out  of  this  body 
come  the  officials,  including  the  geueral.  Part  VI. 
deals  with  the  demeanor  and  duties  of  the  professed. 
The  utmost  stress  is  laid  upon  obedience  and  the 
scrupulous  execution  of  the  constitution  and  rules 
of  the  society.  They  must  love  poverty  as  the  strong 
wall  of  religion  and  preserve  it  in  its  purity.  Part 
VII.  treats  of  the  things  that  pertain  to  the  distri- 
bution of  the  professed  throughout  the  Lord's  vine- 
yard for  the  good  of  mankind  (proximorum).  Their 
obligation  to  go  without  questioning  wherever  the 
pope  or  the  general  may  direct  and  to  devote  them- 
selves unsparingly  to  the  accomplishment  of  what- 
ever tasks  may  be  assigned  is  much  emphasized. 


Part  VIII.  deals  with  methods  to  be  employed  in 
keeping  the  parts  of  the  organization  in  dose  touch 
with  the  head  and  with  each  other.     The  utmost 
importance  is  attached  to  the  vital  unity  of  the 
body,  and  frequent  and  full  correspondence  with 
the  bead  and  among  those  charged  with  various  en- 
terprises is  insisted  upon.    Provision  is  also  made 
for  general  congregations  for  the  discussion    and 
settlement  of  important  matters.    It  is  thought  to 
be  in  the  interest  of  unity  that  the  general  reside 
in  Rome,  where  he  can  always  be  reached,  and  that 
each  provincial  reside  continuously  at   the  point 
determined  upon  in  his  province.    In  case  of  the 
death  or  retirement  of  the  general,  a  general  congre- 
gation is  to  be  called  for  the  election  of  his  successor, 
and  detailed  directions  are  given  for  the  election. 
The  general  is  expected  to  appoint  a  vicar  to  assist 
him  and  to  summon  the  general  congr^ation  in 
case  of  his  demise.    Part  IX.  deals  with  the  func- 
tions and  authority  of  the  general  and  of  the  au- 
thority and   watch-care   of   the   society  over  the 
general.     The  society  controls  the  expenses  and 
manner  of  living  of  the  general.    He  is  subject  to 
constant  watching,  to  admonition,  and  to  deposi- 
tion in  case  his  conduct  or  teaching  should  warrant 
it.     He  must  confess  regularly  to  a  properly  au- 
thorized confessor.    The  provincials  are  to  lead  in 
proceedings  against  the  general.    Part  X.  (and  last) 
treats  of  the  manner  in  which  the  whole  body  of 
the  society  may  be  conserved  and  increased  in  its 
good  estate.    The  vow  taken  by  the  professed  closes 
the  work.    He  promises  that  he  will  never  consent 
to  a  change  of  the  ordinances  concerning  poverty, 
"  unless  at  any  time  from  just  cause  of  exigent  af- 
fairs it  seems  that  poverty  ought  rather  to  be 
restricted,"  that  he  will  never  directly  or  indirectly 
put  forth  effort  to  secure  his  own  election  or  pro- 
motion to  any  office  or  dignity  in  the  society,  that 
he  will  never  seek  or  consent  to  be  elected  to  any 
office  or  dignity  outside  of  the  society  unless  com- 
pelled by  obedience  to  higher  authority,  that  he 
will  report  on  any  brother  that  he  knows  to  be 
seeking  office  or  promotion,  that  if  he  should  accept 
an  ecclesiastical  position  he  would  have  constant 
regard  to  the  obedience  due  to  the  general. 

For  "The   Spiritual   Exercises,"  see   Exxbcitia 
Spiritualia. 

Ignatius'  tract  **  On  the  Virtue  of  Obedience  " 

stands  side   by  side  with  the  Spiritual  Exercises 

and  the  Constitution  as  one  of  the 

3.  "  On  the  foundation  books  of  the  society.    It 

Virtue  of  is  a  letter  of  less  than  4,000  words 
Obedience."  addressed  in  April,  1553,  to  "  the  breth- 
ren of  the  Society  of  Jesus  who  are  in 
Lusitania."  He  wishes  his  brethren,  while  being 
perfect  in  all  spiritual  gifts  and  ornaments,  to  be 
preeminent  in  the  virtue  of  obedience: 

"  The  only  virtue  that  inserts  the  other  virtues  in  the  mind 
and  guards  those  that  have  been  inserted.  While  this 
flourishes,  beyond  doubt  the'  rest  will  flourish.  .  .  .  Our 
salvation  was  wrought  by  Him  who  '  became  obedient  unto 
death.'  .  .  .  We  may  the  more  easily  suffer  ourselves  to  be 
surpassed  by  other  religious  orders  in  fastings,  vigils,  and 
other  asperity  of  food  and  clothing,  which  each  by  its  own 
ritual  and  discipline  holily  receives:  I  could  wish,  dearest 
brethren,  that  you  who  serve  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  this 
society  should  be  conspicuous  indeed  in  true  and  perfect 
obedience  and  abdication  of  will  and  especially  of  judgment; 


143 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jeraits 


and  for  the  true  and  germane  progeny  of  thia  aame  society 
to  be  distinguished  as  it  were  by  this  note,  that  they  never 
look  upon  the  person  himself  whom  they  obey,  but  in  him 
look  upon  Christ  the  Lord  for  whose  sake  they  obey.  Even 
if  the  superior  be  ornamented  and  furnished  with  prudence, 
goodness,  and  whatever  other  gifts,  he  is  not  to  be  obeyed 
on  account  of  these  things,  but  solely  becaiiae  he  is  Qod's 
vicegerent  by  whose  authority  he  performs  his  functions,  who 
says  *  be  that  heareth  you  heareth  me,'  '  he  that  despiseth 
you  despiseth  me  ':  nor,  on  the  contrary,  even  if  the  superior 
should  be  somewhat  deficient  in  counsel  or  prudence,  ought 
there  to  be  any  remission  of  obedience  on  that  accoimt,  so 
long  aa  he  is  one's  superior;  since  it  has  reference  to  the 
person  of  Him  whose  wisdom  can  not  be  deceived:  and  He 
will  supply  whatever  may  be  wanting  to  his  minister,  whether 
he  be  lacking  in  probity  or  in  other  ornaments — seeing  that 
when  Christ  had  said  in  express  words  *  The  Scribes  and 
Pharisees  sit  on  Moses'  seat,'  he  straightway  added  '  All 
things  therefore  whatsoever  they  have  said  to  you.  observe 
and  do,  but  refuse  to  do  according  to  their  works.'  " 

He  proceeds  to  show  that  mere  outward  obedience 
to  a  superior,  with  inner  disapproval  of  the  com- 
mand, is  the  "  lowest  and  utterly  imperfect  form  of 
obedience,  not  worthy  of  the  name  of  virtue  unless 
it  ascends  to  another  grade,  which  makes  one's  own 
the  w^ill  of  the  superior  and  so  agrees  with  it  that 
not  only  the  execution  appears  in  the  effect,  but 
also  the  consent  in  the  affection,  and  so  both  will 
the  same  thing  and  disapprove  the  same  thing." 
Obedience  is  declared  to  be  "  the  sacrifice  of  one's 
own  will,  which  is  the  highest  part  of  the  mind," 
the  highest  possible  offering  we  can  make  to  God. 
He  warns  his  readers  never  to  attempt  to  bend  the 
will  of  a  superior  to  their  own.  This  would  be  not 
to  conform  your  wiU  to  the  divine,  but  to  wish  to 
regulate  the  divine  will  by  the  standard  of  your  own. 
As  a  third  degree  of  obedience,  which  he  would  have 
his  readers  attain,  he  urges  that  they  should  not 
only  will  the  same,  but  also  think  the  same  as  the 
superior;  they  should  subject  their  judgment  to 
his.  The  devout  will  is  able  to  sway  the  intelligence, 
so  that  ''  whatever  things  the  superior  commands 
and  thinks  may  seem  to  the  inferior  right  and  true." 
The  best  way  to  accomplish  this  "  holocaust "  so 
essential  to  personal  peace  and  tranquillity,  alacrity, 
and  diligence,  and  to  the  unity  and  efficiency  of  the 
society,  is  "  not  to  look  upon  the  person  of  the 
superior  as  a  man  obnoxious  to  errors  and  miseries, 
but  as  Christ  himself,  who  is  the  highest  wisdom,  im- 
measurable goodness,  infinite  love,  who  can  neither 
be  deceived  nor  does  he  wish  to  deceive  you;  and 
since  you  are  conscious  within  yourselves  that 
by  the  love  of  God  you  have  subjected  yourselves 
to  the  yoke  of  obedience,  that  in  following  the  will 
of  the  superior  you  follow  more  certainly  the  divine 
will,  do  not  allow  yourselves  to  doubt  that  the 
most  faithful  love  of  the  Lord  will  go  on  by  his  own 
ministry  which  he  has  appointed  over  you  to  govern 
you  from  step  to  step  and  lead  you  in  right  ways. 
Therefore  the  voice  of  your  superior  and  his  orders 
receive  not  otherwise  than  as  the  voice  of  Christ." 
On  Jan.  1,  1604,  Aoquaviva,  general  of  the  so- 
ciety, prescribed  the  reading  of  this  tract  by  every 
member  of  the  society  every  two  days.  It  is 
appended  to  the  Regulae  SocieUUis  Jesu  in  the 
edition  published  in  Rome  in  1616  and  frequently 
afterward. 

Early  in  the  history  of  the  society  a  body  of  rules 
was  printed  for  the  guidance  of  members  in  private 
and  in  public  life.   The  edition  of  1616,  published  in 


Rome  by  Bemardus  de  AngeUs,  secretary  of  the 
society,  embraces  additions  made  by  the  Seventh 
General  Congregation.  It  begins  with 
4.  Rules  a  summary  of  the  Constitution.  "  Com- 
and  Other  mon  rules  "  to  be  observed  by  all  re- 
Manuals,  garding  general  deportment,  religious 
exercises,  reading,  etc.,  follow.  Next 
come  the  "  Rules  of  the  Provincial,"  the  responsible 
leader  in  a  province,  and  his  assistants;  those  of  the 
provost  of  the  house  of  the  professed;  those  of  the 
college  rector;  those  of  the  examiner  who  has  to 
pass  upon  the  qualifications  of  candidates  for  ad- 
mission into  the  society;  those  of  the  master  of  the 
novices  (with  a  list  of  ascetical  books  suitable  for 
his  use);  instruction  for  rendering  an  account  of 
one's  conscience,  comprising  fourteen  questions  to 
be  answered  in  confession  and  intended  to  cover  all 
experiences  of  soul  for  six  months  (a  year  in  case 
of  the  professed)  follows.  Rules  for  those  who  go 
on  pilgrimages,  for  assistants  of  provosts  and  rec- 
tors, oonsultors  (experts  without  office  available  for 
the  settlement  of  difficulties  that  may  arise  in  any 
institution  of  the  society),  the  monitor  (whose  func- 
tion is  to  admonish  superiors  and  report  to  con- 
suitors,  to  collect  the  letters  of  consultors  and  send 
them  to  superiors,  etc.).  A  formula  for  writing 
letters  by  superiors  to  provincials  and  by  provin- 
cials to  the  general,  and  directions  for  the  prepara- 
tion of  the  annual  catalogue  of  each  institution  with 
full  information  about  each  member,  follow.  Rules 
for  prefects,  priests,  preachers,  proctors,  librarians, 
sextons,  those  who  have  the  care  of  the  sicki  etc., 
are  also  given. 

The  Institutum  SocietaHa  Jesus  (Rome,  1606, 
Lyons,  1607)  and  the  Corpus  InstUutionum  S.  J. 
(Antwerp,  1709)  include  a  collection  of  the  works 
already  mentioned,  with  the  "  Decre^  and  Canons 
of  the  General  Congregations,"  the  "  Ordinances  of 
the  Generals,"  and  some  ascetical  works. 

In  1614  there  was  published  at  Cracow  what  pur- 
ported to  be  the  secret  instructions  given  to  mem- 
bers of  the  society  as  to  the  means  to  be  used  to 
acquire  influence  over  the  rich  and  the  noble  and 
to  get  the  advantage  of  members  of  other  orders 
and  of  secular  priests  in  the  confessional  and  other 
kinds  of  service.  It  abounds  in  worldly-wise  advice 
and  reconunends  the  use  of  all  kinds  of  chicanery 
for  the  enrichment  and  aggrandizement  of  the 
society.  It  consists  of  seventeen  short  chapters. 
It  haa  been  frequently  reprinted  and  translated 
into  many  languages,  ibua  becoming  widely  circu- 
lated. It  seems  highly  probable  that  Hieronymus 
Zahorowski,  who  had  recently  severed  his  connection 
with  the  society,  published  the  book  with  the  co- 
operation of  Coimt  George  Zbaraski  and  other  Polish 
enemies  of  the  order.  The  repudiation  of  the  work 
by  the  society  is  no  conclusive  evidence  of  its  spu- 
riousness.  It  has  been  its  policy  from  the  b^^inning 
to  deny  all  discreditable  reports  and  to  take  the 
chances  of  being  proved  imveracious.  If  the  Monita 
Secreta  was  resJly  written  by  Jesuit  officials,  it  is 
probable  that  it  was  never  printed  by  them  and 
that  copies  in  manuscript  were  very  closely  guarded 
before  and  especially  after  the  publication  of  1614. 
On  the  other  hand,  there  is  no  conclusive  proof  of 
the  genuineness  of  the  work.    It  embodies  in  true 


Jaralts 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


144 


Jesuit  style  what  was  believed  to  be  the  actual 
practise  of  members,  and  if  it  be  formally  a  fabrica- 
tion, it  was  written  by  one  who  was  thoroughly  con- 
versant with  the  society's  literature,  modes  of 
thought,  and  practise  at  that  time.  There  is  nothing 
in  the  work  that  is  more  cynical  or  immoral  than 
much  that  is  found  in  acknowledged  Jesmt  writings. 
IL  Histofy  of  the  Society:  The  popes  from  Paul 
III.  to  Urbui  VIII.  bestowed  one  after  another  al- 
most every  imaginable  privilege  and 
X.  Privi-  exemption  upon  the  society,  induding 
leges  and  the  performing  of  religious  services 
Bzemp-  of  aU  kinds  without  regard  to  the 
tions.  rights  of  the  clergy  and  of  other  orders 
and  even  when  an  interdict  is  in  force. 
Nothing  seems  to  have  been  omitted  that  would 
add  to  their  influence  and  authority  (cf.  lAtteroB 
apodoltcae,  guxbua  inatUutio,  c(mfirmaiio,  et  varia 
privilegia  amtineniur  SocietoHa  Jesu,  Antwerp,  1635, 
and  often,  with  later  documents,  and  Compendium 
pritnleffioTum  et  graHarum  SocieUUis  Jeau,  Antwerp, 
1635).  These  privileges  and  exemptions  covered 
nearly  all  cases  ordinarily  reserved  to  the  popes 
and  all  cases  ordinarily  reserved  to  the  bishop, 
ordination,  unction,  chrism,  adjuration,  exorcism, 
confirmation,  distribution  of  indulgences,  granting 
divorces,  baptizing  bells,  making  new  statutes,  dis- 
pensing from  fasts  and  prohibited  foods  for  mem- 
bers of  the  order  and  others,  neglecting  canonical 
hours  for  worship  and  masses,  and  acting  as  advo- 
cates, judges,  and  guardians  in  all  sorts  of  cases, 
criminal,  civil,  or  mixed.  Gregory  XIII.  ordered 
that  all  refusing  to  assist  them  in  work  of  this  kind 
be  excommunicated.  He  expressly  commanded 
archbishops,  bishops,  and  other  clergy  to  assist  the 
Jesuits  laboring  within  their  jurisdiction  with  their 
power  and  resources  and  never  to  permit  them  to  be 
impeded,  molested,  expelled,  or  deprived  of  their 
possessions.  In  1575  he  appointed  Jesuits  as  pon- 
tifical librarians  and  charged  them  with  the  censor- 
ship of  books.  Armed  with  such  privileges,  and  with 
the  resources  of  the  whole  pap&l  church  at  their 
command,  it  is  no  wonder  that  they  multiplied  in 
numbers  and  planted  their  institutions  of  learning 
and  their  religious  houses  throughout  the  world; 
nor  that  they  became  arrogant  and  oppressive. 
That  they  should  have  incuned  the  jealousy  and 
hatred  of  the  other  religious  orders,  of  the  secular 
clergy,  and  of  the  prelates,  and  that  they  should 
have  struck  terror  to  the  hearts  of  Protestants  in 
regions  exposed  to  their  ravages,  might  have  been 
expected.  A  learned  Roman  Catholic  writer  (Caspar 
Scioppius  [7]  in  his  AnaUnma  SocietoHe  Jesu,  n.p., 
1668)  charges  them  with  attempting  to  establish 
for  themselves  a  monopoly  of  things  of  the  greatest 
necessity  and  dignity: 

"  Of  grmoe  with  Qod,  that  nobody  may  be  able  to  be  in  God'i 
graoe  nor  to  obtain  indulffenoe  or  absolution  of  ana  save 
through  the  Jesuits;  of  graoe  with  prinoee  and  magnates, 
that  no  one  may  be  able  to  obtain  honors,  offices  or  wealth 
from  them,  save  through  the  Jesuits;  of  Um  Catholic  faith, 
that  no  one  may  be  able  from  being  a  psgan  to  become  a 
Christian  or  from  being  a  heretic  to  become  a  Catholic,  save 
by  the  work  of  the  Jesuits;  of  perfection,  that  no  one  may 
be  able  to  be  perfect  or  holy,  save  through  the  Jesuits,  i.e., 
unless  he  be  received  into  their  society;  of  learning,  that  no 
one  may  be  able  to  learn  divine  and  human  letten,  unless 
he  avail  himself  of  Jesuit  masters;  of  virtue  or  good  morals, 


that  no  one  may  become  well  moralised,  sav9  through  the 
admonitory  examples  of  the  Jesuits;  of  repotatioii  or  good 
name,  that  no  one  may  be  esteemed  good  or  learned,  save  by 
theur  votes,  or  at  least  with  the  suffrance  of  the  Jesuits  " 
(p.  11;  for  several  other  dassifieH  and  tabulated  statements 
against  the  society  of.  pp.  9-23). 

Having  approved  of    the  constitution   of    the 
society  and  conferred  upon  it  extensive  privileges, 
Paul  III.  proceeded  at  once  to  employ 
2.  Early    its  members  in  the  most  difficult  and 
Achieve-    responsible  undertakings.    In  fact  his 
menti  in    eagerness  to  send  his  associates  on 
Italy,       missions    was    embarrassing    to    the 
Portugal,    founder,  who  feared  that  such  promi- 
and        nent  service  would  interfere  with  the 
Fnmce.     maintenance  of  obedience,    humility, 
and  poverty  that  he  thought  essential. 
They  soon  came  into  sharp  rivalry  with  the  Domin- 
icans, the  recognijBed  leaders  in  philosophy  and 
theology,  and  formerly  the  promoters  and  executive 
officers  of  the  Inquisition  (see  Dominic,  Saint,  and 
THX  Dominican  Order).    In  the  Coimcil  of  Trent, 
especially  the  later  sessions,  they  were  the  confi- 
dential spokesmen  of  the  papal  teaching  and  policy 
and  took  a  leading  part  in  the  revival  and  the  es- 
tablishment of  the  Inquisition  wherever  it  was  prac- 
ticable.   In  Italy  the  influence  of  the  society  soon 
became  paramount.    The  Collegium  Romaniun,  en- 
dowed with  special  privileges  and  most  generously 
supported  by  the  pope  and  his  friends,  carried  on 
the  educational  work  of  the  society  with  the  greatest 
enthusiasm  and  success  (1550  onward).     Side  by 
side  with  this  the  Collegium  Germanicum  was  estab- 
lished by  Gregory  XIII.  (1753)  for  the  education 
of  those  who  were  to  carry  forward  the  Counter-Ref- 
ormation in  German-speaking  countries.    It  was  the 
policy  of  the  pope  and  of  the  Jesuit  administration 
to  fill  this  college  with  students  of  noble    birth, 
though  it  was  not  found  practicable  to  make  the 
restriction  absolute.     About  the  middle  of  the  sev- 
enteenth century  the  nobles  were  in  the  majority 
(cf.  documents  cited  by  Reusch  in  ZKO,  xiii.  269- 
270,  1892).    The  king  of  Portugal  invited  Francis 
Xavier  (q.v.)  and  Simon  Rodrigues  d'Azendo,  two 
of  Ignatius'  earliest  and  most  sealous  associates, 
to  his  court  and  committed  himself  to  the  fullest 
cooperation  with  the  society.     Rodrigues  became 
his  chief  counselor  and  Xavier  went  on  his  great 
mission  to  India  and  China  under  the  king's  patron- 
age.    The  Jesuits   were   soon   in  control  of  the 
college  at  0>imbra,  and  until  a  reaction  occurred 
in  1578  they  virtually  ruled  the  state.    In  Spain 
their  conquest  was  less  rapid  and  complete.    They 
were  opposed  to  the  policy  of  conciliation  in  rela- 
tion to  Protestantism  that  had  been  adopted  by 
Charles  V.    The  Dominicans,  who  had  gained  great 
prestige  in  Spain  because  of  their  leadership  in  the 
drastic  measures  against  Mohammedans  and  Jews 
as  well  as  against  nascent  Protestantism,  bitterly 
opposed  the  society,  partly  because  of  its  early 
manifestation   of   Pelagian   tendencies.     Melchior 
Cano  (q.v.)  denoimced  the  Jesuits  as  the  forenumen 
of  Antichrist  (II  Tim.  iii.  2).    Philip  11.,  though  in 
accord  with  their  uncompromising  hostility  to  Prot^ 
estantism  and  influenced  to  some  extent  by  them, 
never  surrendered  himself  completely  to  their  dom- 
ination.   The  winning  of  Francis  of  Borgia  (q.v.); 


145 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jesuits 


duke  of  Gandia,  who  had  been  a  courtier  of  Charles 
v.,  and  had  been  employed  in  important  admin- 
istrative offices,  to  membership  (1548)  was  no  doubt 
the  moet  important  addition  to  the  personnel  of  the 
society  since  it  received  papal  recognition.    He  was 
to  prove  one  of  the  ablest  and  most  enthusiastic 
worikers  and  to  become  the  third  general  (July  2, 
1565).     The  universities  of  Alcala  and  Salamanca 
resisted  strenuously  the  efforts  of  the  Jesuits  to  gain 
control;   but  they  finally  succeeded  in  establishing 
themselves  in  these  centers  of  influence.    Further 
progress  was  less  difficult.    The  society  encountered 
antipathy  and  mistrust  in  France.    A  number  of 
youths  sent  by  Ignatius  to  the  University  of  Paris 
in  1540  were  driven  away.   The  archbishop  of  Paris, 
the  parliament  of  Paris,  and  the  Sorbonne  imited 
their  forces  in  opposition  to  the  aggressions  of  the 
body.   The  cardinal  of  Lorraine  supported  the  soci- 
ety.    The  Jesuits  did  not  succeed  until  1661  in 
establishing  a  college  in  France,  and  this  (Clermont) 
was  long  denied  university  privileges.    The  Jesuits 
Auger  and  Pelletian  preached  and   labored   with 
such  efficiency  in  Lyons  (1559)  as  to  cause  an  up- 
rising against  the  Huguenots  that  resulted  in  the 
burning  of  their  books,  the  banishment  of  their 
preachers,  and  the  suppression  of  their  worship.    A 
Jesuit  college  was  established  there  in  commemora- 
tion of  their  triumph.    They  persistently  opposed 
Henry  of  Navarre  in  his  struggle  for  the  crown,  re- 
fused to  pray  for  him  after  his  submission  to  the 
pope,  and  denoimced  the  Edict  of  Nantes.    Henry 
did  everything  in  his  power  to  conciliate  them,  re- 
called a  decree  of  banishment  that  had  been  issued 
against  them,  made  a  Jesuit  his  confessor,  and  sought 
to  use  the  Jesuits  in  defending  himself  against  Spain, 
where  the  Dominicans  were  highly  influential.     He 
was  not  content  with  giving  to  the  Jesuits  a  fore- 
most place  in  France,  but  he  sought  to  secure  their 
restoration  to  Venice,  whence  they  had  been  ex- 
pelled in  1606,  and  to  extend  the  sphere  of  their 
influence  in  other  lands.    He  eagerly  promoted  the 
canonisation  of  Ignatius  Loyola  and  Francis  Xavier 
(1606).    Yet  he  was  distrusted  by  the  society  and 
when,  as  he  was  on  the  point  of  marching  an  army 
against  the  emperor  and  his  allies,  he  was  assas- 
sinated  by   Fnmgois    Ravaillac,    the    Huguenots 
chai^ged  that  Jesuit   influence  had  compassed  his 
death,  though  direct  instigation  could  not  be  proved. 
After  the  death  of  Henry  IV.  the  society  became 
still  more  powerful  in  France,  and  the  Revocation 
of  the  Edict  of  Nantes  (q.v.)  and  the  destruction  of 
the  Huguenots  (q.v.)  were  largely  due  to  their  per- 
sistent efforts.    The  Jansenists  asserted  that  their 
theology  was  Pelagian  and  that  their  morals  were 
lax   (q.v.;    see  also  Arnauld;    Du  Vergier  de 
Haurannb,  Jean;  Pascal,  Blaise;  Port  Rotal; 

QUESNBL,  PaSQUIER). 

Germany  and  Austria  were  the  scenes  of  their 
greatest  triumphs.    The  first  Jesuit  to  enter  Ger- 
many was  Lef^vre,  who,  in  1640,  ac- 
3.  In  Oei^  companied  Ortiz,  deputy  of  Charles  V., 
many  and  to  the  Diet  of  Worms.    In  the  city  of 
Austria.     Worms  he  found  only  one  priest  that 
was  not  a  concubinary  or  polluted  with 
crime,  so  with  a  zeal    rarely  surpassed   he  un- 
dertook to  rally  the  demoralized  Catholic  forces 
VI.— 10 


and  to  inspire  with  love  for  Romanism  and  hatred 
for  Protestantism  the  few  priests  and  lajnnen  that 
were  amenable  to  his  influence.  He  participated  in 
the  Diet  of  R^gensburg  (Apr.,  1641),  at  which 
Butzer  and  Mel^chthon  represented  the  Evangel- 
ical interests.  Deeply  lamenting  the  lack  of  zeal 
and  efficiency  in  the  Catholics  present,  he  invited 
bishops,  prelates,  electors,  ambassadors,  vicars- 
general,  theologians,  and  others  to  his  courses  in 
training  in  the  Spiritual  Exercises.  He  was  made 
the  confessor  of  the  son  of  the  duke  of  Savoy. 
Germans,  Portuguese,  Spanish,  and  Italians  eagerly 
sought  his  spiritual  guidance.  He  extended  his 
efforts  to  Nuremberg.  Having  been  ordered  by  the 
general  to  Portugal,  his  place  was  taken  by  LeJay, 
whose  chief  work  was  to  train  the  priests  for  ag- 
gressive work  against  heresy  and  to  inspire  the 
nobles  with  the  conviction  that  heresy  must  be 
exterminated  at  whatever  cost.  He  was  soon  re- 
inforced by  Bobadilla,  who  in  1541  had  achieved 
a  great  success  in  the  diocese  of  Viterbo,  had  formed 
an  intimate  acquaintance  at  InnsbrudE  with  Fer- 
dinand I.,  king  of  the  Romans,  won  him  to  the 
Jesuit  way  of  thinking,  and  accompanied  him  to 
Vieima,  and  had  supported  the  Catholic  cause  in 
a  number  of  diets.  A  college  was  established  in 
Vieima,  which  soon  became  affiliated  with  the  uni- 
versity. LeJay  succeeded  in  filling  with  enthusiastic 
zeal  against  Protestantism  many  priests  who  had 
been  idle  and  indifferent  and  in  enlisting  many 
nobles  in  the  coercive  and  educational  measures 
proposed  by  the  society.  Lef^vre  returned  to  Ger- 
many in  1642  and  made  his  influence  powerfully 
felt  in  Speyer,  Mainz,  Brandenburg,  and  other 
places.  Peter  Canisius  (q.v.)  was  even  more  im- 
portant than  Lef dvre  or  LeJay  in  organizing  Jesuit 
work  in  Germany  and  in  establishing  training-schools 
for  the  propagation  of  Jesuit  principles.  From  1559 
onward  Munich  was  the  chief  Jesuit  center,  and 
came  to  be  known  as  the  "  German  Rome  ";  and 
the  college  established  there  attracted  many  noble 
Protestant  youths,  who  were  won  over  by  their  in- 
structors. All  the  chief  cities  of  Germany  where 
Catholics  had  retained  the  ascendency  and  many 
where  Protestantism  had  made  great  headway  felt 
the  influence  of  these  enthusiastic  and  daimtless 
missionaries.  Under  their  guidance  Albert  V.  of 
Bavaria  gave  his  Protestant  subjects  the  choice  of 
becoming  Catholics  or  leaving  the  country.  With 
their  help  Baden  was  cleared  of  Protestants  in  two 
years  (1570-71).  Similar  measures  were  carried  out 
in  the  territory  of  the  abbot  of  Fulda,  in  Cologne, 
MUnster,  Hildesheim,  Paderbom,  and  Wtlrzburg. 
In  1595  the  bishopric  of  Bamberg  was  cleared  of 
heretics,  and  about  1602  the  work  was  completed 
in  the  archbishopric  of  Mainz.  From  1578  onward 
Jesuits  led  in  the  work  of  exterminating  Protestant- 
ism in  the  Austrian  provinces.  The  Coimter-Refor- 
mation  had  largely  accomplished  its  work  in  Austria 
and  its  dependencies  before  the  outbreak  of  the 
Thirty  Years'  War  (1618;  q.v.).  It  was  rapidly 
pressed  to  completion  from  this  time  onward.  For 
the  details  of  Jesuit  activity  in  the  Counter-Reforma- 
tion and  in  the  revived  Inquisition,  see  Coxtntbb- 
Rbformation  and  articles  there  referred  to;  also 
Inquisition. 


jMidts 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


146 


From  1542  onward  the  Jesuits  had  been  active  in 

Belgium.     They  were  expelled  from  the  country 

during  the  early  years  of  the  war  with 

4.  In  Bel-   Spain,  but  were  readmitted,  imder  the 
gium,  Hoi-  patronage  of  Alexander  Famese,  after 

land,  and    Spanish  authority  had  been  reestab- 

England,  lished,  and  were  protected  by  Philip  II., 
who  had  formerly  opposed  them  (1581- 
15S4).  Within  a  few  years  they  had  almost  taken 
possession  of  the  land  and  made  it  the  base  of  suc- 
cessful propagandism  in  the  Protestant  Nether- 
lands. By  1692  twenty-two  Jesuits  and  220  secular 
priests,  most  of  whom  had  been  educated  in  their 
colleges,  were  working  in  the  United  Netherlands, 
and  the  Catholic  membership  had  increased  from  a 
few  thousand  scattered  and  discouraged  souls  to 
345,000.  The  assassination  of  WUliam  of  Orange 
(1584)  was  commonly  attributed  to  Jesuit  in- 
fluence on  the  groimd  that,  as  was  asserted,  Baltha- 
sar  Gerard  claimed  the  blessing  of  the  rector  of 
the  Jesuit  college  at  Treves  before  conunitting  the 
crime. 

The  Jesuits  early  addressed  themselves  to  the 
task  of  reestablishing  papal  supremacy  in  England. 
In  1542  Paschasius  Brouet  and  Alphonso  Salmeron 
(q.v.)  made  a  secret  and  rapid  tour  through  Ire- 
land, and  in  thirty-four  days  succeeded  in  inflaming 
the  Catholics  of  Ireland  against  the  government  of 
Henry  VIII.  and  against  Protestantism.  But  the 
Jesuits  met  with  little  success  in  Scotland.  In 
England  they  carried  on  for  more  than  a  century  a 
secret  but  effective  propaganda.  In  1569  WUliam 
Allen  (q.v.),  afterward  a  cardinal,  established  at 
Douai  (q.v.)  a  training-school  for  Jesuit  missiona- 
ries to  England,  where  a  large  number  of  British 
Catholic  youths  were  prepared  for  the  extremely 
perilous  work  of  restoring  papal  authority  in  Britain. 
Sacked  by  the  Protestants  of  Flanders  at  the  insti- 
gation of  the  English  government,  the  college  was 
reopened  at  Reims  under  the  patronage  of  the  arch- 
bishop, and  continued  to  train  men  for  English 
work  and  martyrdom.  In  1579  an  English  college 
was  opened  in  Rome  for  the  same  purpose.  The 
most  active  leaders  of  the  Jesuit  work  in  England 
were  Robert  Parsons  and  Edmund  Campian  (qq.v.). 
In  Scotland  Jesuits  attached  themselves  to  the 
court  of  Mary  Stuart  (c.  1587),  and  by  encouraging 
her  aspirations  after  the  English  crown  wrought 
her  destruction.  The  "  Gunpowder  Plot  "  (1605) 
was  commonly  attributed  to  their  machinations. 

The   missionary   efforts   of   the   Jesuits,    under 

French  patronage,  in  North  America  among  the 

Indians  (see  Indians  of  North  Amer- 

5.  Mission  ica,  Missions  to;  Missions  to  the 
Work  in  Heathen,  A)  and  the  French  col- 
America,     onists  were  from  their  own  point  of 

view  highly  successful.  In  Florida, 
Mexico,  South  America  and  Central  America,  and 
California  they  established  their  great  mission  com- 
poimds  where  captured  natives,  sometimes  guarded 
and  forced  by  Spanish  and  Portuguese  troops,  were 
employed  as  laborers  and  compelled  to  conform  to 
Roman  Catholic  observances.  Their  work  among 
the  North  American  Indians,  as  well  as  among  the 
natives  of  India,  China,  and  Japan,  displayed  heroic 
self-sacrifice  of  the  highest  order  along  with  a  will- 


ingness to  receive  a  very  superficial  knowledge  of 
Christianity  as  evidence  of  ita  acceptance.  Those 
whom  they  baptised,  even  clandestinely,  they 
claimed  as  members  of  the  Christian  Chiirdi. 

Attention  has  already  been  called  to  the  obliga- 
tion of  absolute  and  unquestioning  obedience  incul- 
cated by  Ignatius  that  involved  the 
6.  Unetfa-  suppression  or  destruction  of  the  in- 
ical  Teach-  dividual  conscience.  The  doctrine  of 
ings  and  Probabilism  (q.v.)  was  not  originated 
Practises,  by  ihe  Jesuits,  but  was  wrought  out 
by  their  writers  during  the  seventeenth 
century  with  more  minuteness  than  by  earlier 
Roman  Catholic  writers.  According  to  this  teaching 
one  is  at  liberty  to  follow  a  probable  opinion,  i.e., 
one  that  has  two  or  three  reputable  Catholic  writers 
in  its  favor,  against  a  more  probable  or  a  highly 
probable  opinion  in  whose  favor  a  multitude  of  tbe 
highest  authorities  concur.  To  justify  any  practise, 
however  immoral  it  might  be  commonly  esteemed, 
a  few  sentences  from  Catholic  writers  sufficed,  and 
these  were  often  garbled.  Some  Jesuits  and  some 
popes  repudiated  this  doctrine.  In  1680  Gonzales, 
an  opponent  of  the  doctrine,  was  made  general  of 
the  society  through  papal  pressure;  but  he  failed 
to  pufge  the  society  of  probabilism  and  came  near 
being  deposed  by  reason  of  his  opposition.  Another 
antiethical  device  widely  approved  and  employed 
by  members  of  the  society  is  Mental  Reservation  or 
Restriction  (see  Reservation,  Mental),  in  ac- 
cordance with  which,  when  important  interests  are 
at  stake,  a  negative  or  a  modifying  clause  may 
remain  unutteied  which  would  completely  reverse 
the  statement  actually  made.  This  principle  jus- 
tified unlimited  lying  when  one's  interests  or  con- 
venience seemed  to  require.  Where  the  same  word 
or  phrase  has  more  than  one  sense,  it  may  be  em- 
ployed in  an  unusual  sense  with  the  expectation 
that  it  will  be  imderstood  in  the  usual  (amphibol- 
ogy). Such  evasions  may  be  used  imder  oath  in  a 
civil  court.  Equally  destructive  of  good  morals 
was  the  teaching  of  many  Jesuit  casuists  that  moral 
obligation  may  be  evaded  by  directing  the  inten- 
tion when  committing  an  inunoral  act  to  an  end 
worthy  in  itself;  as  in  murder,  to  the  vindication 
of  one's  honor;  in  theft,  to  the  suppljring  of  one's 
needs  or  those  of  the  poor;  in  fornication  or  adul- 
tery, to  the  maintenance  of  one's  health  or  comfort. 
Nothing  did  more  to  bring  upon  the  society  the  fear 
and  distrust  of  the  nations  and  of  individuals  than 
the  justification  and  recommendation  by  several  of 
their  writers  of  the  assassination  of  tyrants,  the 
term  "  tyrant "  being  made  to  include  all  persons 
in  authority  who  oppose  the  work  of  the  papal 
chiurch  or  the  order.  The  question  has  been  much 
discussed,  Jesuits  always  taking  the  negative  side, 
whether  the  Jesuits  have  taught  that  "the  end 
sanctifies  the  means."  It  may  not  be  possible  to 
find  this  maxim  in  these  precise  words  in  Jesuit 
writings;  but  that  they  have  always  taught  that  for 
the  "  greater  glory  of  God,"  identified  by  them 
with  the  extension  of  Roman  Catholic  (Jesuit)  in- 
fluence, the  principles  of  ordinary  morality  may  be 
set  aside,  seems  certain.  The  doctrine  of  philosoph- 
ical sin,  in  accordance  with  which  actual  attention  to 
the  sinfulness  of  an  act  when  it  is  being  committed 


147 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jeraits 


is  requisite  to  its  sinfulness  for  the  person  commit- 
ting it,  was  widely  advocated  by  members  of  the 
society.  The  repudiation  of  some  of  the  most  scan- 
dalous maximR  of  Jesuit  writers  by  later  writers, 
or  the  placing  of  books  containing  scandalous 
maxims  on  the  Index,  does  not  relieve  the  society 
or  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  from  responsibility, 
as  such  books  must  have  received  authoritative  ap- 
proval before  publication,  and  the  censuring  of  them 
does  not  necessarily  involve  an  adverse  attitude 
toward  the  teaching  itself,  but  may  be  a  mere 
measure  of  expediency. 

Lainez,  who  succeeded  Ignatius  in  the  office  of 
general  (1558-65),  manifested  in  the  administra- 
tion of  the  affairs  of  the  society  more  of  worldly 
wisdom  and  less  of  pietistic  enthusiasm  than  the 
founder.  Paul  IV.  became  alarmed 
7.  Internal  at  the  remarkable  growth  and  aggres- 
Develop-  siveness  of  the  society.  He  sought 
ment  and  (1558)  to  curb  the  almost  irresponsible 
Moial  power  of  the  generals  by  limiting  their 
Dedenston.  tenure  of  office  to  three  years,  and  to 
limit  the  freedom  of  the  body  by  re- 
quiring the  observance  of  the  canonical  hours  for 
singing  in  the  choir.  These  changes  would  have 
placed  the  society  on  somewhat  the  same  basis  as 
the  other  orders  and  would  have  stripped  it  of  half 
its  power.  These  measures  were  earnestly  resisted 
and  the  death  of  the  pope  (1559)  prevented  the  ca- 
lamity. Pius  IV.  let  Lainez  have  his  ambitious  and 
aggressive  way  and  employed  his  services  in  the 
later  sessions  of  the  Council  of  Trent.  Francis  of 
Borgia  had  spent  his  fortime  in  founding  a  college 
in  Gandia  and  the  Collegium  Romanum  and  came  to 
the  office  of  general  (1565)  with  all  of  the  ascetical 
enthusiasm  of  Ignatius,  but  with  little  of  his  worldly 
wisdom.  He  was  succeeded  in  1572  by  Mercurian, 
whose  administration  was  relatively  feeble.  The 
greatest  of  all  the  generals  was  Claudius  Acquaviva 
(1581-1615),  a  Neapolitan.  He  had  to  contend 
with  a  powerful  and  determined  Spanish  faction  in 
the  society  that  resented  Italian  control.  The 
Spanish  Jesuits  secured  the  support  of  the  Inquisi- 
tion, of  Philip  IL,  and  of  aement  VIII.  The  lat- 
ter summoned  a  General  Congregation  (1592)  to 
deal  with  the  difficulties.  Acquaviva  managed  the 
meeting  with  such  adroitness  that  he  was  trium- 
phantly vindicated  and  thoroughly  established  in 
his  office.  Molina's  Pelagian  teaching  provoked  a 
fresh  Dominican  onslaught  on  the  society.  Acqua- 
viva and  his  supporters  espoused  the  cause  of  Mo- 
lina (q.v.),  though  he  had  been  condemned  by  the 
Spanish  Inquisition.  The  pope  transferred  the  dis- 
pute to  Rome  (1596)  and  for  a  time  it  looked  as  if 
the  Dominicans  would  triumph;  but  Acquaviva's 
consummate  skill  again  averted  calamity.  At  the 
General  Congregation  he  confounded  his  opponents 
by  springing  upon  the  assembly  the  news  that  Henry 
IV.  of  France  had  espoused  his  cause.  Under  Acqua- 
viva the  Counter-Reformation  was  carried  forward 
with  astonishing  success.  The  failure  of  Domin- 
icans, Inquisition,  and  pope  to  silence  the  Pelagian 
anthropology  of  the  order  encouraged  its  members 
to  go  to  the  greatest  extremes  in  their  moral  theol- 
ogy. Under  the  administration  of  Mutius  Vitel- 
leschi  (1615-45)  the  Counter-Reformation  was  car- 


ried almost  to  its  completion  and  the  Thirty  Years' 
War  almost  ran  its  course.  In  1640  the  jubilee  of 
the  society  was  celebrated  with  great  ^clat.  It  now 
numbered  15,000  members  distributed  into  thirty- 
nine  provinces.  The  ascetical  requirements  of  Ig- 
natius had  been  put  aside.  The  professed  had  in- 
creased in  numbers  in  far  greater  proportion  than 
the  membership,  and  now  freely  accepted  positions 
of  honor  and  influence,  enjoyed  regular  incomes, 
and  lived  like  gentlemen,  leaving  the  drudgery  of 
the  educational  and  church  work  to  younger  and 
less  experienced  men.  They  constituted  a  sort  of 
aristocracy  that  neutralized  to  some  extent  the  au- 
tocracy of  the  General.  Degeneration  continued 
unimpeded  under  Caraffa  (d.  1649)  and  Piccolomini 
(d.  1651).  The  German  Nickel  (1651-64)  proved 
so  unsatisfactory  as  general  that  Oliva  was  made 
his  vicar  (1661).  Oliva  was  a  favorite  of  the  pope 
and  lived  in  splendor.  His  independent  adminis- 
tration (1664-^81)  was  favorable  to  the  development 
of  the  worst  features  of  Jesuitism.  He  was  an  ad- 
vocate and  promoter  of  Probabilism  and  other  im- 
moral forms  of  teaching  and  encouraged  to  the  ut- 
most the  disposition  to  meddle  with  national  and 
international  politics  that  had  become  characteris- 
tic of  the  society.  Ignatius  had  opposed  with  all  his 
might  the  promotion  of  Jesuits  to  high  ecclesiastical 
positions.  In  1593  Tolet  was  made  a  cardinal;  in 
1599,  Bellarmine;  in  1629,  Pazmany;  in  1643,  De 
Lugo,  and  many  afterward.  Their  literary  activ- 
ity in  all  religious  and  secular  branches  of  learning 
was  very  great  during  the  seventeenth  and  eight- 
eenth centuries.  The  same  may  be  said  of  the 
more  recent  time. 

The  growing  secularization  of  the  society  and  its 
need  of  vast  resources  for  the  maintenance  and  ex- 
tension of  its  world-wide  work  and  the  diminution 
of  free-will  offerings  that  had  sufficed  in  the  times 
when  religious  enthusiasm  was  at  its 
8.  Decline  height  led  the  society  to  engage  in 
and  Pro-  great  speculative  business  enterprises, 
scription.  those  conducted  in  Paraguay  and  Mar- 
tinique resulting  in  disaster  to  many 
innocent  investors  (1753  onward),  and  brought  upon 
the  society  much  reproach  in  Portugal  and  France. 
In  Portugal  the  Blarquis  of  Pombal,  one  of  the  fore- 
most statesmen  of  his  time,  became  convinced  that 
the  liberation  of  the  country  from  ecclesiastical  rule, 
in  which  Jesuits  had  long  been  predominant,  re- 
quired the  exclusion  of  the  latter.  An  insurrection 
in  Portuguese  Paraguay  by  the  natives  furnished  an 
occasion  to  Pombal  for  denouncing  the  Jesuits  to  the 
king  and  for  demanding  papal  prohibition  of  their 
conmiercial  undertakings.  The  papal  prohibition 
was  issued  in  1758  and  priestly  privileges  were  with- 
drawn from  Jesuits  in  Portugal.  An  attempt  upon 
the  life  of  the  king  (Sept.  3,  1758)  was  attributed  to 
Jesuit  influence  and  led  to  a  decree  for  the  expul- 
sion of  the  society  and  the  confiscation  of  its  prop- 
erty (Sept.  3,  1759).  The  pope  tried  in  vain  to 
protect  them  and  bis  nuncio  was  driven  from  the 
country.  Malgrida,  a  Jesuit,  was  burned  at  the  stake 
in  1761.  Speculations  by  Jesuits  in  Martinique,  in 
which  vast  sums  of  money  were  lost  by  French 
citizens,  led  to  a  public  investigation  of  the  methods 
of  the  socie^.  and  on  April  16. 1761.  the  Parliament 


Jasults 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOa 


148 


of  Paris  decreed  a  suppression  of  Jesuit  establish- 
ments in  Franoe  and  on  May  8  declared  the  entire 
order  responsible  for  the  debts  of  the  principal  pro- 
moter of  the  coUapaed  enterprise.  Other  parliar 
ments  foUowed  that  of  Paris.  King,  pope,  and 
many  bishops  protested  in  vain.  Blighty  of  their 
coll^^es  were  closed  in  April,  1762.  Their  consti- 
tution was  denounced  as  godless,  sacrilegious,  and 
treasonable,  and  the  vows  taken  by  Jesuits  were  de- 
clared to  be  null  and  void.  On  Nov.  26,  1764,  the 
king  agreed  to  a  decree  of  expulsion.  In  Spain 
6,000  Jesuits  were  suddenly  arrested  at  night  and 
conveyed  to  papal  territory  (Sept.  2-S,  1768).  Re- 
fused admission  by  the  pope,  they  took  refuge  in 
Corsica.  A  similar  seizure  and  transportation  of 
3,000  had  occurred  at  Naples  (Nov.  3-4,  1767). 
Parma  dealt  with  them  similarly  (Feb.  7,  1768), 
and  soon  afterward  they  were  expelled  from  Bialta 
by  the  Knights  of  St.  John.  The  Bourbon  princes 
urged  Clement  XIII.  to  abolish  the  society.  He 
refused,  and  when  he  died  (Feb.  2,  1769)  there  was 
much  intriguing  among  friends  and  enemies  of  the 
Jesuits  in  seeking  to  secure  the  election  of  a  pope 
that  would  protect  or  abolish  the  society.  Cardinal 
Ganganelli  was  elected  and  it  ie  highly  probable 
that  he  had  bargained  with  the  Bourbons  for  the 
destruction  of  the  Jesuits.  From  the  beginning  of 
his  pontificate  powerful  pressiu^  was  brought  to 
bear  upon  him  by  Spain,  France,  and  Portugal  for 
the  abolition  of  the  order.  He  gave  promises  of 
early  action,  but  long  hesitated  to  strike  the  fatal 
blow.  He  began  by  subjecting  the  Jesuit  colleges 
in  and  around  Rome  to  investigation.  These  were 
promptly  suppressed  and  their  inmates  banished. 
Maria  Theresa  of  Austria,  who  had  been  greatly  de- 
voted to  the  Jesuits,  now  regretfully  abandoned 
them  and  joined  with  the  Bourbons  in  demanding 
the  abolition  of  the  society  by  the  pope.  This  com- 
bined pressure  of  the  chief  Catholic  powers  was  more 
than  the  pope  could  withstand  C  Coactusfeci/'  he 
is  reported  to  have  afterward  said).  On  July  21, 
1773,  he  signed  the  Brief  Dominua  ac  Redemptor 
naster,  which  abolished  the  society,  and  on  August 
16  the  general  and  his  chief  assistants  were  im- 
prisoned and  all  their  property  in  Rome  and  the 
States  of  the  Chuj*ch  confiscated  (Eng.  transl.  of 
this  brief  is  most  easily  accessible  in  Nicolini,  Hia. 
of  the  Jesuits,  pp.  387-406,  London,  1893).  The 
brief  recites  at  length  the  charges  of  immoral  teach- 
ing and  intolerable  meddlesomeness  in  matters  of 
church  and  state,  of  the  abuse  of  the  unlimited 
privileges  that  the  society  has  enjoyed,  and  virtu- 
ally admits  that  it  has  become  totally  depraved  and 
a  universal  nuisance.  To  restore  peace  to  Christen- 
dom its  abolition  is  declared  to  be  necessary.  A 
papal  coin  was  struck  the  same  year  in  commem- 
oration of  the  event,  with  Christ  sitting  in  judg- 
ment and  saying  to  the  Jesuit  fathers  arraigned  on 
his  left,  "  Depart  from  me  all  of  you,  I  never  knew 
you." 

At  the  time  of  its  abolition  the  society  had  about 
22,000  members.  It  would  have  been  unreasonable 
to  expect  that  so  large  a  body  of  trained  men, 
adepts  at  secret  and  evasive  methods  of  work,  and 
with  centuries  of  successful  effort  behind  them, 
would  suddenly  vanish  in  response  to  a  papal  brief 


extorted  by  the  Roman  Catholic  powers.    Thou- 
sands of  them,  without  change  of  principles,  became 
members  of  societies  of  the  Sacred 
9.  Illicit     Heart  of  Jesus;  others  of  the  society  of 
Contintt-    Fathers  of  the  Faith,  founded  by  Nicolo 
anceand    Paccanari   (q.v.);   othen  becune  Re- 
Restormtton.  demptorists  or  Liguorists  (see  Liouobi, 
Alfonso  Maria  db).    Frederick  II. 
of  Prussia  encouraged  and  protected  them  with  a 
view,  no  doubt,  to  using  their  political  knowledge 
and  skill  against  the  Bourbons,  the  Hapsburgers, 
and  the  pope.    Catharine  II.  of  Russia  hoped  by 
showing  them  favor  to  conciliate  her  new  Polish 
subjects  and  to  use  them  against  Bourbons  and 
Hapsburgers.    In  Naples  and  in  Franoe  the  papal 
decree  was  only  imperfectly  executed.     Pius  VI. 
gave  full  papal  approval  (1783)  to  the  perpetUAr 
tion  of  the  society  in  Russia,  while  Pius  VII.  (1801) 
approved  of  their  designating  their  vicar-general  as 
general.    The  same  pope  approved  of  the  restora- 
tion of  the  society  in  Naples  and  Sicily  (July,  1804) 
so  that  the  head  of  the  society  now  beoune  ''  Gen- 
eral for  Russia  and  Naples."    The  Napoleonic  dis- 
turbance of  Europe  having  come  to  an  end  and 
Pius  VII.  having  been  released  from  his  French  cap- 
tivity, the  need  of  the  society  for  leadership  in  an 
aggressive  movement  for  the  restoration  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  Chureh  to  its  former  power  was 
profoundly  felt  by  the  Curia.    On  Aug.  7,  1814, 
Pius  VII.  issued  the  bull  Solicitudo  omnium  eccU- 
aiarum,  by  which  he  restored  the  society.    Since 
that  time  it  has  suffered  many  reverses  and  much 
persecution.    Most  of  the  states  of  Europe  have 
repeatedly  expelled  its  members.    Yet  it  has  stead- 
ily grown  in  power  and  has  for  nearly  a  century 
dictated  the  policy  of  the  papal  administration. 
Jesuits  are  to-day  the  chief  diplomats  of  the  Ro- 
man Catholic  Churoh  and  they  are  surpassed  in 
astuteness  and  the  ability  to  achieve  results  by 
those  of  no  civil  goverzmient.    The  promulgation 
of  the  dogma  of  the  immaculate  conception  of  Mary 
(1854),  the  Encyclical  and  Syllabus  of  1864,  the 
Vatican  Council  with  its  decree  of  papal  infallibility 
(1869-70),  the  recent  drastic  measures  against  Bib- 
lical criticism  and  in  opposition  to  freedom  of  re- 
search and  freedom  of  teaching  and  publishing,  are 
commonly  attributed  to  Jesuit  influence.    Tb^  so- 
ciety had,  in  1902,  15,231  members,  6,743  being 
priests  and  4,542  students  for  the  priesthood.  There 
are  about  1,800  in  the  United  States,  and  they  are 
numerous  in  Canada,  Mexico,  Central  and  South 
America,  Cuba,  and  the  Philippines.    [The  Jesuits 
have  from  the  beginning  laid  especial  stress  upon 
education  and  adopted  a  high  standard.    But  they 
have  had  to  run  the  gantlet  of  sharp  criticism  not 
only  from  Protestants  but  from  Roman  Catholics. 
Nor  can  it  be  explained  away  that  the  order  was  for 
a  considerable  period  under  the  papal  ban.    Their 
secrecy,  superior  skill  and  learning,  and  especially 
the  casuistry  advocated  in  books  written  by  mem- 
bers of  the  order,  have  concentrated  much  attention 
on  them,  not  always  to  their  approval.   They  can  not 
claim  exemption  from  the  conmion  failings  of  man- 
kind, or  any  special  divine  leadership.    They  have 
had    ambitious   and    unscrupulous    members  and 
have  been  under  unworthy  leadership.    Their  med- 


140 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jesuits 


dling  in  politics  has  not  always  been  to  their 
credit.  But  when  all  has  been  said  against  them 
the  Jesuits  still  retain  their  preeminence.  They 
were  the  authors  of  the  Counter-Reformation  which 
prevented  the  collapse  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
Qiurch  in  lands  in  which  Protestantism  had  gotten 
a  hold.  They  gave  their  church  its  theology  and 
raised  its  standard  of  education  and  of  clerical 
morality.  They  cleansed  it  of  much  of  it«  foulness, 
put  new  breath  into  its  foreign  missions,  and  every- 
where displayed  a  seal,  patience  and  piety  which 
revived  the  whole  church.  And  these  services  in 
the  past  are  continued  into  the  present,  and  every 
year  the  Roman  Catholic  Chiurch  is  still  heavier  in 
their  debt.] 

The  number  of  Jesuits  throughout  the  world  is 
small.  In  1902  there  were  but  15,231  of  all  grades. 
The  Official  Catholic  Directory  for  1909,  pp.  746-747, 
gives  these  figures  for  the  United  States: 


Fathera. 

Scholaa. 
tics. 

Lay 
Brothers. 

New     York  .  Maryland 
Provioos 

340 
338 

59 

132 

164 

333 
252 

34 
77 

128 

157 

MiMOttii  Province 

New  Mezioo  and  Colo- 
rado Mioaion 

New  Orleana  Province. . 

CaKfomia    and     Rocky 
Mountain  Mijrion.... 

158 

26 

48 

106 

1.023 

824 

495 

m.  Female  Orders  in  Imitation  of  Jesoiti:  The 
Society  of  Jesus  has  no  recognized  affiliated  socie- 
ties of  women.  Before  his  first  pilgrimage  to  Je- 
rusalem Ignatius  formed  the  acquaintance  in  Bar- 
celona of  Isabella  de  Rosella,  a  gifted  and  wealthy 
woman,  and  greatly  interested  her  in  his  plans  and 
purposes.  When  he  returned  in  1524  she  minis- 
tered to  his  needs  for  a  considerable  time.  In  1543, 
after  the  society  had  secured  papal  approval  and 
when  he  was  occupied  with  world-wide  schemes  for 
the  mastery  of  the  nations,  she  visited  him  in  Rome, 
with  two  other  like-minded  ladies,  and  begged  to 
be  taken  under  his  spiritual  guidance.  He  was  un- 
willing to  assume  this  additional  burden;  but  the 
persistent  women  secured  from  the  pope  an  order 
(1545)  that  Ignatius  should  accede  to  their  wishes. 
With  great  reluctance  he  yielded;  but  soon  found 
that  these  women,  with  the  small  sisterhood  that 
they  had  gathered,  gave  him  more  trouble  than  the 
administration  of  the  affairs  of  the  entire  society, 
and  at  his  earnest  request  the  pope  relieved  him  of 
the  obligation  (1547).  It  was  no  easy  task  to  se- 
cure the  consent  of  Isabella  and  her  companions  to 
be  released  from  the  obligations  that  they  had  been 
so  eager  to  assume;  but  he  was  inexorable  and  Isa- 
bella had  to  be  content  to  be  a  ''  mother  **  rather 
than  "  daughter  "  of  the  great  leader.  The  Eng- 
lish Ladies  (q.v.)  founded  by  Mary  Ward,  an  Eng- 
lish woman,  at  St.  Omer  in  Flanders  in  1609,  sought 
affiliation  with  the  Jesuits,  but  failed  to  secure  per- 
manent recognition  as  Jesuitesses.  A  similar  soror- 
ity, founded  in  1607  by  Johanna,  marchioness  of 
Montserrat,  came  into  close  relations  with  the 
Jesuits  without  becoming  identified  with  the  so- 
ciety.   The  same  may  be  said  of  the  sisters  of  the 


Sacred  Heart  and  of  the  Faith  of  Jesus.  It  is  the 
policy  of  the  Jesuits  to  influence  and  control  many 
of  the  sisterhoods  without  assuming  any  responsi- 
bility for  them  and  without  entrusting  to  them  the 
secrets  of  the  society.  A.  H.  Newman. 

Bxbuoqrapht:  A  rather  full  list  of  works,  including  aouroes, 
ia  given  in  Hauck-Heriog,  RE,  viii.  742  aqq.;  and  a  mono- 
graph devoted  to  the  subject  is  A.  Carayon.  BiJbUoaniphie 
hiatorique  de  la  Compaonie  de  Jeeua,  Paris,  1864.  Without 
consulting  the  earlier  and  now  often  inaccessible  editions 
of  the  documents  which  created  and  protected  the  society, 
it  is  possible  to  obtain  a  view  of  all  that  is  essential  in  the 
late  edition  of  the  documents,  3  vols.,  Rome,  1800  sqq., 
which  contains  the  Constitutions,  the  Examen  generals, 
the  pertinent  papal  bulls,  briefs,  and  privileges,  the  decrees 
and  canons  of  the  General  Constitution,  the  plan  of  study, 
the  "  Spiritual  Exercises,"  and  the  IXrectorium.  A  late 
edition  of  the  MonUa  privaia  is  by  C.  Souvestre,  Paris, 
1880. 

On  the  general  history  of  the  order  the  great  work  of 
De  Backer  (see  vol.  i.,  p.  xxiil.  of  this  work)  and  of  Ci^ 
tineau-Joly  are  of  first  importance;  and  the  literature 
under  Ignatius  of  Loyola  contains  much  of  importance. 
Consult  further  for  the  general  history:  Maynard,  Tf^e 
Studiee  and  Teaching  of  the  Society  of  Jeaue  ai  the  Time  of 
iU  Sujyprtaeion,  1760-1763,  Balthnore,  1856;  C.  Paroissen, 
Principlee  of  the  JeauiU,  London,  I860:  J.  M.  S.  Daurignac, 
Hiel.  of  the  Society  of  Jeeua,  2  vols.,  Cincinnati.  1865;  F. 
Nippold,  Der  Jeeuitenorden  von  aeiner  WiederhereteHung 
hia  ttarOegenwart,  Mannheim,  1867;  S.  Rose,  IgnaHue  Loyola 
and  the  Early  Jeauite,  London,  1871;  J.  Stephen,  Foundera 
ofJeauitiam,  in  Eaaaya  in  Ecdeaiaatieal  Biography,  London, 
1875;  W.  C.  Cartwright,  The  Jeauita;  their  Conatitution 
and  Teadunga,  London,  1876;  P.  Bert,  La  Monde  dea 
JiauHea,  Paris,  1880;  T.  Griesinger.  The  JeatUta;  a  eom^ 
plete  Hiatory  of  their  Proeeedinga,  London,  1883;  T.  Carlyle, 
JeauiOam,  in  Worka,  II.  259-485.  Boston.  1885;  T.  Hughes, 
Loyola  and  the  Educational  Syaiem  of  the  Jeauita,  London, 
1892;  G.  B.  NiooUni,  Hiat.  of  the  Jeauita;  their  Origin, 
Progreaa,  Doctrinea  and  Deaigna,  London,  1893;  E.  Piaget, 
Eaaai  aur  Vorganiaation  de  la  eompagnie  de  J6aua,  Paris, 
1893;  F.  H.  Reuach,  BeitrOge  aur  GeaehidUe  dea  Jeauiten- 
ordena,  Munich,  1894;  R.  W.  Thompson,  Tf^e  Foatprinta 
cf  iha  JeauiU,  New  York,  1894;  E.  Gothein,  Ignatiua  von 
Loyola  und  die  Oegenreformation,  Halle,  1895;  M.  F. 
Cusaek.  The  Black  Pope;  a  Hiat.  of  the  Jeauita,  London. 
1896;  H.  Mailer,  Lea  Originea  de  la  Compagnie  de  J6aua; 
Ignaee  at  Lainea,  Paris,  1898;  A.  Hamy,  Galerie  iUuairie  de 
la  Compaonie  de  Jiaua,  Paris,  1900;  J.  Michelet  and  E. 
Quinet,  Etude  aur  lea  Jiauitea,  latest  ed.  Paris,  1900;  J. 
Hoehstetter.  Moniia  Secreta;  Die  geheimen  Inatruktionen 
der  JaauUen,  Stuttgart,  1901;  Kaiaer  Frana  Joaeph  1.  und 
die  Jeauiten,  Barmen,  1901;  L.  Wittwe,  Friedrich  der 
Qroaaa  und  die  Jeauiten,  Halle,  1901;  R.  Schwickerath, 
JeauU  Education,  ita  Hiatory  and  Principlea,  St.  Louis,  1903; 
J.  Btey,  Un  pridieaieur  apoatolique  au  16,  aiMe,  Fray  de 
NmmiUa,  1699-1774,  Paris.  1904;  B.  Pascal,  The  Pro- 
vincial Lettera,  often  reprinted,  e.g.,  New  York,  1904;  P. 
Suan,  8L  Franeoia  de  Borgia,  1610- 167B,  Paris.  1905; 
A.  Brou,  L«s  Jiauitea  de  la  legende.  Part  I.  Lea  Originea 
juaqu'd  Paaeal,  Paris,  1906. 

For  the  Jesuits  in  England  consult:  H.  Foley,  Reeorda 
of  the  Englith  Province  of  the  Society  cf  Jeaua,  8  vols., 
London,  1877-83;  A.  Kobler,  Die  MOrtyrer  und  Bekenn^ 
der  GeaaUachaft  Jeau  in  England  1680-1681,  Innsbruck, 
1886;  E.  L.  Taunton,  HiaL  of  the  Jeauita  in  England,  1680- 
177S,  London,  1901;  W.  Walsh,  The  Jeauita  in  Great 
Britain,  London,  1903.  For  their  history  in  France:  A. 
Carayon,  DoeumeiUa  inSdita  concemante  la  Compagnie  de 
Jiaua,  23  voln.,  Poitiers,  1863  sqq.;  J.  Prat,  La  Compagnie 
de  Jiaua  en  France,  4  vols.,  Paris,  1877;  £.  Piaget,  Hiat, 
de  Vitabliaaement  dea  Jiauitea  en  France  1640-1600,  Leyden, 
1895;  M.  Ghoeset,  Lea  Jiauitea  et  leura  cmvrea  h  Avignon, 
166S-1768,  Avignon,  1896;  E.  Souillier,  Lea  Jiauitea  it 
MaraeOle  au»  16.  et  18.  aiielea,  Avignon,  1899;  J.  Pra. 
Lea  Jiauitea  h  Grenoble,  1687-1763,  Lyons,  1901;  J.  Del- 
four,  L«s  Jiauitea  b,  Poitiera,  160Jhl76$,  Paris,  1902. 
For  Gennany:  S.  Sugenheim,  Geachiehte  der  Jeauiten  in 
DeutadOand  1640-1773, 2  vols.,  Frankfort,  1847;  J.  Hansen. 
Rheiniadte  Akten  zur  Geadiiehte  dea  Jeauiianordena,  1649- 
1689,  Cologne,  1896;  B.  Duhr,  Die  Jeauiten  an  den 
deutadien  FUratenhefen  dea   16.   Jahrhunderta,   Freiburg, 


Jesus  Ohriat 


THE  NEW  SCHAPP-HER20G 


160 


1901;  idem.  AktenatHeke  sur  OMchidUs  der  JetuiUn-Mia- 
sionen  in  DeuUcMand,  1848-1879,  ib.  1908;  ideni«  Of 
nehichU  der  JfuUen  in  den  LAndem  deuUcher  Zunge,  ib. 
1907;  M.  RIst,  Die  detUachen  Jeeuilen  auf  den  ScMacht- 
feldem  und  in  den  Lazaretten  1866,  1870-1871,  FreiburK. 
1904.  For  North  America:  Jeeuit  RelaHone  and  Allied 
Doeumenie;  TraveU  and  Exploratione  of  the  JeeuU  MiseUm- 
ariee  in  New  France,  ed.  R.  G.  Thwaites,  73  voIb.,  Cleve- 
land, O.,  1896-1902:  T.  Hughes.  Hiet.  of  Society  cf  Jeeue 
in  North  America  colonial  and  federal,  vol.  i.  to  1646,  Lon- 
don, 1907;  idem.  Documente,  vol.  i.,  part  I.,  nos.  1-140 
(1605-1838).  London.  1908;  F.  Parkman,  The  Jeeuite  in 
North  America  in  the  Seventeenth  Century,  Boston.  1897; 
idem.  Pioneer»  of  France  in  the  New  World,  ib.  1879;  idem. 
La SaUe and  the  Diaeovery  oftheOreai  Weet,  ib.l879;  W. I. 


Kip,  The  Early  JesuU  Mieaione  in  North  America,  New 
York.  1882;  idem.  Hiatarical  Seenee  from  the  Old  Jeeuit 
Mieeume,  ib.  1876;  Z.  Engelhardt.  The  Mieeione  and  Mis- 
eionariee  of  Califomia,  San  Frandsoo,  1908.  For  other 
countries:  H.  Lutteroth.  Rueeland  und  die  Jeauiten  177 t- 
18B0,  Stuttgart,  1846;  P.  Mury,  Lea  Jiauiiea  d  Cayenne, 
Strasbuig,  1896;  M.  de  Anglds  y  Gortari.  Loa  Jeeuiiaa  en 
el  Paraguay,  Assumption,  1896;  R.  Peres.  La  Campania  de 
Jeeua  en  Colomhia  y  Centro-America,  ValladoUd.  1896;  A. 
Astrain.  Hiatoria  de  la  eompania  de  Jeeua  en  la  tieiatencia 
de  Eapana,  2  vols.,  Madrid,  1902-05;  R.  B.  Cunningham 
Graham.  A  Vaniahed  Arcadia;  being  aome  account  of  thf 
JeavUa  in  Paraguay,  1607  to  1767,  New  Yoric.  1901;  F. 
Colin,  Labor  evangdica  de  loa  Obreroa  de  la  CompalUa  de 
Jeeua  en  las  lalaa  FUipinaa,  Barcelona,  1904. 


Consideration  of  the  Sources. 

Heathen  Writers  (i  1). 

The  Apostle  Paul  (i  2). 

Paul  and  the  Earthly  Life  of  Jesus 
(§3). 

Other  EpistoUrs  (f  4). 

The  Gospel  of  Luke  (f  5). 

Mark  and  Matthew  ({  6). 

The  Primitive  **  Narrative  Source  " 
(§7). 

"Sayings  of  Jesus'*  (|  8). 

Individual  Sections  of  Luke  and 
Matthew  (ft  9). 

The  Gospel  of  John  (I  10). 

Gospel  Portrait  of  Christ  not  In- 
vented (i  11). 

The  Portrait  of  Jeeua. 

His  Humiliation  (f  1). 

His  Messiahship  and  Deity  (fi  2). 

Central  Conoeptions  (§3). 


JESUS    CHRIST. 

nt  Attempts  to  Naturalise  the  Portrait 
of  Jesiis. 
Literary   and    Historical    Criticism 

(§1). 
Methods    of    Historical    Criticism 

(§  2). 
Its  Embarrassment  (f  3). 
Its  Historical  Development  (|  4). 
Its  Issue  (i  5). 
IV.  The  Life  of  Jesus. 

In  What  Sense  a  "  Life"  Impossible 

(ID. 
Framework  of  the  "Life"  (i  2). 
Outline  of  the  "Life"  (S  3). 
The  Public  Ministry  (f  4). 
Instruments  of  the  Ministry  (f  6). 
The  Virgin-Birth;  the  Resurrection 
(§6). 
B. 

I.  Limitation  of  the  Field. 
II.  The  Sources. 

The  Epistles  of  Paul  (f  1). 


The  Gospels  (i  2). 
The  Pautine  Gospel  (i  3). 
Its  Relations  and  Charaeter  (I  4). 
The  Petrine  Gospel  (|  5). 
Its  Character  (I  6). 
Consequences  (f  7). 
Four  Types  of  Tradition  (I  8). 
The  Gospel  of  John  (i  0). 
Matthew  and  Luke  (i  10). 
Q  and  the  Aramaic  Source  (I  11). 
Results  of  Source  Analysis  (S  12). 
III.  Critical  Outline  of  the  Story  of  Jesus. 
Relations  with   John   the  Baptist 

(ID. 
The  Motive  for  Jesus'  Ministry  (f  2). 
Message  and  Miracles  (S  3). 
Breaking  of  Bread  (f  4). 
CoUision  with  the  Authorities  (f  5). 
The  Crisis  in  Galilee  (f  6). 
Jesus  as  "  Son  of  Man  "  (f  7). 
The  Finale  (f  8). 
The  Issue  (i  9). 


A.  I.  Oonslderationofthe  Sooroea:  The  rise  of 
Christianity  was  a  phenomenon  of  too  little  apparent 
significance  to  attract  the  attention  of  the  great 
worid.  It  was  only  when  it  had  refused  to  be 
quenched  in  the  blood  of  its  founder,  and,  breaking 
out  of  the  narrow  bounds  of  the  obscure  province 
in  which  it  had  its  origin,  was  making  itself  felt 
in  the  centers  of  population,  that  it  drew  to  itself 
a  somewhat  irritated  notice.  The  interest  of 
such  heathen  writers  as  mention  it  was  in  the 
movement,  not  in  its  author.  But  in  speaking 
of  the  movement  they  tell  some- 
1.  Heathen  thing  of  its   author,  and    what   they 

Writers,  tell  is  far  from  being  of  little  moment. 
He  was,  it  seems,  a  certain  "  Christ," 
who  had  lived  in  Judea  in  the  reign  of  Tiberius 
(14-37  A.D.),  and  had  been  brought  to  capital  pun- 
ishment by  the  procurator,  Pontius  Pilate  (q.v.; 
cf.  Tacitus,  AnnaU,  xv.  44).  The  significance  of 
his  personality  to  the  movement  inaugurated  by 
him  is  already  suggested  by  the  fact  that  he,  and 
no  other,  had  impressed  his  name  upon  it.  But 
the  name  itself  by  which  he  was  known  particu- 
larly attracts  notice.  This  is  imiformly,  in  these 
heathen  writers,  *'  Christ,"  not  "  Jesus."  ♦  Sue- 
tonius (Claudius,  xxv.)  not  unnaturally  confuses 
this  "  Christus  "  with  the  Greek  name  "  Chres- 
tus  ";  but  Tacitus  and  Pliny  show  themselves  bet- 
ter informed  and  preserve  it  accurately.  "  Christ," 
however,  is  not  a  personal  name,  but  the  Greek 

*  In  Josephus,  iln<.  XVIII..  iii.  3.  XX.,  ix.  1.  "Jesus," 
"Jesus,  surnamed  Christ,"  occur.  But  the  authenticity  of 
the  passages  bi  questionable,  espedally  that  of  the  fon&ar. 


rendering  of  the  Hebrew  title  *'  Messiah."  Clearly, 
then,  it  was  as  the  promised  Messiah  of  the  Jews 
that  their  founder  was  reverenced  by  "  the  Chris- 
tians ";  and  they  had  made  so  much  of  his  Messiah- 
ship  in  speaking  of  him  that  the  title  '*  Christ " 
had  actually  usurped  the  place  of  his  personal 
name,  and  he  was  everywhere  known  simply  as 
"  Christ."  Their  reverence  for  his  person  had,  in- 
deed, exceeded  that  commonly  supposed  to  be  due 
even  to  the  Messianic  dignity.  Pliny  records  that 
this  "  Christ  "  was  statedly  worshiped  by  "  the 
Christians "  of  Pont  us  and  Bithynia  as  their 
God  (Pliny,  Epist.^  xcvi.  [xcvii.]  to  Trajan). 
Beyond  these  great  facts  the  heathen  historians  give 
little  information  about  the  founder  of  Christianity. 

What  is  lacking  in  them  is  happily  supplied, 
however,  by  the  writings  of  the  Christians  them- 
selves.    Christianity   was    from   its    beginnings  a 
literary    religion,    and    documentary 
2.  The     records  of  it  have  come  down  from  the 

Apostle  very  start.  There  are,  for  example, 
Paul.  the  letters  of  the  Apostle  Paul  (q.v.), 
a  highly  cultured  Romanized  Jew  of 
Tarsus,  who  early  (34  or  35  a.d.)  threw  in  his 
fortunes  with  the  new  religion,  and  by  his  splen- 
did leadership  established  it  in  the  chief  centers 
of  influence  from  Antioch  to  Rome.  Written 
occasionally  to  one  or  another  of  the  Chris- 
tian communities  of  this  region,  at  intervals 
during  the  sixth  and  seventh  decades  of  the  cen- 
tury, that  is  to  say,  from  twenty  to  forty  years 
after  the  origin  of  Christianity,  these  letters  reflect 
the  conceptions  which  ruled  in  the  Christian  com- 


151 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


JfesuB  Ohrist 


munities  of  the  time.     Paul  had  known  the  Chris- 
tian movement  from  its  beginning;   first  from  the 
outside,  as  one  of  the  chief  agents  in  its  persecu- 
tion, and  then  from  the  inside,  as  the  most  active 
leader  of  its  propaganda.     He  was  familiarly  ac- 
quainted with  the  Apostles  and  other  immediate 
followers  of  Jesus,  and  enjoyed  repeated  intercourse 
with  them.    He  explicitly  declares  the  harmony  of 
their  teaching  with  his,  and   joins  with  his  their 
testimony  to  the  great  facts  which  he  proclaimed. 
The  complete  consonance  of  his  allusions  to  Jesus 
with    what    is   gathered  from   the   hints    of  the 
heathen  historians  is  very  striking.    The  person 
of  Jesus  fills  the  whole  horizon  of  his  thought, 
and   gathers  to  itself  all  his  religious  emotions. 
That  Jesus  was  the  Messiah  is  the  presupposition  of 
all  his  speech  of  him,  and  the  Messianic  title  has 
already  become  his  proper  name  behind  which  his 
real  personal  name,  Jesus,  has  retired.    This  Mes- 
siah is  definitely  represented  as  a  divine  being  who 
has  entered  the  world  on  a  mission  of  mercy  to  sin- 
ful man,  in  the  prosecution  of  which  he  has  given 
himself  up  as  a  sacrifice  for  sin,  but  has  risen  again 
from  the  dead  and  ascended  to  the  right  hand  of 
God,  henceforth  to  rule  as  Lord  of  all.    Aroimd 
the  two  great  facts,  of  the  expiatory  death  of  the 
Son  of  God  and  his  rising  again,  Paul's  whole  teach- 
ing circles.    Jesus  Christ  as  crucified,  Christ  risen 
from  the  dead  as  the  first  fruits  of  those  that  sleep 
— ^here  is  Paul's  whole  gospel  in  summary- 

Into  the  details  of  Christ's  earthly  life  Paul  had 
no  occasion  to  enter.  But  he  shows  himself  fully 
familiar  with  them,  and  indden^lly 
^'  ?*^  conveys  a  vivid  portrait  of  Christ's 
^^?7*  personality.  Of  the  seed  of  David  on 
JAtBof  ^^  human,  as  the  Son  of  God  on  the 
Jesna.  divine  side,  he  was  bom  of  a  woman, 
under  the  law,  and  lived  subject  to  its 
ordinances  for  his  mission's  sake,  humbling  himself 
even  unto  death,  and  that  the  death  of  the  cross. 
His  lowly  estate  is  dwelt  upon,  and  the  high  traits 
of  his  personal  character  manifested  in  his  lowli- 
ness are  lightly  sketched  in,  justifying  not  merely 
the  negative  declaration  that  **  he  knew  no  sin," 
but  his  positive  presentation  as  the  model  of  all 
perfection.  An  item  of  his  teaching  is  occasionally 
adverted  to,  or  even  quoted,  always  with  the  ut- 
most reverence.  Members  of  his  immediate  circle 
of  followers  are  mentioned  by  name  or  by  class — 
whether  his  brethren  according  to  the  fiesh  or  the 
twelve  apostles  whom  he  appointed.  '  The  institu- 
tion by  him  of  a  sacramental  feast  is  described,  and 
that  of  a  companion  sacrament  of  initiation  by 
baptism  is  implied.  But  especially  his  sacrificial 
death  on  the  cross  is  emphasized,  his  burial,  his 
rising  again  on  the  third  day,  and  his  appearances 
to  chosen  witnesses,  who  are  cited  one  after  the 
other  with  the  greatest  solemnity.  Such  details 
are  never  communicated  to  Paul's  readers  as  pieces 
of  fresh  information.  They  are  alluded  to  as  mat- 
ters of  common  knowledge,  and  with  the  plainest 
intimation  of  the  unquestioned  recognition  of  them 
by  all.  Thtis  it  is  made  clear  not  only  that  there 
tmderlies  Paul's  letters  a  complete  portrait  of 
Jesus  and  a  full  outline  of  his  career,  but  that  this 
portrait  and  this  outline  are  the  universal  posses- 


sion of  Christians.  They  were  doubtless  as  fully 
before  his  mind  as  such  in  the  early  years  of  his 
Christian  life,  in  the  thirties,  as  when  he  was  writing 
his  letters  in  the  fifties  and  sixties.  There  is  no 
indication  in  the  way  in  which  Paul  touches  on 
these  things  of  a  recent  change  of  opinion  re- 
garding them  or  of  a  recent  acquisition  of  knowl- 
edge of  them.  The  testimony  of  Paul  s  letters,  in 
a  word,  has  retrospective  value,  and  is  contempo- 
rary testimony  to  the  facts. 

Paul's  testimony  alone  provides  thus  an  excep- 
tionally good  basis  for  the  historical  verity  of  Jesus' 
personality   and    career.    But   Paul's 

4.  Other  testimony  is  far  from  standing  alone. 
Bplstolars.  Jt  ia  fully  supported  by  the  testimony 
of  a  series  of  other  writings,  similar 
to  his  own,  purporting  to  come  from  the  hands  of 
early  teachers  of  the  Church,  most  of  them  from 
actual  companions  of  our  Lord  and  eye-witnesses 
of  his  majesty,  and  handed  down  to  us  with  cred- 
ible evidence  of  their  authenticity.  And  it  is  ex- 
tended by  the  testimony  of  a  series  of  writings  of 
a  very  different  character;  not  occasional  letters 
designed  to  meet  particular  crises  or  questions  ari- 
sing in  the  churches,  but  formal  accounts  of  Jesus' 
words  and  acts. 

Among  these  attention  is  attracted  first  by  a 
great  historical  work,  the  two  parts  of  which  bear 
the  titles  of  "  the  Gospel  accoitling  to  Luke  "  and 
"  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles."  The  first  contains  an 
aocoimt  of  Jesus'  life  from  his  birth  to  his  death  and 
resurrection;  or,  including  the  opening  paragraphs 
of  the  second,  to  his  ascension.  What  directs  at- 
tention to  it  first  among  books  of  its  class  is  the  un- 
conunonly  full  information  possessed  concerning 
its  writer  and  his  method  of  historical 
6.  The     composition.     It  is  the  work  of  an  ed- 

Oospel  of  ucated  Greek  physician,  known  to  have 
Luke.  enjoyed,  as  a  companion  of  Paul,  spe- 
cial opportunities  of  informing  him- 
self of  the  facts  of  Jesus'  career.  Whatever  Paul 
himself  knew  of  the  acts  and  teachings  of  his 
Lord  was,  of  course,  the  common  property  of 
the  band  of  missionaries  which  traveled  in  his 
company,  and  could  not  fail  to  be  the  subject 
of  much  public  and  private  discussion  among 
them.  Among  Paul's  other  companions  there 
could  not  fail  to  be  9ome  whose  knowledge  of  Jesus' 
life,  direct  or  derived,  was  considerable;  an 
example  is  found,  for  instance,  in  John  Mark, 
who  had  come  out  of  the  inunediate  circle  of 
Jesus'  first  followers,  although  precise  knowledge 
of  the  meeting  of  Luke  and  Mark  as  fellow  com- 
panions of  Paul  belongs  to  a  little  later  period 
than  the  composition  of  Luke's  Gospel.  In  com- 
pany with  Paul  Luke  had  even  visited  Jerusalem 
and  had  resided  two  years  at  Caesarea  in  touch  with 
primitive  disciples;  and  if  the  early  tradition  which 
represents  him  as  a  native  of  Antioch  be  accepted, 
he  must  be  credited  with  facilities  from  the  begin- 
ning of  his  Christian  life  for  association  with  orig- 
inal disciples  of  Jesus.  All  that  is  needed  to  ground 
great  confidence  in  his  narrative  as  a  trustworthy 
account  of  the  facts  it  records  is  assurance  that  he 
had  the  will  and  capacity  to  make  good  use  of  his 
abounding    opportunities    for   exact    infoimation* 


Jesos  OlirUt 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


152 


The  former  is  afiforded  by  the  preface  to  his  Gospel 
in  which  he  roTeals  his  method  as  a  historian  and 
his  zeal  for  exactness  of  information  and  state- 
ment; the  latter  by  the  character  of  the  Gospel, 
which  evinces  itself  at  every  point  a  sincere  and 
careful  narrative  resting  upon  good  and  well-lifted 
information.  In  these  circumstances  the  deter- 
'mination  of  the  precise  time  when  this  narrative  was 
actually  committed  to  paper  becomes  a  matter  of 
secondary  importance;  in  any  event  its  material 
was  collected  during  the  period  of  Paul's  mission- 
ary activity.  It  may  be  confidently  maintained, 
however,  that  it  was  also  put  together  during  this 
period,  that  is  to  say,  during  the  earlier  years 
of  the  seventh  decade  of  the  century.  Confi- 
dence in  its  narrative  is  strengthened  by  the  com- 
plete accord  of  the  portrait  of  Jesus,  which  its  de- 
tailed account  exhibits  with  that  which  underlies 
the  letters  of  Paul.  Not  only  are  the  general  traits 
of  the  personality  identical,  but  the  emphasis  falls 
at  the  same  places.  In  effect,  the  Jesus  of  Luke's 
narrative  is  the  Christ  of  Paul's  epistles  in  perfect 
dramatic  presentation,  and  only  two  hypotheses 
offer  themselves  in  possible  explanation.  Either 
Luke  rests  on  Paul,  and  has  with  consmnmate  art 
invented  a  historicsJ  basis  for  Paul's  ideal  Christ; 
or  else  Paul's  allusions  rest  on  a  historical  basis 
and  Luke  has  preserved  that  historical  basis  in  his 
careful  detailed  narrative.  Every  line  of  Luke's 
narrative  refutes  the  former  and  demonstrates  the 
latter  supposition. 

Additional  evidence  of  the  trustworthiness  of 
Luke's  Gospel  as  an  account  of  Jesus'  acts  and 
teaching  is  afforded  by  the  presence  by  its  side  of 
other  narratives  of  similar  character  and  accordant 
contents.  These  narratives  are  two  in  mmiber  and 
have  been  handed  down  under  the  names  of  mem- 
bers of  the  earliest  circle  of  Christians — of  John 
Blark,  who  was  from  the  beginning  in  the  closest 
touch  with  the  apostolic  body,  and  of 

6.  Kark    Matthew,    one    of    the   apostles.     On 

and        comparison  of  these   narratives  with 

Xatthew.   Luke's,  not  only  are  they  foimd  to 

present,   each  with  its   own  peculiar 

point  of  view  and    purpose,    precisely  the    same 

conception    and  portrait    of  Jesus,  but  to  have 

utilized  in  laige   measure  also  the  same  sources 

of    information.     Indeed,    the    entire    body    of 

Blark's  Gospel  is   found  to  be  incorporated   also 

in  Blatthew's  and  Luke's. 

This  circumstance,  in  view  of  the  declarations 
of  Luke's  preface,  is  of  the  utmost  significance 
for  an  estimate  of  the  trustworthiness  of  the  narra- 
tive thus  embodied  in  all  three  of  the  "  Synoptic  " 
Gospels.  In  this  preface  Luke  professes  to  have 
had  for  his  object  the  estabUshment  of  absolute 
"  certainty,"  with  respect  to  the  things  made 
the  object  of  instruction  in  Christian  circles;  and 
to  this  end  to  have  grounded  his  nar- 

7.  Tha     rative  in  exact  investigation  of    the 

PrimitlYe  course  of  events  from  the  beginning. 
"Narrative In  the  prosecution  of  this  task,    he 

Bouroe.*^    knew  himself   to    be   working  in    a 

goodly  company  to  a  common  end, 

namely,  the  narration  of  the  Christian  origins  on 

the  basis  of  the  testimony  of  those   ministers  of 


the  word  who  had  been  also  "  eye-witnesses  from 
the  beginning."  He  does  not  say  whether  these 
fellow  narrators  had  or  had  not  been,  some  or 
all  of  them,  eye-witnesses  of  some  or  of  all  the 
events  they  narrated;  he  merely  says  that  the 
foundation  on  which  all  the  narratives  be  has  in 
view  rested  was  the  testimony  of  eye-witnesses. 
He  does  not  assert  for  his  own  treatise  superiority  to 
those  of  his  fellow  workers;  he  only  daims  an  hon- 
orable place  for  his  own  treatise  among  the  others 
on  the  ground  of  the  diligence  and  care  he  has  exer- 
cised in  ascertaining  and  recording  the  facts, 
through  which,  he  affirms,  he  has  attained  a  cer- 
tainty with  regard  to  them  on  which  his  readers 
may  depend.  Now,  on  comparing  the  narrative  of 
Luke  with  those  of  Matthew  and  Biark,  it  is  dis- 
covered that  one  of  the  main  sources  on  which 
Luke  draws  is  also  one  of  the  main  sources  on 
which  Matthew  draws  and  practically  the  sole 
source  on  which  Mark  rests.  Thus  Luke's  judg- 
ment of  the  value  and  trustworthiness  of  this 
source  receives  the  notable  support  of  the  judg- 
ment of  his  fellow  evangelists,  and  it  can  scarcely 
be  doubted  that  what  it  contains  is  the  veri- 
table tradition  of  those  who  were  as  well  eye- 
witnesses as  ministers  of  the  Word  from  the  b^in- 
ning,  in  whose  acctu^cy  confidence  can  be  placed. 
If  the  three  Synoptic  Gospels  do  not  give  three  in- 
dependent testimonies  to  the  facts  which  they  re- 
cord, they  give  what  is,  perhaps,  better, — three  in- 
dependent witnesses  to  the  trustworthiness  of  the 
narrative,  which  they  all  incorporate  into  their  own 
as  resting  on  autoptic  testimony  and  thoroughly 
deserving  of  credit.  A  narrative  lying  at  the  basis 
of  all  three  of  these  Gospels,  themselves  written 
certainly  not  later  than  the  seventh  decade  of  the 
century,  must  in  any  event  be  early  in  date,  and 
in  that  sense  must  emanate  from  the  first  follow- 
ers of  Christ;  and  in  the  circumstances— of  the 
large  and  confident  use  made  of  it  by  all  three  of 
these  Gospels — can  not  fail  to  be  an  authentic 
statement  of  what  was  the  conviction  of  the  earliest 
circles  of  Christians. 

By  the  side  of  this  ancient  body  of  narrative 
must  be  placed  another  equally,  or,  perhaps,  even 
more  ancient  source,  consisting  largely, 
8.  The      but  not  exclusively,  of  reports  of  "  say- 
''Saylnffs  ings  of  Jesus."    This  imderlies  much 
of  Jems."  of  the  fabric  of  Luke  and  Matthew 
where  Mark  fails,  and  by  their  em- 
ployment of  it  is  authenticated  as  containing,  as 
Luke  asserts,  the  trustworthy  testimony  of  eye-wit- 
nesses.    Its  great  antiquity  is  universally  allowed, 
and  there  is  no  doubt  that  it  comes  from  the  very 
bosom  of  the  Apostolical  circle,  bearing  independ- 
ent but  thoroughly  consentient  testimony,  with  the 
narrative  source  which  imderlies  all  three  of  the 
Synoptists,  of  what  was  understood  by  the  primi- 
tive Christian  community  to  be  the  facts  regarding 
Jesus.    This  is  the  fundamental  fact  about  these 
two  sources — ^that  the  Jesus  which  they  present  is 
the  same  Jesus;  and  that  this  Jesus  is  precisely  the 
same  Jesus  found  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels  themselves, 
presented,  moreover,  in  precisely  the  same  fashion 
and  with  the  emphases  in  precisely  the  same  places. 
This  latter  could,  of  course,  not  faU  to  be  the  case 


i6d 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jasus  Ohrlst 


nnoe  these  Bources  themselves  constitute  the  main 
substance  of  the  Synoptic  Gospels  into  which  they 
have  been  transfused.  Its  significance  is  that  the 
portrait  of  Jesus  as  the  supernatural  Son  of  God  who 
came  into  the  world  as  the  Messiah  on  a  mission  of 
mercy  to  sinful  men,  which  is  reflected  even  in  the 
scanty  notices  of  him  that  find  an  incidental  place 
in  the  pages  of  heathen  historians,  which  suffused 
the  whole  preaching  of  Paul  and  of  the  other  mis- 
sionaries of  the  first  age,  and  which  was  wrought 
out  into  the  details  of  a  rich  dramatization  in  the 
narratives  of  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  is  as  old  as 
Christianity  itself  and  comes  straight  from  the  rep- 
resentations of  Christ's  first  followers. 

Valuable,  however,  as  the  separation  out  from 
the  Synoptic  narrative  of  these  underlying  sources 
is  in  this  aspect  of  the  matter,  appeal  can  not  be 
made  from  the  Synoptics  to  these  sources  as  from 
less  to  more  trustworthy  documents. 
0.  Individ-  On  the  one  hand,  these  sources  do  not 
nalSec-  exist  outside  the  Synoptics;  in  them 
tions  of  they  have  "  found  their  grave."  On 
Itvke  and  the  other  hand,  the  Synoptics  in  large 
Xatthew.  ^^g^  ^pg  these  sources;  and  their  trust- 
worthiness as  wholes  is  guaranteed  by 
the  trustworthiness  of  the  sources  from  which 
they  have  drawn  the  greater  part  of  their  materials, 
and  from  the  general  portraiture  of  Christ  in  which 
they  do  not  in  the  least  depart.  Luke's  daim 
in  his  preface  that  he  has  made  accurate  in- 
vestigations, seeking  to  learn  exactly  what  hap- 
pened that  he  might  attain  certainty  in  his 
narrative,  is  expressly  justified  for  the  larger 
part  of  his  narrative  when  the  sources  which 
underlie  it  are  isolated  and  are  found  to  approve 
themselves  imder  every  test  as  excellent.  There 
is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  for  the  remainder  of 
his  narrative  (and  Matthew  too  for  the  remainder 
of  his  narrative)  not  derived  from  these  two  sources 
which  the  accident  of  their  common  use  by  Mat- 
thew, Mark,  and  Luke,  or  by  Matthew  and  Luke, 
reveals,  he  (or  Matthew)  derives  his  material  from 
equally  good  and  trustworthy  sources  which  hap- 
pen to  be  used  only  by  him.  The  general  trust- 
worthiness of  Luke's  narrative  is  not'  lessened  but 
enhanced  by  the  circumstance  that,  in  the  larger 
portion  of  it,  he  has  the  support  of  other  evange- 
lists in  his  confident  use  of  his  sources,  with  the 
effect  that  these  sources  can  be  examined  and 
an  approving  verdict  reached  upon  them.  His 
judgment  of  sources  is  thus  confirmed,  and  his 
daim  to  possess  exact  information  and  to  have 
framed  a  trustworthy  narrative  is  vindicated. 
What  he  gives  from  sources  which  were  not  used 
by  the  other  evangelists,  that  is  to  say,  in  that  por- 
tion of  his  narrative  which  is  peculiar  to  himself 
(and  the  same  must  be  said  for  Matthew,  mutatis 
muiandis),  has  earned  a  right  to  credit  on  his  own 
authentication.  It  is  not  surprising,  therefore,  that 
the  portions  of  the  narratives  of  Matthew  and  Luke 
which  are  peculiar  to  the  one  or  the  other  bear 
every  mark  of  sincere  and  well-informed  narration 
and  contain  many  hints  of  resting  on  good  and 
trustworthy  sources.  In  a  word,  the  Synoptic 
Gospels  supply  a  threefold  sketch  of  the  acts  and 
teachings  of  Christ  of  exceptional  trustworthiness. 


If  here  is  not  historical  verity,  historical  verity 
would  seem  incapable  of  being  attained,  recorded, 
and  transmitted  by  human  hands. 

Along  with  the  Synoptic  Gospels  there  has  been 
handed  down  by  an  unexceptionable  line  of  testi- 
mony imder  the  name  of  the  Apostle  John,  another 
narrative  of  the  teaching  and  work  of  Christ  of 

equal  fulness  with  that  of  the  Synop- 

10.  The    tic  Gospels,  and  yet  so  independent  of 

G'ospelof  theirs  as  to  stand  out  in  a  sense  in 

John.       strong  contrast  with  theirs,  and  even 

to  invite  attempts  to  establish  a  con- 
tradiction between  it  and  them.  There  is,  however, 
no  contradiction,  but  rather  a  deep-lying  harmony. 
There  are  so-called  Synoptical  traits  discover- 
able in  John,  and  not  only  are  Johaimine  elements 
imbedded  in  the  Synoptical  narrative,  but  an  oc- 
casional passage  occurs  in  it  which  is  almost  more 
Johaimine  than  John  himself.  Take,  for  example, 
that  pr^nant  declaration  recorded  in  Matt.  xi.  27- 
28,  which,  as  it  occurs  also  in  Luke  (x.  21,  22), 
must  have  had  a  place  in  that  ancient  source 
drawn  on  in  common  by  these  two  Gospels  which 
comes  from  the  first  days  of  Christianity.  All 
the  high  teaching  of  John's  Gospel,  as  has  been 
justly  remarked,  is  but  *'  a  series  of  variations  " 
upon  the  theme  here  given  its  "  classical  expres- 
sion." The  type  of  teaching  which  is  brought 
forward  and  emphasized  by  John  is  thus  recognised 
on  all  hands  from  the  begiiming  to  have  had  a 
place  in  Christ's  teaching;  and  John  differs  from 
the  Synoptics  only  in  the  special  aspect  of  Christ's 
teaching  which  he  elects  particularly  to  present. 
The  naturalness  of  this  type  of  teaching  on  the  lips 
of  the  Jesus  of  the  Synoptists  is  also  undeniable; 
it  must  be  allowed — and  is 'now  generally  allowed — 
that  by  the  writers  of  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  and, 
it  should  be  added,  by  their  sources  as  well,  Jesus 
is  presented,  and  is  presented  as  representing  him- 
self, as  being  all  that  John  representa  him  to  be 
when  he  calls  him  the  Word,  who  was  in  the  be- 
ginning with  God  and  was  God.  The  relation  of  John 
and  the  Synoptists  in  their  portraiture  of  Jesus 
somewhat  resembles,  accordingly,  that  of  Plato 
and  Xenophon  in  their  portraiture  of  Socrates; 
only,  with  this  great  difference — ^that  both  Plato 
and  Xenophon  were  primarily  men  of  letters  and 
the  portrait  they  draw  of  Socrates  is  in  the 
hands  of  both  alike  eminently  a  sophisticated  and 
literary  one,  while  the  evangelists  set  down  simply 
the  facts  as  they  appealed  to  them  severally.  The 
definite  claim  which  John's  Gospel  makes  to  be  the 
work  of  one  of  the  iimer  circle  of  the  companions  of 
Jesus  is  supported,  moreover,  by  copious  evidence 
that  it  comes  from  the  hands  of  such  a  one  as  a  com- 
panion of  Jesus  would  be — a  Jew,  who  possessed  an 
intimate  knowledge  of  Palestine,  and  was  ac- 
quainted with  the  events  of  our  Lord's  life  as  only 
an  eye-witness  could  be  acquainted  with  them,  and 
an  eye-witness  who  had  been  admitted  to  very 
close  association  with  him.  That  its  narrative 
rests  on  good  information  is  repeatedly  manifested; 
and  more  than  once  historical  links  are  supplied 
by  it  which  are  needed  to  give  deamess  to  the 
Synoptical  narrative,  as,  for  example,  in  the  chron- 
ological framework  of  the  ministry  of  Jesus  and  the 


Jesus  Ohriflt 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


164 


culminating  miracle  of  the  raising  of  Lazarus, 
which  is  required  to  acooimt  for  the  incidents  of 
,the  Passion-Week.  It  presents  no  different  Jesus 
from  the  Jesus  of  the  Synoptists,  and  it  throws  the 
emphasis  at  the  same  plaoe--on  his  expiatory  death 
and  rising  again;  but  it  notably  supplements  the 
narrative  of  the  Synoptists  and  reveals  a  whole 
new  side  of  Jesus'  ministry,  and  if  not  a  whoUy 
new  aspect  of  his  teaching,  yet  a  remarkable  mass 
of  that  higher  aspect  of  his  teaching  of  which  only 
occasional  specimens  are  included  in  the  Synoptic 
narrative.  John's  narrative  thus  rounds  out  the 
Synoptical  narrative  and  gives  the  portrait  drawn 
in  it  a  richer  content  and  a  greater  completeness. 

This  portrait  may  itself  be  confidently  adduced 

as  its  own  warranty.     It  is  not  too  much  to  say 

with  Nathaniel  Laidner  that  "  the  history  of  the 

New  Testament  has  in  it  all  the  marks 

ll.Ooapel  of   credibility   that   any  history   can 
Portrait    have."    But  apart  from  these  more 

of  Ohrlat   usuaUy  marshaled    evidences  of    the 
Not        trustworthiness  of  the  narratives,  there 

Invented,  jg  the  portrait  itself  which  they  draw, 
and  this  can  not  by  any  possibility 
have  been  an  invention.  It  is  not  merely  that  the 
portrait  is  harmonipus  throughout — ^in  the  allusions 
and  presuppositions  of  the  epistles  of  Paul  and  the 
other  letter-writers  of  the  New  Testament,  in  the  de- 
tailed narratives  of  the  Synoptists  and  John,  and 
in  each  of  the  sources  which  underlie  them.  This 
is  a  matter  of  importance;  but  it  is  not  the  matter 
of  chief  moment;  there  is  no  need  to  dwell  upon 
the  impossibility  of  such  a  harmony  having  been 
maintained  save  on  the  basis  of  simple  truthful- 
ness of  record,  or  to  dispute  whether  in  the  case  of 
the  Synoptics  there  are  three  independent  witnesses 
to  the  one  portrait,  or  only  the  two  independent 
witnesses  of  their  two  most  prominent  "  sources." 
Nor  is  the  most  interesting  point  whether  the  abo- 
riginality  of  this  portrait  is  guaranteed  by  the  har- 
mony of  the  representation  in  all  the  sources  of  in- 
formation, some  of  which  reach  back  to  the  most 
primitive  epoch  of  the  Christian  movement.  It  is 
quite  certain  that  this  conception  of  Christ's  per- 
son and  career  was  the  conception  of  his  immediate 
followers,  and  indeed  of  himself;  but,  important  as 
this  conclusion  is,  it  is  still  not  the  matter  of  pri- 
mary import.  The  matter  of  primary  significance 
is  that  this  portrait  thus  imbeidded  in  all  the  au- 
thoritative sources  of  information,  and  thus  proved 
to  be  the  conception  of  its  foimder  cherished  by 
the  whole  of  primitive  Christendom,  and  indeed 
commended  to  it  by  that  founder  himself,  is  a  por- 
trait intrinsically  incapable  of  invention  by  men. 
It  could  never  have  come  into  being  save  as  the 
revelation  of  an  actual  person  embodying  it,  who 
really  lived  among  men.  "  A  romancer,"  as  even 
Albert  R^ville  allows,  **  can  not  attribute  to  a  being 
which  he  creates  an  ideal  superior  to  what  he  himself 
is  capable  of  conceiving."  The  conception  of  the 
God-man  which  is  embodied  in  the  portrait  which 
the  sources  draw  of  Christ,  and  which  is  dramatized 
by  them  through  such  a  history  as  they  depict,  can 
be  accoimted  for  only  on  the  assumption  that  such 
a  God-man  actually  lived,  was  seen  of  men,  and 
was  painted  from  the  life.    The  miracle  of  the  in- 


vention of  such  a  portraiture,  whether  by  the  con- 
scious effort  of  art,  or  by  the  unconscious  working 
of  the  mythopeic  fancy,  would  be  as  great  as  the 
actual  existence  of  such  a  person.  Of  this  there  is 
sufficient  a  posteriori  proof  in  the  invariable  deteri- 
oration this  portrait  suffers  in  its  secondary  repro- 
ductions— ^in  the  so-called  "  Lives  of  Christ,"  of 
every  t3rpe.  The  attempt  vitally  to  realize  and 
reproduce  it  results  inevitably  in  its  reduction.  A 
portraiture  which  can  not  even  be  interpreted  by 
men  without  suffering  serious  loss  can  not  be  the 
invention  of  the  first  simple  followers  of  Jesus. 
Its  very  existence  in  their  unsophisticated  narra- 
tives is  the  sufficient  proof  of  its  faithfulness  to  a 
great  reality. 

H.  The  Portrait  of  Jeene:  Only  an  outline  of 
this  portrait  can  be  set  down  here.  Jesus  appears 
in  it  not  only  a  supernatural,  but  in  all  the  sources 
alike  specifically  a  divine,  person,  who  came  into 
the  world  on  a  mission  of  mercy  to  sinful  man. 
Such  a  mission  was  in  its  essence  a  humiliation  and 
involved  humiliation  at  every  step  of  its  accomplish- 
ment.    His  life  is  represented  accord- 

1.  Hie  iugly  as  a  life  of  difficulty  and  con- 
Hnmlll-  ffict,  of  trial  and  suffering,  issuing  in  a 
atlon.       shameful  death.    But  this  himiiliation 

is  represented  as  in  every  step  and  stage 
of  it  voluntary.  It  was  entered  into  and  abided  in 
solely  in  the  interests  of  his  mission,  and  did  not  ar- 
gue at  any  point  of  it  helplessness  in  the  face  of  the 
difficulties  which  hemmed  him  in  more  and  more 
until  they  led  him  to  death  on  the  cross.  It  rather 
manifested  his  strong  determination  to  fulfil  his 
mission  to  the  end,  to  drink  to  its  dregs  the  cup 
he  had  imdertaken  to  drink.  Accordingly,  every 
suggestion  of  escape  from  it  by  the  use  of  his  in- 
trinsic divine  powers,  whether  of  omnipotence  or 
of  omniscience,  was  treated  by  him  first  and  last  as 
a  temptation  of  the  evil  one.  The  death  in  which 
his  life  ends  is  conceived,  therefore,  as  the  goal  in 
which  his  life  culminates.  He  came  into  the  world 
to  die,  and  every  stage  of  the  road  that  led  up  to 
this  issue  was  determined  not  for  him  but  by  him: 
he  was  never  the  victim  but  always  the  master  of 
circumstance,  and  pursued  his  pathway  from  begin- 
ning to  end,  not  merely  in  full  knowledge  from  the 
start  of  all  its  turns  and  twists  up  to  its  bitter  con- 
clusion, but  in  complete  control  both  of  them  and 
of  it. 

His  life  of  humiliation,  sinking  into  his  terrible 

death,  was  therefore  not  his  misfortune,  but  his 

achievement  as  the  promised  Messiah, 

2.  Hie  l>y  and  in  whom  the  kingdom  of  God 
Xeeelah-  is  to  be  established  in  the  world;  it 
ehlp  and  was  the  work  which  as  Messiah  he 

X>elty.      came  to  do.    Therefore,  in  his  prose- 
cution of  it,  he  from   the   beginning 
announced  himself  as  the  Messiah,  accepted  all 
ascriptions  to   him   of    Messiahship  under  what-      ^ 
ever    designation,    and    thus    gathered    up   into      j 
his  person  all  the  preadumbrations  of  Old-Testa-      | 
ment     prophecy;      and     by     his    favorite    seU-      j 
designation    of    **  Son    of    Man,"    derived   from 
Daniel's   great  vision  (vii.    18),    continually  pro- 
claimed    himself    the    Messiah    he    actually  was, 
emphasizing  in  contrast  with  his  present  humilia-      , 


I 


156 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jesos  Christ 


tion  bis  heavenly  origin  and  his  future  glory. 
Moreover,  in  the  midst  of  his  humiliation,  he  ex- 
ercised, so  far  as  that  was  consistent  with  the  per- 
formance of  his  mission,  all  the  prerogatives  of  that 
'*  transcendent "  or  divine  Messiah  which  he  was. 
He  taught  with  authority,  substituting  for  every 
other  sanction,  his  great  "  But  I  say  imto  you," 
and  declaring  himseS  greater  than  the  greatest  of 
God's  representatives  whom  he  had  sent  in  all  the 
past  to  visit  his  people.  He  surrounded  himself 
as  he  went  about  preaching  the  Gospel  of  the  king- 
dom with  a  miraculous  nimbus,  each  and  every 
miracle  in  which  was  adapted  not  merely  to  mani- 
fest the  presence  of  a  supernatural  person  in  the 
midst  of  the  people,  but,  as  a  piece  of  symbolical 
teaching,  to  reveal  the  nature  of  this  supernatural 
person,  and  to  afford  a  foretaste  of  the  blessedness 
of  his  rule  in  the  kingdom  he  came  to  found.  He 
assumed  plenary  authority  over  the  religious  ordi- 
nances of  the  people,  divinely  established  though 
they  were;  and  exercised  absolute  control  over  the 
laws  of  nature  themselves.  The  divine  preroga^ 
tive  of  forgiving  sins  he  claimed  for  hiniself,  the 
divine  power  of  reading  the  heart  he  frankly  exer- 
cised, the  divine  function  of  judge  of  quick  and 
dead  he  attached  to  his  own  person.  Asserting  for 
himself  a  superhuman  dignity  of  person,  or  rather 
a  share  in  the  ineffable  Name  itseU,  he  represented 
himself  as  abiding  continually  even  when  on  earth 
in  absolute  communion  with  God  the  Father,  and 
participating  by  necessity  of  nature  in  the  treas- 
ures of  the  divine  knowledge  and  grace;  announced 
himself  the  source  of  all  divine  knowledge  and  graoe 
to  men;  and  drew  to  himself  all  the  religious  affec- 
tions, suspending  the  destinies  of  men  absolutely 
upon  their  relation  to  his  own  person.  Neverthe- 
less he  walked  straight  onward  in  the  path  of  his 
lowly  mission,  and,  bending  even  the  wrath  of  men 
to  his  service,  gave  himself  in  his  own  good  time 
and  way  to  the  death  he  had  come  to  accomplish. 
Then,  his  mission  performed,  he  rose  again  from 
the  dead  in  the  power  of  his  deathless  life;  showed 
himself  alive  to  chosen  witnesses,  that  he  might 
.strengthen  the  hearts  of  his  people;  and  ascended 
to  the  right  hand  of  God,  whence  he  directs  the 
continued  .preparation  of  the  kingdom  until  it  shall 
please  him  to  return  for  its  establishment  in  its 
glorious  eternal  form. 

It  is  important  to  fix  firmly  in  mind  the  central 

conception  of  this  representation.    It  tiuns  upon 

the  sacrificial  death  of  Jesus  to  which  the  whole 

life  leads  up,  and  out  of  which  all  its 

8.  Central  issues  are  drawn,  and  for  a  perpetual 

Conoep-  memorial  of  which  he  is  represented 
tlons.  as  having  instituted  a  solenm  memo- 
rial feast.  The  divine  majesty  of  this 
Son  of  God;  his  redemptive  mission  to  the  world,  in  a 
life  of  humiliation  and  a  ransoming  death;  the  com- 
pletion of  his  task  in  accordance  with  his  purpose;  his 
triumphant  rising  from  the  death  thus  vicariously 
enduz«d;  his  assumption  of  sovereignty  over  the 
future  development  of  the  kingdom  founded  in  his 
blood,  and  over  the  world  as  the  theater  of  its  de- 
velopment; his  expected  return  as  the  consimi- 
mator  of  the  ages  and  the  judge  of  all — ^this  is  the 
circle  of  ideas  in  which  all  accounts  move.    It  is 


the  portrait  not  of  a  merely  human  life,  though  it 
includes  the  delineation  of  a  complete  and  a  com- 
pletely human  life.  It  is  the  portrayal  of  a  human 
episode  in  the  divine  life.  It  is,  therefore,  not 
merely  connected  with  supernatural  occurrences, 
nor  merely  colored  by  supernatural  features,  nor 
merely  set  in  a  supernatural  atmosphere:  the  su- 
pernatural is  its  very  substance,  the  elimination  of 
which  would  be  the  evaporation  of  the  whole.  The 
Jesus  of  the  New  Testament  is  not  fundamentally 
man,  however  divinely  gifted:  he  is  God  taber- 
nacling for  a  while  among  men,  with  heaven  lying 
about  him  not  merely  in  his  infancy,  but  through- 
out all  the  days  of  his  flesh. 

m.  Attempts  to  Naturalise  the  Portrait  of 
Jesus :  The  intense  supematiu*alism  of  this  por- 
traiture is,  of  course,  an  offense  to  our  anti-super- 
naturalistic  age.  It  is  only  what  was  to  be  ex- 
pected, therefore,  that  throughout  the  last  century 
and  a  half  a  long  series  of  scholars,  imbued  with 
the  anti-supernaturalistic  instinct  of  the  time,  have 
assumed  the  task  of  desupematuralizing  it.  Great 
difficulty  has  been  experienced,  however,  in  the 
attempt  to  construct  a  historical  sieve  which  will 
strain  out  miracles  and  yet  let  Jesiis  through;  for 
Jesus  is  himself  the  greatest  miracle  of  them  all. 
Accordingly  in  the  end  of  the  day  there  is  a  grow- 
ing disposition,  as  if  in  despair  of  accomplishing 
this  feat,  boldly  to  construct  the  sieve  so  a^  to 
strain  out  Jesus  too;  to  take  refuge  in  the  coun- 
sel of  desperation  which  affirms  that  there  never 
was  such  a  person  as  Jesus,  that  Christianity  had 
no  foimder,  and  that  not  merely  the  portrait  of 
Jesus,  but  Jesus  himself,  is  a  pure  projection  of 
later  ideals  into  the  past.  The  main  stream  of 
assault  still  addresses  itself,  however,  to  the  at- 
tempt to  eliminate  not  Jesus  himself,  but  the 
Jesus  of  the  evangelists,  and  to  substitute  for  him 
a  desupematurali^ed  Jesus. 

The  instruments  which  have  been  relied  on  to 
effect  this  result  may  be  called,  no  doubt  with  some 
but  not  misleading  inexactitude,  literary  and  his- 
torical criticism.  The  attempt  has 
1.  liiterary  heen  made  to  track  out  the  process  by 

and  His-    which  the   present   witnessing   docu- 

torioal  ments  have  come  into  existence,  to 
Criticism,  show  them  gathering  accretions  in 
this  process,  and  to  sift  out  the 
sources  from  which  they  are  drawn;  and  then 
to  make  appeal  to  these  sources  as  the  only 
real  witnesses.  And  the  attempt  has  been 
made  to  go  behind  the  whole  written  record, 
operating  either  inunediately  upon  the  docu- 
ments as  they  now  exist,  or  ultimately  upon 
the  sources  which  literary  criticism  has  sifted  out 
from  them,  with  a  view  to  reaching  a  more  primi- 
tive and  presumably  truer  conception  of  Jesus  than 
that  which  has  obtained  record  in  the  writings  of 
his  followers.  The  occasion  for  resort  to  this  latter 
method  of  research  is  the  failure  of  the  former  to 
secure  the  results  aimed  at.  For,  when,  at  the 
dictation  of  anti-supernaturalistic  presuppositions, 
John  is  set  aside  in  favor  of  the  Synoptics,  and 
then  the  Synoptics  are  set  aside  in  favor  of  Mark, 
conceived  as  the  representative  of  ''  the  narrative 
source ''  (by  the  side  of  which  must  be  placed — 


Jeans  Ohxlflt 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


166 


though  this  is  not  always  remembered — the  second 
source  of  "  Sayings  of  Jesus/'  which  imderlies  so 
much  of  Matthew  and  Luke;  and  also — ^though 
this  is  even  more  commonly  forgotten — whatever 
other  sources  either  Matthew  or  Luke  has  drawn 
upon  for  material),  it  still  appears  that  no  progress 
whatever  has  been  made  in  eliminating  the  divine 
Jesus  and  his  supernatural  accompaniment  of 
mighty  works — ^although,  chronologically  speaking, 
the  very  beginning  of  Christianity  has  been 
reached.  It  is  necessary,  accordingly,  if  there  is 
not  to  be  acknowledged  a  divine  Christ  with  a 
supernatural  history,  to  get  behind  the  whole  lit- 
erary tradition.  Working  on  Mark,  therefore, 
taken  as  the  original  Gospel,  an  attempt  must  be 
made  to  distinguish  between  the  traditional  ele- 
ment which  he  incorporates  into  his  narrative 
and  the  dogmatic  element  which  he  (as  the 
mouthpiece  of  the  Christian  conmiunity)  con- 
tributes to  it.  Or,  working  on  the  "Sayings," 
discrimination  must  first  be  made  between  the 
narrative  element  (assumed  to  be  colored  by  the 
thought  of  the  Christian  community)  and  the 
reportorial  element  (which  may  repeat  real  sayings 
of  Jesiis);  and  then,  within  the  reportorial  element, 
all  that  is  too  lofty  for  the  naturalistic  Jesus  must 
be  trimmed  down  until  it  fits  in  with  his  simply  hu- 
man character.    Or,  working  on  the  Gospels  as  they 

stand,  inquisition  must  be  made  for 

2.  Xethods  statements  of  fact  concerning  Jesus  or 

of  His-     for  sayings  of  his,  which,  taken  out  of 

torioal     the  context  in  which  the  evangelists 

Oritioinn.  have  placed  them  and  cleansed  from 

the  coloring  given  by  them,  may  be 
made  to  seem  inconsistent  with  **  the  worship  of 
Jesus  "  which  characterises  these  documents;  and 
on  the  narrower  basis  thus  secured  there  is 
built  up  a  new  portrait  of  Jesus,  contradictory 
to  that  which  the  evangelists  have  drawn. 

The  precariousness  of  these  proceedings,  or 
rather,  frankly,  their  violence,  is  gb&ringly  evident. 
L:i  the  processes  of  such  criticism  it  is  pure  subjec- 
tivity which  rules,  and  the  investigator  gets  out  as 
results  only  what  he  puts  in  as  premises.  And  even 
when  the  desired  result  has  thus  been  wrested  from 
the  unwilling  documents,  he  discovera  that  he  has 
only  brought  himself  into  the  most  extreme  his- 
torical embarrassment.  By  thus  desupematural- 
izing  Jesus  he  leaves  primitive  Christianity  and 
its  Bupematun^  Jesus  wholly  without  historical 
basis  or  justification.  The  naturalizing  historian 
has  therefore  at  once  to  address  himself  to  supply- 
ing some  account  of  the  immediate  universal  as- 

cription  to  Jesus  by  his  followers  of 

banaflfl!^'  qualities  which  he  did  not  possess  and 

ment. "    ^  which  he  laid  no  claim;   and  that 

with  such  force  and  persistence  of  con- 
viction as  totally  to  supersede  from  the  very  begin- 
ning with  their  perverted  version  of  the  facts  the 
actual  reality  of  things.  It  admits  of  no  doubt, 
and  it  is  not  doubted,  that  supernaturalistic  Chris- 
tianity is  the  only  historical  Christianity.  It  is 
agreed  on  all  hands  that  the  very  first  followers  of 
Jesus  ascribed  to  him  a  supernatural  character. 
It  is  even  allowed  that  it  is  precisely  by  virtue  of 
its  supernaturalistic  elements  that  dhristianity  has 


made  its  way  in  the  world.  It  is  freely  admitted 
that  it  was  by  the  force  of  its  enthusiastic  proc- 
lamation of  the  divine  Christ,  who  could  not  be 
holden  of  death  but  burst  the  bonds  of  the  grave, 
that  Christianity  conquered  the  world  to  itself. 
What  account  shall  be  given  of  all  this  ?  There  is 
presented  a  problem  here,  which  is  insoluble  on  the 
naturalistic  hypothesis.  The  old  mythical  theory 
fails  because  it  requires  time,  and  no  time  is  at  its 
disposal;  the  primitive  Christian  community  be- 
lieved in  the  divine  Christ.  The  new  ''  history-of- 
religions  "  theory  fails  because  it  can  not  discover 
the  elements  of  that  ''  C!hristianity  before  Christ " 
which  it  must  posit,  either  remotely  in  the  Baby- 
lonian inheritance  of  the  East,  or  close  by  in  the 
prevalent  Messianic  conceptions  of  contemporary 
Judaism.  Nothing  is  available  but  the  postulation 
of  pure  fanaticism  in  Jesus'  first  followers,  which 
finds  it  convenient  not  to  proceed  beyond  the  gen- 
eral suggestion  that  there  is  no  telling  what  fanati- 
cism may  not  invent.  The  plain  fact  is  that  the 
supernatural  Jesus  is  needed  to  account  for  the 
supernaturalistic  Christianity  which  is  grounded 
in  him.  Or — if  this  supernaturalistic  Christianity 
does  not  need  a  supernatural  Jesus  to  account  for 
it,  it  is  hard  to  see  why  any  Jesus  at  all  need  be 
postulated.  Naturalistic  criticism  thus  overreaches 
itself  and  is  caught  up  suddenly  by  the  discovery 
that  in  abolishing  the  supernatural  Jesus  it  has 
abolished  Jesus  altogether,  since  this  supernatural 
Jesus  is  the  only  Jesus  which  enters  as  a  factor 
into  the  historical  development.  It  is  the  desuper- 
naturalized  Jesus  which  is  the  mythical  Jesus,  who 
never  had  any  existence,  the  postulation  of  the 
existence  of  whom  explains  nothing  and  leaves  the 
whole  historical  development  hanging  in  the  air. 

It  is  instructive  to  observe  the  lines  of  develop- 
ment of  the  naturalistic  reconstruction  of  the  Jesus 
of  the  evangelists  through  the  century  and  a  half 
of  its  evolution.  The  normal  task  which  the  student 
of  the  life  of  Jesus  sets  himself  is  to  penetrate 
into  the  spirit  of  the  transmission  so  far  as  that 
transmission    approves   itself  to  him 

toricSl  *"  **  trustworthy,  to  realize  with  exact- 
Develop-   ^®"  *"***  vividness  the  portrait  of  Jesus 

n^^Q^  ~  conveyed  by  it,  and  to  reproduce  that 
portrait  in  an  accurate  and  vital  por- 
trayal. The  naturalistic  reeonstructors,  on  the 
other  hand,  engage  themselves  in  an  effort  to  sub- 
stitute for.  the  Jesus  of  the  transmission  another 
Jesus  of  their  own,  a  Jesus  who  will  seem  ^'  nat- 
ural "  to  them,  and  will  work  in  "  naturally  "  with 
their  naturalistic  world-view.  In  the  first  instance 
it  was  the  miracles  of  Jesus  which  they  set  them- 
selves to  eliminate,  and  this  motive  ruled  their 
criticism  from  Reimarus  (1694-1768),  or  rather, 
from  the  publication  of  the  Wolfenbuettel  Frag- 
ments (q.v.),  to  Strauss  (1835-36).  The  domi- 
nant method  employed — ^which  foimd  its  culmina- 
ting example  in  H.  E.  G.  Paulus  (1828)— was  to 
treat  the  narrative  as  in  all  essentials  historical, 
but  to  seek  in  each  miraculous  story  a  natural  fact 
imderlying  it.  This  whole  point  of  view  was  tran- 
scended by  the  advent  of  the  mythical  view  in 
Strauss,  who  laughed  it  out  of  court.  Since  then 
miracles  have  been  treated  ever  more  and  more 


157 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Ohrist 


confideiitly  as  n^ligible  quantities,  and  the  whole 
strength  of  criticism  has  been  increasingly  ex- 
paided  on  the  reduction  of  the  supernatural  figure 
of  Jesus  to  "  natural "  proportions.  The  instru- 
ment relied  upon  to  produce  this  effect  has  been 
psychological  analysis;  the  method  being  to  re- 
work the  narrative  in  the  interests  of  what  is  called 
a  "  comprehensible "  Jesus.  The  whole  mental 
life  of  Jesus  and  the  entire  course  of  his  conduct 
have  been  subjected  to  psychological  canons  derived 
from  the  critics'  conception  of  a  purely  human  life, 
and  nothing  has  been  allowed  to  him  which  does 
not  approve  itself  as  "  natural "  according  to  this 
standi^.  The  result  is,  of  course,  that  the  Jesus 
of  the  evangelists  has  been  transformed  into  a 
nineteenth-century  ''  liberal  "  theologian,  and  no 
conceptions  or  motives  or  actions  have  been  allowed 
to  him  which  would  not  be  "  natural "  in  such  a 
one. 

The  inevitable  reaction  which  seems  to  be  now 
asserting  itself  takes  two  forms,  both  of  which, 
while  serving  themselves  heirs  to  the  negative  criti- 
cism of  this  "  liberal "  school,  decisively  reject  its 
positive  construction  of  the  figure  of  Jesus.  A 
weaker  current  contents  itself  with  drawing  atten- 
tion to  the  obvious  fact  that  such  a  Jesus  as  the 
"  liberal "  criticism  yields  will  not  accoimt  for 
the  Christianity  which  actually  came  into  being; 
and  on  this  groimd  proclaims  the  "  liberal ''  criti- 
cism bankrupt  and  raises  the  question,  what  need 
there  is  for  assuming  any  Jesus  at  all.  If  the  only 
Jesus  salvable  from  the  debris  of  legend  is  obvi- 
ously not  the  author  of  the  Christianity  which 
actually  came  into  being,  why  not  simply  recog- 
nize that  Christianity  came  into  being  without  any 
author — was  just  the  crystallization  of  conceptions 
in  solution  at  the  time?  A  stronger  current,  scoff- 
ing at  the  projection  of  a  nineteenth-century 
"  Hberal "  back  into  the  first  century  and  calling 
him  "  Jesus,'  insists  that  **  the  historical  Jesus  " 
was  just  a  Jew  of  his  day,  a  peasant  of  Galilee  with 
all  the  narrowness  of  a  peasant's  outlook  and  all 
the  deficiency  in  culture  which  belonged  to  a  Gali- 
lean countryman  of  the  period.  Above  all,  it  in- 
sists that  the  real  Jesus,  possessed  by  those  Mes- 
sianic dreams  which  filled  the  minds  of  the  Jewish 
peasantry  of  the  time,  was  afflicted  with  the  great 
delusion  that  he  was  himself  the  promised  Messiah. 
Under  the  obsession  of  this  portentous  fancy  he 
imagined  that  God  would  intervene  with  his  al- 
mighty arm  and  set  him  on  the  throne  of  a  conquer- 
ing Israel;  and  when  the  event  falsified  this  wild 
hope,  he  assuaged  his  bitter  disappointment  with 
the  wilder  promise  that  he  would  rise  from  death 
itself  and  come  back  to  establish  bis  kingdom. 
Thus  the  naturalistic  criticism  of  a  hundred  and 
fifty  years  has  run  out  into  no  Jesus  at  all,  or  worse 
thaji  no  Jesus,  a  fanatic  or  even  a  paranoiac.  The 
"  liberal "  criticism  which  has  had  it  so  long  its 
own  way  is  called  sharply  to  its  defense  against  the 
fruit  of  its  own  loins.  In  the  process  of  this  de- 
fense it  wavera  before  the  assault  and  incorpor- 
ates more  or  less  of  the  new  conception  of  Jesus — 
of  the  "  consistently  eschatological "  Jesus — into 
its  fabric.  Or  it  stands  in  its  tracks  and  weakly 
protests  that  Jesus'  figure  must  be  conceived  as 


greatly  as  possible,  so  only  it  be  kept  strictly 
within  the  limits  of  a  mere  human  being.  Or 
it  develops  an  apologetical  argument  which,  given 
its  full  validity  and  effect,  would  imdo  all  its  pain- 
fully worked-out  negative  results  and  lead  back 
to  the  Jesus  of  the  evangelists  as  the  true 
*'  historical  Jesus." 

It  has  been  remarked  above  that  the  portrait  of 
Jesus  drawn  in  the  sources  is  its  own  credential;  no 
man,  and  no  body  of  men,  can  have  invented  this 
figure,  consciously  or  unconsciously,  and  dramatised 
.   -  it  consistently  through  such  a  varied 

Inrae.  ^^^  difficult  life-history.  It  may  be 
added  that  the  Jesus  of  the  natiualistic 
critidsm  is  its  own  refutation.  One  wonders  whether 
the  "  liberal  "  critics  realize  the  weakness,  ineffect- 
iveness, inanition  of  the  Jesus  they  offer;  the  piti- 
ful inertness  they  attribute  to  him,  his  utter  passiv- 
ity under  the  impact  of  circumstance.  So  far  from 
being  conceivable  as  the  molder  of  the  ages,  this 
Jesus  is  wholly  molded  by  his  own  surroundings, 
the  sport  of  every  suggestion  from  without.  In 
their  preoccupation  with  critical  details,  it  is  pos- 
sible that  its  authors  are  scarcely  aware  of  the 
grossness  of  the  reduction  of  the  figure  of  Jesus 
they  have  perpetrated.  But  let  them  only  turn  to 
portray  their  new  Jesus  in  a  life-history,  and  the 
pitiableness  of  the  figure  they  have  made  him  smites 
the  eye.  Whatever  else  may  be  said  of  it,  this  must 
be  said — ^that  out  of  the  Jesus  into  which  the  nat- 
uralistic criticism  has  issued — ^in  its  best  or  in  its 
worst  estate — the  Christianity  which  has  conquered 
the  world  could  never  have  come. 

ry.  The  Liib  of  Jesiui:    The  firmness,  deamess, 
and  even  fulness  with  which  the  figure  of  Jesus  is 
delineated  in  the  sources,  and  the  variety  of  activ- 
ities through  which  it  \b  dramatized,  do  not  insure 
that  the  data  given  should  suffice  for  drawing  up  a 
properly  so-called  "life  of  Jesus."    The  data  in 
the  sources  are  practically  confined  to 
1.  In  What  ^^  ^i^ef  period  of  Jesus'  public  work. 
Senae  a    Only  a  single  incident  is  recorded  from 
"Life"     his  earlier  life,  and  that  is  taken  from 
Impos-     his  boyhood.    So  large  a  portion  of 
■ible.      the  actual  narrative,  moreover,  is  oc- 
cupied with  his  death  that  it  might 
even  be  said — ^the  more  that  the  whole  narrative 
also  leads  up  to  the  death  as  the  life's  culmination 
— ^that  litde  has  been  preserved  concerning  Jesus 
but  the  circumstances  which  accompanied  his  birth 
and  the  circumstances  which  led  up   to  and  ac- 
companied his  death.    The   incidents  which   the 
narrators  record,  again,   are  not  recorded  with  a 
biographical  intent,  and  are  not  selected  for  their 
biographical    significance,    or  ordered    so    as    to 
present  a  biographical  result:  in  the  case  of  each 
evangelist  they  serve  a  particular  purpose  which 
may  employ  biographical  detailB,  but  is   not  it- 
self a  biographical  end.    In  other  words  the  Gos- 
pels  are   not   formal   biographies    but   biograph- 
ical arguments — a  circumstance  which  does  not 
affect  the  historicity  of  the  incidents  they  select  for 
record,  but  does  affect  the  selection  and  ordering 
of  these  incidents.    Mark  has  in  view  to  show  that 
this  great  religious  movement  in  which  he  himself 
had  a  part  had  its  beginnings  in  a  divine  interpo- 


Christ 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


168 


fldtion;  Matthew,  that  this  divine  interposition  was 
in  fulfilment  of  the  promises  made  to  Israel;  Luke, 
that  it  had  as  its  end  the  redemption  of  the  world; 
John,  that  the  agent  in  it  was  none  other  than  the 
Son  of  God  himself.  In  the  enforcement  and  illus- 
tration of  their  several  themes  each  records  a  wealth 
of  biographical  details.  But  it  does  not  follow 
that  these  details,  when  brought  together  and  ar- 
ranged in  their  chronological  sequence,  or  even  in 
their  genetic  order,  will  supply  an  adequate  biog- 
raphy. The  attempt  to  work  them  up  into  a 
biography  is  met,  moreover,  by  a  great  initial  dif- 
ficulty. Every  biographer  takes  his  position,  as  it 
were,  above  his  subject,  who  must  live  his  life  over 
again  in  his  biographer's  mind;  it  is  of  the  very  es- 
sence of  the  biographer's  work  thoroughly  to  un- 
derstand his  subject  and  to  depict  him  as  he  un- 
derstands him.  What,  then,  if  the  subject  of  the 
biography  be  above  the  comprehension  of  his  biog- 
rapher? Obviously,  in  that  case,  a  certain  reduc- 
tion can  scarcely  be  avoided.  This  in  an  instance 
like  the  present,  where  the  subject  is  a  superhmnan 
being,  is  the  same  as  to  say  that  a  greater  or  lesser 
measure  of  rationalization,  "  naturalization,"  in- 
evitably takes  place.  A  true  biography  of  a  God- 
man,  a  biography  which  depicts  his  life  from  with- 
in, imtangling  the  complex  of  motives  which  moved 
him,  and  explaining  his  conduct  by  reference  to  the 
internal  springs  of  action,  is  in  the  nature  of  the 
case  an  impossibility  for  men.  Hmnan  beings  can 
explain  only  on  the  basis  of  their  own  experiences 
and  mental  processes;  and  so  explaining  they  in- 
stinctively explain  away  what  transcends  their  ex- 
periences and  confounds  their  mental  processes. 
Seeking  to  portray  the  life  of  Jesus  as  natural,  they 
naturalize  it,  that  is,  reduce  it  to  correspondence 
with  their  own  nature.  Every  attempt  to  work 
out  a  life  of  Christ  must  therefore  face  not  only  the 
insufiiciency  of  the  data,  but  the  perennial  danger 
of  falsifying  the  data  by  an  instinctive  naturaliza- 
tion of  them.  If,  however,  the  expectation  of 
attaining  a  '^  psychological "  biography  of  Jesus 
must  be  renounced,  and  even  a  complete  external 
life  can  not  be  pieced  together  from  the  fragmentary 
communications  of  the  sources,  a  clear  and  consist- 
ent view  of  the  course  of  the  public  ministry  of 
Jesus  can  still  be  derived  from  them.  The  consecu- 
tion of  the  events  can  be  set  forth,  their  causal  rela- 
tions established,  and  their  historical  development 
explicated.  To  do  this  is  certainly  in  a  modified 
sense  to  outline  "  the  life  of  Jesus,''  and  to  do  thb 
proves  by  its  results  to  be  eminently  worth  while. 

A  series  of  synchronisms  with  secular  history  in- 
dicated by  Liike,  whose  historical  interest  seems 

more  alert  than    that    of   the  other 

k'^h"  evangelists,  gives  the  needed  informa- 

n  j^^  „     tion  for  placing  such  a  '*  life  "  in  its 

right  historical  relations.  The  chrono- 
logical framework  for  the  "  life "  itself  is  sup- 
plied by  the  succession  of  annual  feasts  which  are 
^corded  by  John  as  occurring  during  Jesus'  public 
ministry.  Into  this  framework  the  data  fur- 
nished by  the  other  Gospels — ^which  are  not  with- 
out corroborative  suggestions  of  order,  season  of 
occurrence,  and  relations — fit  readily;  and  when  so 
arranged  yield  so  self-consistent  and  rationally  de- 


veloping a  history  as  to  add  a  strong  corroboration 
of  its  trustwortldness.  Differences  of  opinion  re- 
specting the  details  of  arrangement  of  course  re- 
main possible;  and  these  differences  are  not  always 
small  and  not  always  without  historical  signifi- 
cance. But  they  do  not  affect  the  general  outline  or 
the  main  drift  of  the  history,  and  on  most  points, 
even  those  of  minor  importance,  a  tolerable  agree- 
ment exists.  Thus,  for  example,  it  is  all  but  uni- 
versally allowed  that  Jesus  was  bom  c.  5  or  6  b.c. 
(year  of  Rome  748  or  749),  and  it  is  an  erratic 
judgment  indeed  which  would  fix  on  any  other 
year  than  29  or  30  a.d.  for  his  crucifixion.  On  the 
date  of  his  baptism — which  determines  the  duration 
of  his  public  ministry — ^more  difference  is  possible; 
but  it  is  quite  generally  agreed  that  it  took  place  late 
in  26  A.D.  or  early  in  27.  It  is  only  by  excluding 
the  testimony  of  John  that  a  duration  of  less  than 
between  two  and  three  years  can  be  assigned  to 
the  public  ministry;  and  then  only  by  subjecting 
the  Synoptical  narrative  to  considerable  pressure. 
The  probabilities  seem  strongly  in  favor  of  ex- 
tending it  to  three  years  and  some  months.  The 
decision  between  a  duration  of  two  years  and 
some  months  and  a  duration  of  three  years  and 
some  months  depends  on  the  determination  of 
the  two  questions  of  where  in  the  narrative  of 
John  the  imprisonment  of  John  the  Baptist  (Matt, 
iv.  12)  is  to  be  placed,  and  what  the  unnamed 
feast  is  which  is  mentioned  in  John  v.  1.  On 
the  former  of  these  questions  opinion  varies  only 
between  John  iv.  1-3  and  John  v.  1.  On  the 
latter  a  great  variety  of  opinions  exists:  some 
think  of  Passover,  others  of  Purim  or  Pentecost, 
or  of  Trumpets  or  Tabernacles,  or  even  of  the 
day  of  Atonement.  On  the  whole,  the  evidence 
seems  decisively  preponderant  for  placing  the  im- 
prisonment of  the  Baptist  at  John  iv.  1-3,  and  for 
identifying  the  feast  of  John  v.  1  with  Passover. 
In  that  case,  the  public  ministry  of  Jesus  covered 
about  three  years  and  a  third,  and  it  is  probably 
not  far  wrong  to  assign  to  it  the  period  lying  be- 
tween the  latter  part  of  26  a.d.  and  the  Passover 

of  30  A.D.* 

The  material  supplied  by  the  Gospel  narrative 
distributes  itself  naturally  under  the  heads  of  (1)  the 
preparation,  (2)  the  ministry,  and  (3)  the  oonsum- 
a  Ontii       naation.    For  the  first  twelve  or  thir- 
'  of  the  *  *®®°  yeATS  of  Jesus'  life   nothing   is 
**j^^^  >»    recorded  except  the  striking   circum- 
stances connected  with  his  birth,  and 
a  general  statement   of  his   remarkable  growth. 
Similarly  for  his  youth,  about  seventeen  years  and 
a  half,  there  is  recorded  only  the  single  incident,  at 
its  beginning,  of  his  conversation  with  the  doctors 
in  the  temple.    Anything  like  continuous  narrative 
begins  only  with  the  public  ministry,  in,  say,  De- 
cember, 26  A.D.    This  narrative  falls  naturally  into 
four  parts  which  may  perhaps  be  distinguished  as 

*  Ramaay,  Sanday,  and  Turner  prefer  29  a.d.  for  the  date 
of  the  enicifizion.  Turner's  dates  are:  birth,  7~6  b.c; 
baptism,  26  a.d.;  ministry,  between  two  and  three  sreara; 
death,  29  a.d.  Sanday's  dates  are:  birth,  — ;  baptism, 
late  26  a.d.;  ministry,  two  and  a  half  yean;  death,  29  a.d. 
Ramsay's  dates  are:  birth,  autumn,  6  b.c;  baptism,  early 
in  26  A.D.;   ministry,  three  years  and  some  months;  death, 

29  A.D. 


159 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Christ 


(a)  the  beginning  of  the  Gospel,  forty  dayB,  from 
December,  26  to  February,  27;  (b)  the  Judean 
ministry,  covering  about  ten  months,  from  Feb.,  27 
to  Dec,  27;  (c)  the  Galilean  ministry,  covering  about 
twenty-two  months,  from  Dec.,  27  to  Sept.,  29; 
(d)  the  last  journeys  to  Jerusalem,  covering  some 
six  months,  from  Sept.,  29  to  the  Passover  of  (Apr.) 
30.  The  events  of  this  final  Passover  season,  the 
narrative  of  which  becomes  so  detailed  and  precise 
that  the  occurrences  from  day  to  day  are  noted, 
constitute,  along  with  their  sequences,  what  is  here 
called  "  the  consimmiation."  They  include  the 
events  which  led  up  to  the  crucifixion  of  Jesus,  the 
crucifixion  itself,  and  the  manifestations  which  he 
gave  of  himself  after  his  death  up  to  his  ascension. 
So  preponderating  was  the  interest  which  the  re- 
porters took  in  this  portion  of  the  "  life  of  Christ," 
that  is  to  say,  in  his  death  and  resurrection,  that 
about  a  third  of  their  whole  narrative  is  devoted 
to  it.  The  ministry  which  leads  up  to  it  is  also, 
however,  full  of  incident.  What  is  here  called  "  the 
beginning  of  the  Gospel "  gives,  no  doubt,  only 
the  accounts  of  Jesus'  baptism  and  temptation. 
Only  meager  information  is  given  also,  and  that  by 
John  alone,  of  the  occurrences  of  the  first  ten  months 
after  his  public  appearance,  the  scene  of  which  lay 
mainly  in  Judea.  With  the  beginning  of  the  min- 
istry in  Galilee,  however,  with  which  alone  the 
Synoptic  Gospels  concern  themselves,  incidents  be- 
come numerous.  Capemaimi  now  becomes  Jesus' 
home  for  aknost  two  full  years;  and  no  less  than 
eight  periods  of  sojourn  there  with  intervening  cir- 
cuits going  out  from  it  as  a  center  can  be  traced. 
When  the  object  of  this  ministry  had  been  accom- 
plished Jesus  finally  withdraws  from  Galilee  and 
addresses  himself  to  the  preparation  of  his  follow- 
ers for  the  death  he  had  come  into  the  world  to 
accomplish;  and  this  he  then  brings  about  in  the 
manner  which  best  subserves  his  purpose. 

Into  the  substance  of  Jesus'  ministry  it  is  not 
possible  to  enter  here.    Let  it  only  be  observed 

that  it  is  properly  called  a  ministry. 

*•  ^*      He  himself  testified  that  he  came  not 

j^^^^      to  be  ministered  unto  but  to  minister, 

and  he  added  that  this  ministry  was 
fulfilled  in  his  giving  his  life  as  a  ransom  for  many. 
In  other  words,  the  main  object  of  his  work  was  to 
lay  the  foimdations  of  the  kingdom  of  God  in  his 
blood.  Subsidiary  to  this  was  his  purpose  to  make 
vitally  known  to  men  the  true  nature  of  the  king- 
dom of  God,  to  prepare  the  way  for  its  advent  fai 
their  hearts,  and  above  all,  to  attach  them  by  faith 
to  his  person  as  the  founder  and  consummator  of 
the  kingdom.  His  ministry  involved,  therefore,  a 
constant  presentation  of  himself  to  the  people  as 
the  promised  One,  in  and  by  whom  the  kingdom 
of  God  was  to  be  established,  a  steady  "  campaign 
of  instruction  "  as  to  the  nature  of  the  kingdom 
which  he  came  to  foimd,  and  a  watchful  con* 
trol  of  the  forces  which  were  making  for  his  de- 
struction, until,  his  work  of  preparation  being  ended, 
he  was  ready  to  complete  it  by  offering  himself 
up.  The  progress  of  his  ministry  is  governed  by 
the  interplay  of  these  motives.  It  has  been  broadly 
distributed  into  a  year  of  obscurity,  a  3rear  of 
popular  favor,  and  a  year  of  opposition;    and  if 


these  designations  are  understood  to  have  only  a 
relative  applicability,  they  may  be  accepted  as  gen- 
erally describing  from  the  outside  the  development 
of  the  ministry.  Beginning  first  in  Judea  Jesus 
spent  some  ten  months  in  attaching  to  himself  his 
first  disciples,  and  with  apparent  fruitlessness  pro- 
claiming the  kingdom  at  the  center  of  national  life. 
Then,  moving  north  to  Galilee,  he  quickly  won  the 
ear  of  the  people  and  carried  them  to  the  height 
of  their  present  receptivity;  whereupon,  breaJ^ig 
from  them,  he  devoted  hixnself  to  the  more  precise 
instruction  of  the  chosen  band  he  had  gathered 
about  him  to  be  the  nucleus  of  his  Church.  The 
Galilean  ministry  thus  divides  into  two  parts,  marked 
respectively  by  more  popular  and  more  intimate 
teaching.  The  line  of  division  falls  at  the  miracle 
of  the  feeding  of  the  five  thousand,  which,  as  mark- 
ing a  crisis  in  the  ministry,  is  recorded  by  all  four 
evangelists,  and  is  the  only  miracle  which  has  re- 
ceived this  fourfold  record.  Prior  to  this  point, 
Jesus'  work  had  been  one  of  gathering  disciples; 
subsequently  to  it,  it  was  a  work  of  instructing  and 
sifting  the  disciples  whom  he  had  gathered.  The 
end  of  the  Galilean  ministry  is  inarked  by  the  con- 
fession of  Peter  and  the  transfiguration,  and  after 
it  nothing  remained  but  the  preparation  of  the 
chosen  disciples  for  the  death,  which  was  to  dose 
his  work;  and  the  consmnmation  of  his  mission  in 
his  death  and  rising  again. 

The  instruments  by  which  Jesus  carried  out  his 
ministry  were  two,  teaching  and  miracles.    In  both 

alike  he  manifested  his  deity.    Wher- 

6.  Instra-  gyg^  y^  ^gj^^  ^jjg  supernatural  was 

ments  of   ppgge^i;  {^  ^qj^  mj^j  jgg^j^    gjg  teach- 

jjg^^^       mg  was  with  authority.    In  its  m- 

sight  and  foresight  it  was  as  super- 
natural as  the  miracles  themselves;  the  hearts  of 
men  and  the  future  lay  as  open  before  him  as  the 
forces  of  nature  lay  under  his  control;  all  that  the 
Father  knows  he  knew  also,  and  he  alone  was  the 
channel  of  the  revelation  of  it  to  men.  The  power  of 
his  ''  But  I  say  unto  you  "  was  as  manifest  as  that 
of  his  compelling  "  Arise  and  walk."  The  theme 
of  his  teaching  was  the  kingdom  of  God  and  him- 
self as  its  divine  founder  and  king.  Its  form  ran 
all  the  way  from  crisp  gnomic  sayings  and  brief 
comparisons  to  elaborate  parables  and  profoimd 
spiritual  discussions  in  which  the  deep  things  of 
God  are  laid  bare  in  simple,  searching  words.  The 
purport  of  his  miracles  was  that  the  kingdom  of 
God  was  already  present  in  its  King.  Their  num- 
ber is  perhaps  usually  greatly  underestimated.  It 
is  true  that  only  about  thirty  or  forty  are  actually 
recorded.  But  these  are  recorded  only  as  speci- 
mens, and  as  such  they  represent  all  classes.  Mir- 
acles of  healing  form  the  preponderant  class;  but 
there  are  also  exorcisms,  nature-miracles,  raisings 
of  the  dead.  Besides  these  recorded  miracles,  how- 
ever, there  are  frequent  general  statements  of 
aboimding  miraculous  manifestations.  For  a  time 
disease  and  death  must  have  been  almost  banished 
from  the  land.  The  ooimtry  was  thoroughly 
aroused  and  filled  with  wonder.  In  the  midst  of 
this  imiversal  excitement — ^when  the  people  were 
ready  to  take  him  by  force  and  make  him  king — 
hd  withdrew  himself  from  them,  and  throwing  his 


Jesus  Christ 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0Q 


160 


drouito  far  afield,  besrond  the  bruit  and  uproar,  ad- 
dressed himself  to  preparing  his  chosen  companions 
for  his  great  sacrifice — first  leading  them  in  the  so- 
called  "  Later  Galilean  ministry  "  (from  the  feed- 
ing of  the  5,000  to  the  confession  at  Gesarea  Phi- 
lippi)  to  a  better  apprehension  of  the  majesty  of 
his  person  as  the  Son  of  God,  and  of  the  character 
of  the  kingdom  he  came  to  found,  as  consisting  not 
in  meat  and  drink  but  in  righteousness;  and  then, 
in  the  so-called  "  Penean  ministiy  "  (from  the  con- 
fession at  CSBBsarea  Philippi  to  the  final  arrival  at 
Jerusalem)  specifically  preparing  them  for  his  death 
and  resurrection.  Thus  he  walked  straightforward 
in  the  path  he  had  chosen,  and  his  choice  of  which 
is  already  made  dear  in  the  account  of  his  tempta- 
tion, set  at  the  beginning  of  his  public  career;  and 
in  his  own  good  time  and  way — ^in  the  end  forcing 
the  hand  of  his  opponents  to  secure  that  he  should 
die  at  the  Passover — shed  his  blood  as  the  blood 
of  the  new  covenant  sacrifice  for  the  remission  of 
sins.  Having  power  thus  to  lay  down  his  life,  he 
had  power  also  to  take  it  again,  and  in  due  time  he 
rose  again  from  the  dead  and  ascended  to  the  right 
hand  of  the  majesty  on  high,  leaving  behind  him 
his  promise  to  come  again  in  his  glory,  to  perfect 
the  kingdom  he  had  inaugurated. 

It  is  appropriate  that  this  miraculous  life  should 
be  set  between  the  great  marvels  of  the  virgin- 
birth  and  the  resurrection  and  asoen- 
6.  The      gion.    These  can  appear  strange  only 

JriTgiU'  when  the  intervening  life  is  looked 
™^»  *!*•  upon  as  that  of  a  merely  human  being, 
tton^**"  endowed,  no  doubt,  not  only  with  un- 
usual qualities,  but  also  with  the  un- 
usual favor  of  God,  yet  after  all  nothing  more  than 
human  and  therefore  presumably  entering  the 
world  like  other  human  beings,  and  at  the  end 
paying  the  universal  debt  of  human  nature.  From 
the  standpoint  of  the  evangelical  writers,  and  of 
the  entirety  of  primitive  Christianity,  which  looked 
upon  Jesus  not  as  a  merely  human  being  but  as 
God  himself  come  into  the  world  on  a  mission  of 
mercy  that  involved  the  humiliation  of  a  human 
life  and  death,  it  would  be  this  assumed  commu- 
nity with  common  humanity  in  mode  of  entrance 
into  and  exit  from  the  earthly  life  which  would  seem 
strange  and  incredible.  The  entrance  of  the  Lord 
of  Glory  into  the  world  could  not  but  be  super- 
natural; his  exit  from  the  world,  after  the  work 
which  he  had  undertaken  had  been  performed, 
could  not  fail  to  bear  the  stamp  of  triumph.  There 
is  no  reason  for  doubting  the  trustworthiness  of  the 
narratives  at  these  points,  beyond  the  anti-super- 
naturalistic  instinct  which  strives  consciously  or 
imconsciously  to  naturalize  the  whole  evangelical 
narrative.  The  "  infancy  chapters  "  of  Luke  are 
demonstrably  from  Luke's  own  hand,  bear  evident 
traces  of  having  been  derived  from  trustworthy 
sources  of  information,  and  possess  all  the  author- 
ity which  attaches  to  the  communications  of  a  his- 
torian who  evinces  himself  sober,  careful,  and 
exact,  by  every  historical  test.  The  parallel  chap- 
ters of  Matthew,  while  obviously  independent  of 
those  of  Luke — ^recording  in  common  with  them 
not  a  single  incident  beyond  the  bare  fact  of  the 
virgin-birth — are  thoroughly  at  one  with  them  in 


the  main  fact,  and  in  the  inddents  they  record  fit 
with  remarkable  completeness  into  the  interstices  of 
Luke's  narrative.  Similarly,  the  narratives  of  the 
resurrection,  full  of  diversity  in  details  as  they  are, 
and  raising  repeated  puszling  questions  of  order  and 
arrangement,  yet  not  only  bear  consentient  testi- 
mony to  all  the  main  facts,  but  fit  into  one  an- 
other so  as  to  create  a  consistent  narrative — ^which 
has  moreover  the  support  of  the  contemporary 
testimony  of  Paul.  The  persistent  attempts  to 
explain  away  the  facts  so  witnessed  or  to  substi- 
tute for  the  account  which  the  New  Testament 
writers  give  of  them  some  more  plausible  explana- 
tion, as  the  natusalistic  mind  estimates  plausibility, 
are  all  wrecked  on  the  directness,  precision,  and 
copiousness  of  the  testimony;  and  on  the  great 
efifects  which  have  flowed  from  this  fact  in  the  rev- 
olution wrought  in  the  minds  and  lives  of  the  apos- 
tles themselves,  and  in  the  revolution  wrought 
through  their  preaching  of  the  resurrection  in  the 
life  and  history  of  the  world.  The  entire  history 
of  the  world  for  2,000  years  is  the  warranty  of  the 
reality  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  by  which  the 
forces  were  let  loose  which  have  created  it.  "  Unique 
spiritual  efifects,"  it  has  been  remarked,  with  great 
reasonableness,  "  require  a  unique  spiritual  cause; 
and  we  shaU  never  understand  the  full  significance 
of  the  cause,  if  we  begin  by  denying  or  minimizing 
its  uniqueness." 

For  details  see  the  separate  articles  on  the  several 
distinct  topics,  e.g.,  Christoloot;  Gospelb;  Mir- 
▲CLBs;  Parables;  Resurrection;  Virqin-birth. 
Benjaion  B.  Warfikld. 

B.  I.  Limitation  of  the  Field:  The  means  of  wri- 
ting a  satisfactory  life  of  Christ  have  never  existed. 
From  the  outset  what  the  Church  attempted  was 
no  more  than  the  story  of  Jesus  covering  a  twelve- 
month. Even  in  this  its  object  was  not  historical 
but  apologetic.  There  exists  a  bare  mention  by  a 
few  secular  writers  of  110-120  a.d.  of  the  origin  of 
the  obnoxious  ''  Christians."  Pliny,  the  earliest 
(112  A.D.),  merely  describes  the  sect.  Tadtus,  an 
accurate  historian,  c.  115  a.d.,  dates  its  rise  from 
the  execution  of  '*  Christus  "  by  Pilate,  procurator 
of  Judea  imder  Tiberius.  Secular  writers  have  no 
more  to  tell.  They  would  have  been  compelled  to 
refer  inquirers  to  the  tradition  preserved  by  the 
sect  itself.  Now  even  the  latest  of  our  four  Gos- 
pels can  be  traced  in  some  form  by  its  use  in  or- 
thodox, heretical,  and  even  anti-Christian  writers, 
to  about  the  same  period;  so  that  the  whole  ques- 
tion of  the  historical  investigator  resolves  itself 
into  a  valuation  and  comparison  of  the  writings 
preserved  by  the  Church  itself,  in  the  interest  of  its 
own  defense  and  edification. 

H.  The  Soi&roes:  The  story  of  Jesus  induded 
what  was  needful  for  the  uses  of  the  Chiu%h.  For- 
tunately the  severest  tests  known  to  the  sdenoe  of 
literary  and  historical  criticism  leave  the  Church 
in  possession  of  two  groups  of  writings  which  cir- 
culated in  Christian  conventicles  50-100  a.d.  These 
are  (1)  apostolic  letters,  homilies  and  "prophe- 
cies," writings  directly  addressed  to  the  edification 
of  particular  chiu%hes;  and  (2)  etiological  nar- 
ratives, purporting  to  give  account  of  Christian 
origins. 


161 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jesns  Ohrlst 


Of  these  sources  the  former  contain  from  the 

nature  of  the  case  but  slight  and  incidental  allusion 

to  the  tradition;  but  for  the  very  rea- 

Bsiati^     son  that  no  effort  is  made  to  prove  a 

ofPauL  ®*®®'  *^  readers  being  merely  re- 
minded of  generally  accepted  facts, 
this  testimony,  so  far  as  it  goes,  is  of  far  greater 
value  than  apologetic  narrative.  Moreover,  the 
nucleiis  of  this  group  consists  of  extensive  ''  epi&- 
tles  "  by  a  known  author  addressed  at  a  fixed  date 
to  definite  localities  criticaUy  authenticated,  and 
from  twenty  to  fifty  years  earlier  in  date  than  the 
anonymous  narratives.  It  is  needless,  in  view  of 
this,  to  explain  why  the  historical  critic  takes  his 
stand  primarily  at  the  situation  of  belief  and  prac- 
tise indirectly  revealed  by  the  great  Pauline  Epis- 
tles, employing  them  as  a  standard.  The  minor 
elements  of  this  group,  disputed  letters  of  Paul, 
later  and  doubtful  writings  attributed  to  Peter, 
John,  James  and  Jude  add  little  in  any  event  to  the 
knowledge  of  Christianity  as  it  existed  in  Corinth 
c.  55  A.D.  derivable  from  the  two  Epistles  to  the 
Corinthians  alone. 

The  narrative  writings  (2)  are  four  in  number,  all 
anonymous,  none  earlier  than  65  a.d.,  the  latest,  at- 
tributed in  veiled  language,  in  a  subsequently  at- 
a  Th       ^c^^  appendix,  to  the  Apostle  John 

Gh>sDels.  ^^^  earlier  than  98  a.d.  They  show  a 
large  degree  of  mutual  dependence, 
but  certainly  have  no  mere  partial  presentation  in 
mind.  Each  aims  to  furnish  to  its  respective  re- 
gion **  the  Gospel "  as  locally  understood  inclusive 
of  all  essential  features.  Not  in  the  case  of  Mark, 
admittedly  representing  the  tradition  as  it  circu- 
lated at  Rome,  nor  even  in  the  case  of  John,  repre- 
senting that  of  proconsular  Asia,  can  it  be  supposed 
that  the  writer  intended  merely  to  supplement  cer- 
tain standard  authorities  already  current.  Just  as 
Mark  represents  "  the  Gospel "  as  understood  in 
Rome,  one  of  the  two  chief  Pauline  centers,  and 
John  that  of  Ephesus,  the  other,  so  the  double 
work  attributed  to  Luke,  whom  tradition  declared 
of  Antiochian  parentage,  represents  "  the  Gospel " 
(Luke  i.  4)  as  understood  in  **  Syria  and  Cilicia  " 
(Acts  XV.  23;  Gal.  i.  21);  while  southern  Syria, 
whose  historic  relations  are  with  Egypt,  seems  to 
be  represented  by  the  Gospel  attributed  to  Mat- 
thew. Critical  examination  shows  these  four  Gos- 
pels to  be  largely  interdependent  so  that  practically 
the  whole  of  Mark  has  been  transcribed  to  form 
the  narrative  outline  of  both  Matthew  and  Luke 
while  John  shows  dependence  on  all  three.  Yet 
in  each  there  persists  a  significant  local  type.  Both 
Syrian  gospels,  besides  the  conspicuous  Mark  ele- 
ment, make  laige  use  of  a  factor  absent  from  gos- 
pels of  the  Pauline  or  Greco-Roman  field,  that  of 
the  conunandments  of  Jesus.  This  factor  (Q)  de- 
termines the  very  nature  of  Matthew,  whose  whole 
mission  is  to  teach  men  **  to  observe  all  things 
whatsoever  I  oonunanded  you  "  (Matt,  xxviii.  20). 
Luke's  drafts  from  this  same  "  teaching  "  source 
are  only  second  in  extent  to  his  extracts  from  Mark, 
and  are  transcribed  with  much  greater  exactness. 
He  adds,  however,  quite  a  body  of  narrative  not 
used  by  Matthew,  including  his  whole  second 
"  treatise,"  and  by  such  additions,  as  well  as  the 
VI^ll 


treatment  of  material,  generaUy  approximates  more 
nearly  than  Matthew  to  Mark's  idea  of  "  the  Gos- 
pel"  as  the  whole  drama  of  Jesus'  career  (Acts 
i.  1).  The  motive  of  the  Ephesian  Gospel  is  differ- 
ent. While  in  form  largely  composed  of  dialogue, 
often  tending  to  monologue  (iii.  1-21),  it  does  not 
aim  to  transmit  ''  conunandments  of  the  Lord." 
Its  discourses  are  controversial  expositions  of  the 
great  Pauline  doctrines  of  new  birth,  life  in  the 
Spirit,  etc.  Nor  does  the  author  aim  at  history. 
The  "  works  "  he  relates  are  seven  symbolic  "  signs  " 
"  manifesting  the  glory  "  of  the  incarnate  Logos. 
The  explicit  aim  is  to  produce  faith  in  Jesus  as  the 
incarnate  Son  of  God,  and  thus  convey  that  mys- 
tical "  life  "  which  is  the  essence  of  Paiiline  religion 
(John  XX.  31;  cf.  Gal.  ii.  20). 

The  great  Pauline  Epistles  recall  the  conditions  out 
of  which  the  Greek  Gospels  have  grown.    They  re- 

8   The      producenotonly  Paul's  own  conception 
Pauline    ^^  "  ^^  Gospel  "  including  an  outline 

Qoig^l,  of  the  story,  but  certain  fundamental 
differences  between  Paul  and  the  older 
apostles,  which  in  some  degree  correspond  to  and 
explain  the  persistent  differences  of  type  in  the 
Greco-Roman  and  the  Syrian  tradition.  Paul  was 
both  unable,  and  of  principle  unwilling,  to  com- 
pete with  those  who  claimed  to  report  acts  and  ut- 
terances of  the  Lord  from  their  own  observation. 
Even  had  he  known  a  flesh  and  blood  Messiah, 
such  a  Messiah,  were  it  even  the  earthly  Jesus 
himself,  he  would  know  no  more  {II  Cor.  v.  16), 
because  since  his  experience  in  conversion,  re- 
demption had  lost  all  interest  save  as  a  spiritual 
experience  beginning  in  the  individual  soul.  His 
own  hopeless  struggle  for  the  righteousness  of  the 
law,  on  which  participation  in  the  Messianic  age,  the 
rabbinic  "  world  to  come,"  was  in  his  view  condi- 
tioned, had  issued  in  a  moral  death,  from  which  he 
had  been  raised  by  vision  of  the  risen  Lord  of 
Stephen  and  of  many  another  Christian  martyr. 
Dawning  faith  in  the  crucified  Messiah  of  the  pub- 
licans and  sinners,  outcasts  from  synagogue  ortho- 
doxy, had  brought  to  him  not  merely  hope  of  a 
forgiveness  without  the  works  of  the  law,  but  an 
experience  similar  to  that  he  witnessed  in  them, 
though  of  loftier  moral  type,  an  influx  of  life  and 
power  from  "  the  spirit."  The  starting-point  of 
everything  was  to  Paul  the  risen,  glorified  Christ, 
giver  of  the  Spirit.  He  had  been  revealed  as  the 
Son  of  God  with  power  by  the  resurrection  (Rom. 
i.  4).  This  inward  experience  made  Paul  an  apos- 
tle (Gal.  i.  16)  and  gave  him  his  message.  Cozifer- 
ence  with  those  who  were  apostles  before  him  was 
not  needful  to  prepare  him  to  preach  it  (Gal.  i.  16- 
17).  And  3ret  without  the  safe  anchor  of  connec- 
tion with  the  historic  Jesus,  this  doctrine  of  a  spiri- 
tual Christ  was  exposed  to  all  kinds  of  vagaries. 
From  what  it  actually  suffered  at  the  hands  of 
docetic  Gnostics  (see  Docetism),  and  of  ultra  Paul- 
inists  like  Marcion  (q.v.),  it  seems  that  it  would 
soon  be  assimilated  in  the  hands  of  Greek  converts 
to  the  myths  of  the  redeemer-gods  (theoi  sOUres), 
who,  incarnate  in  the  form  of  demigods,  or  as  in- 
visible eons,  "  powers,"  or  "  emanations,"  were 
held  to  participate  in  the  life  of  men.  The  whole 
ethical  content  of  Paul's  religion  of  the  Spirit  was 


Jeans  Ohrlst 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


162 


4.  Ita 
Halations 


dependent  on  the  identification  of  this  Spirit,  whose 
manifestations  formed  the  basis  of  all  church  life 
with ''  the  mind  that  was  in  Christ  Jesus.''  Rigidly 
his  converts  must  be  disciplined  in  the  subordina- 
tion <>f  the  spectacular  gifts  of  the  Spirit,  "  mir- 
acles," "  tongues,"  "  prophecies,"  to  the  "  abi- 
ding," the  moral  (I  Cor.  xiii.). 

It  is  no  surprise,  therefore,  to  find  Paul,  three 
years  after  his  conversion,  going  up  to  Jerusalem 
to  "  become  acquainted  with  Peter, "  literally 
"  to  hear  his  story  "  (Gal.  i.  18).  From  that  Pe- 
trine  story  must  have  come  many  an 
allusion  in  Paul's  letters  to  Jesus' 
^  ^^  teachings  (I  Thess.  iv.  16;  I  Cor.  vii. 
Q]u^,i^^,,  10,  ix.  14),  the  purity  of  his  life  (II  Cor. 
V.  21),  the  tragedy  of  his  betrayal  and 
death  (I  Cor.  xi.  23),  the  manifestations  of  his  res- 
urrection glory  (I  Cor.  xv.  3-7).  From  it  came  cer- 
tainly the  institution  of  the  Eucharist  (I  Cor.  id. 
23-25;  see  below,  II.,  §  8),  but  not  that  of  baptism 
(I  Cor.  i.  17).  Moreover,  if  it  related,  as  may  surely 
be  assumed,  marvels  of  healing  and  exordsm  out- 
shining those  of  the  "  strolling  Jews,  exorcists " 
and  even  the  "  gifts  of  healing  "  and  "  miracles  " 
boasted  in  the  Church  (I  Cor.  xii.  28-29),  it  is 
somewhat  significant  that  Paul  ignores  this  whole 
element,  large  as  it  looms  on  the  pages  of  Mark. 
Ultimately  in  the  latest  of  the  undisputed  epistles 
Paul  states  the  essence  of  his  Gospel  in  a  "  nut- 
shell "  (Pha.  ii.  4-11;  cf.  Mark.  x.  42-15).  Such 
is  Paul's  messianism,  the  starting-point  of  which 
is  the  glorified  one  of  his  vision,  but  in  its  backward 
look  almost  overleaps  the  earthly  career  as  a  mere 
episode,  a  period  of  "  humiliation,"  in  the  great 
economy  of  God,  with  whom  this  second  Adam 
had  enjoyed  the  riches  of  heaven  (II  Cor.  viii.  9) 
before  the  first  Adam  walked  in  Paradise.  Essen- 
tially and  fundamentally  Paul's  (xospel  is  an  in- 
carnation doctrine,  closely  allied  in  its  sacraments, 
its  aspiration  to  life  by  mystic  tmion  with  Christ 
and  God  in  the  Spirit,  and  even  in  its  terminology, 
with  Greek  and  Oriental  mystery  religion.  Its 
Roteriology  recalls  the  avatar  doctrine  of  the  re- 
deemer-gods (see  Hinduism).  That  which  gives 
it  power  to  assimilate  rather  than  be  assimilated 
in  the  maelstrom  of  intermingling  religious  ideals, 
is  its  ethical  root  in  the  life  and  teaching  of  the 
historic  Jesus. 

It  can  not  be  too  emphatically  insisted  that  the 
gospel  of  Peter  was  essentially,  in  its  starting-point, 
and  in  religious  value,  identical  with  that  of  Paul 
(I  Cbr.  XV.  11;  Gal.  ii.  2, 6-8, 15-16).  It  also  did  not 
start  from  the  story  of  the  ministry, 
but  from  the  resurrection  (Acts  iv. 
33).  It  rested  upon  an  experience  of 
Peter  only  less  profoundly  ethical  than 
Paul,  a  rescue  by  the  felt  presence  of  the  risen 
Christ  from  the  abyss  of  moral  agony.  The  four 
canonical  Gospels  have  uniformly  canceled  the 
story  of  this  fundamental  event  in  the  history  of 
the  Christian  religion  in  favor  of  more  concrete, 
more  tangible  and  marvelous  tales  of  the  empty 
tom|>  and  reappearances  of  Jesus  in  palpable  form. 
Not  a  trace  of  this  appears  in  PauL  His  accoimt 
of  the  tradition  of  the  resurrection  appearances  is 
unassailable,  and  certainly  complete.    It  puts  his  | 


6.  The 

Petrine 
Gospel. 


own  experience  in  line  with  Peter's,  and  coincides 
with  the  renmants  and  allusions  in  the  Gospel  nar- 
rative of  how  first  of  all  "  the  Lord  appeared  to 
Simon  "  (Luke  xxiv.  34).  Many  traces  of  this  in- 
itial vision  of  Peter  exist  in  the  canonical  story 
itself  (Mark  xiv.  28,  xvi.  1,  cf.  ix.  2-10),  in  addi- 
tions to  it  (John  xxi.  1-13),  in  extrsrcanonical  frag- 
ments (Gospel  of  Peter,  end),  and  above  all  in  the 
recorded  prayer  of  Jesus  for  the  "  turning  again  " 
of  Simon  (Luke  xxii.  32).  These  aotiply  corrobo- 
rate the  statement  of  Paul  that  the  fibrst  "  appear- 
ance "  was  *'  to  Simon,"  and  establish  tfacT  essential 
justice  of  the  tradition  which  explains  the  name 
of  "  Cephas  "  or  "  Peter  "  ("  Rock  ")  as  given  be- 
cause the  Church  owed  its  foundation  to  the  new- 
bom  faith  of  this  disciple.  Because  Peter  in  Gali- 
lee rallied  his  ''  brethren  "  with  the  assurance  of 
his  experience  of  a  manifestation  of  Jesus  in  glory, 
(Christianity  became  a  religion.  What  was — what 
is  the  experience  of  the  presence  of  the  risen  (Christ? 
This  is  not  a  problem  of  history  but  of  religious 
psychology.  With  Peter's  experience,  soon  re- 
peated in  that  of  his  "  brethren,"  of  500  at  once, 
of  Pentecost,  of  James,  of  Paul  (I  Cor.  xv.  3-8) 
**  the  Gospel "  began  its  career.  It  was  essen- 
tially the  story  of  the  resurrection  as  a  message  of 
redemption  (II  Cor.  v.  19-21).  The  psychological 
phenomenon,  vital  as  it  is  in  the  spiritual  history 
of  the  race,  falls  from  its  very  nature  outside  the 
limits  of  this  discussion;  3ret  it  alone  accounts  for 
the  preservation  of  the  implied  story  of  Jesus'  pre- 
vious career. 

In  Peter's  case  as  in  Paul's  this  starting-point 
was  the  resurrection.    But  that  which  traditioD 
reports  (Papias,  in  Eusebius,  Hist,  eed.,  III.,xxxix. 
15)  of  the  nature  of  Peter's  preaching  is  that  which 
could  be  anticipated  from  all  known  of  his  past. 
To   Peter   the    remembrance    of    Jesus'    earthly 
^  y         career  would  not  be,  as  to  Paul,  a 
OhMraoter  ^^^  episode  in  the  eternal  plan  of  re- 
"  demption,  an  avatar  of  God's  redeem- 
ing  Spirit   suffering   humiliation   and    death.    It 
would  be  a  priceless  jewel  of  personal  recollections 
filled  with  foregleams  of  the   later   glorification. 
Peter's  Christology  would  be  fimdamentally  not 
an  incarnation  doctrine,  but  just  as  it  is  actually 
found  in  the  Petrine  speeches  of  Acts  (ii.  32-36, 
iii.  18-23,  26)  an  apotheosis  doctrine.    An  early 
source  even  sketches  the  outline  of  Peter's  story. 
It  "  began  from  Galilee,  after  the  baptism  which 
John  preached;   how  God  anointed  Jesus  of  Naza- 
reth with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  with  power;   who 
went  about  doing  good,  and  healing  iJl  that  were 
oppressed  of  the  devil,  for  God  was  with  him." 
From  this  point  it  passes  immediately  to  the  story 
of  the  crucifixion  in  Jerusalem  and  the  witness  to 
the  resiurection  (Acts  x.  37-41).    The  correspond- 
ence of  this  outline  with  the  outline  of  that  Gospel 
(Mark)  which  tradition  declares  to  be  founded  on 
Peter's  narrative,  is  a  phenomenon  of  great  signifi- 
cance.    Disregarding  the   portions   elaborated  in 
the  Pauline  interest,  which  show  connection  at 
many  points  with  (J  and  perhaps  also  with  the 
"  special  source  "  of  Luke,  and  taking  only  the  un- 
derlying narrative,  three  essential  diata  appear  in 
Mark:  (1)  the  beginnings  in  Galilee  after  the  bap- 


168 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


JesiiflOhrlst 


7.  Con- 
■aquenoea. 


ttsm  of  John,  including  the  healings  which  center 
in  Capernaum,  and  in  fact  at  the  very  door  of 
Peter's  house  (Mark  i.  15-39,  ii.  1-22,  iv.  36,  v. 
^^)'f  (2)  the  journey  to  Jerusalem,  interpreted  by 
Peter  as  a  Biessianic  enterprise  (Mark  viii.  27  sqq., 
xL  15  sqq.);  (3)  the  night  of  betrayal  (cf.  I  Cor. 
xi.  23),  the  crucifixion  and  resurrection  (Mark  xiv. 
16).     In  all  these  Peter's  figure  is  central. 

Two  unavoidable  inferences  from  what  Paul  has 
shown  of  Peter's  Gospel  confirm  the  tradition  which 
connects  the  story  of  Jesus  with  him.  (1)  With- 
out the  impression  of  an  extraordinary  personality 
and  an  extraordinary  career,  the  ini- 
tial experience  of  Peter,  echoed  in 
that  of  his  brethren  and  of  Paul  (I  Cor. 
XV.  3-11),  the  true  foundation  experience  of  the 
Church,  could  never  have  occurred.  (2)  Having 
occurred,  aU  Peter's  remembered  intercourse  with 
Jesus  would  be  shot  through  with  transfiguring 
rays  from  the  later  vision  of  his  heavenly  glory. 
The  process  is  artlessly  acknowledged  in  the  case 
of  the  so>called  triumphal  entry  in  John  xii.  16. 
What  proved  Jesus  to  have  been  the  Christ  whose 
coming  to  establish  his  kingdom  only  awaits  Israel's 
repentance  (Acts  iii.  19-26) — this  formed  the  sub- 
stance of  Peter's  story. 

Turning  to  the  second  and  later  group  of  sources, 
the  fourfold  tradition,  the  four  canonical  Gospels 
in  their  fundamental  character  may  fairly  be  com- 
pared with  the  four  tendencies  so  distinctly  marked 
by  Paul  among  the  Corinthian  believ- 
J!lT®^   ers  of  56  a.d.    The  Roman  Gospel 

Ephesian  (John)  those  "  of  Apollos," 
the  Antiochian  (Luke — ^Acts),  those ''of  Cephas," 
the  Palestinian  (Matthew)  those ''  of  Christ."  Mark 
and  John  are  both  Pauline  in  the  sense  of  making 
faith  in  the  person  of  Christ  essential  rather  than 
obedience  to  precept.  But  in  Mark  it  is  the  ex- 
ternal side  of  Paulinism  which  is  presented.  It  ap- 
pears with  the  same  crudity  in  its  doctrine  of  the 
Spirit,  and  brusqueness  in  repudiation  of  Jewish 
scruples,  which  caUs  forth  Paul's  rebuke  of  his  too 
inconsiderate  adherents  in  Corinth. 

The  Fourth  Gospel  systematically  idealizes  the 
tradition  both  of  "  sayings  "  and  "  doings  "  for 
the  inculcation  of  a  Christology  now  openly  allied 

to  the  Logos  philosophy  of  Ephesus 

Gtomel^  f  ^^    Alexandria.      Differences    exist 

j^^       among  critics  as  to  its  authorship,  but 

comparatively  none  as  to  its  specula- 
tive and  theological  character.  Its  slender  modicimi 
of  underlying  historic  tradition  can  be  employed 
only  with  utmost  critical  caution  to  criticize  or 
supplement  the  Petrine  story  in  a  few  details,  so 
completely  has  it  been  volatilized  in  the  domi- 
nant interest  of  presenting  Christological  theory. 
Aiming  only  to  depict  the  drama  of  the  incarnate 
Logos,  this  Gospel  takes  indeed  the  foremost  rank 
as  a  source  for  the  later  history  of  Pauline  Chris- 
tology, but  is  almost  unusable  for  the  history  of 
Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

The  two  Gospels  assigned  respectively  to  Jerusa- 
lem and  Antioch  have  much  in  common  after  the 
subtraction  of  Mark.  They  do  not,  with  Paul' 
Mark  and  John,  ignore  the  Davidic  descent  of  Jesus 


(cf.  Rom.  i.  3-4  with  Mark  xii.  25-^7;  John  vii.  40- 
43),  but  prefix  independently  to  the'  Petrine  narra- 
tive two  genealogies,  followed  by  accoimts  of  Jesus' 
10  Mat.  '^'^culous  birth  and  childhood.  The 
thewand  P®^gre«'>  though  mutually  exclu- 
John.  ^^^f  ^^^  really  ancient  attempts  to 
justify  the  tradition  alluded  to  by  Paul 
(Rom.  i.  3),  which  possibly  had  some  foimdation 
in  the  claims  of  Jesus'  family.  The  stories  of  the 
viigin-birth  are  equally  inconsistent  with  one  an- 
other, and  merely  seek  in  a  crude  way  to  adjust 
the  Jewish-Christian  doctrine  of  the  pedigrees 
(Jesus  the  Christ  as  son  of  David)  to  the  Greek  or 
Pauline  incarnation  doctrine.  These  also  have 
significance  for  the  history  of  Christological  doc- 
trine, but  not  for  the  history  of  Jesus.  The  most 
Important  new  element  contributed  by  Matthew 
and  Luke  is  the  source  which  they  share  in  com- 
mon. This  was  certainly  in  its  fundamental  char- 
acter more  closely  allied  in  aim  to  Matthew  than 
to  Luke,  its  principal  object  being  not  to  narrate  the 
career  of  Jesus,  but  to  embody  his  precepts.  If  it 
be  supposed  that  those  of  Corinth  who  said  ''  I  am 
of  Chrijst  "  meant  "  my  conduct  is  governed  by  the 
precepts  delivered  as  from  him,"  their  later  devel- 
opment may  be  traced  in  the  combination  effected 
in  Matthew,  as  all  critics  now  admit,  of  the  Gospel 
of  Mark  with  that  primitive  compilation  of  Jesus' 
teachings  made  by  the  Apostle  Matthew  in  the 
tongue  of  Palestine,  to  which  Papias  refers  in  145 
A.D.  as  the  "  Logia  or  Syntagma  of  the  Dominical 
Oracles."  The  greater  leaning  of  Luke  to  narra- 
tive material,  his  less  intolerant  attitude  toward 
teachers  and  workers  of  "  lawlessness,"  and  the 
central  position  accorded  to  Peter  and  to  the  Pe- 
trine solution  of  the  great  issue  at  Antioch  in  his 
second  treatise  (Acts  xv.;  cf.  Gal.  ii.),  justify  in 
classifying  the  Antiochian  Gospel  as  corresponding 
to  those  who  declared  "  I  am  of  Cephas." 

It  will  readily  be  seen  that  the  most  invaluable 
of  all  sources  for  that  extraordinary  character  and 
career  which  through  its  influence  on  Peter  and 
Paul  has  given  rise  to  the  Christian  re- 
Sl  *^*  ligion,    is   the    underlying    non-Mark 
▲ramaio    ^^^^^^'^^  common  to  Matthew  and  Luke 
Souroe.     ^^^*  whose  relation  to  the  reported 
"  Hebrew "   compilation    (the  Logia) 
is  as  yet  imexplained.     Unlike  the  "  wonder-lov- 
ing "  Mark,  Q  is  not  dominated  by  the  effort  to 
prove  by  accounts  of  prodigies  smrounding  his 
career  that  Jesus  was  the  Son  of  God  in  the  Pauline 
sense  (Mark  i.  1),  but  aims  primarily  to  report  his 
teaching.    Even  more,  while  it  alludes  to  Jesus' 
miracles,  as  Paul  alludes  to  those  of  his  time,  it 
presents  Jesus'  attitude  toward  them  as  one  of 
severe  rebuke  of  the  popular  craving  for  signs 
(Matt.  xii.  38  sqq.;   Luke  xi.  29  sqq.)  as  well  as  of 
the  suggestion  that  he  might  violate  by  his  hiunan 
will  the  divine  order  of  the  world  (Matt.  iv.  3-7; 
Luke  iv.  3,  4,  9-12).    This  aim,  and  this  relative 
independence   of   Pauline   Christology  qualify  Q, 
fragmentary  as  it  \b,  for  use  as  a  corrective  in  rela- 
tion to  the  Petrine  tradition,  much  as  the  Pauline 
epistles  have  been  used  in  relation  to  the  fourfold 
narrative. 
The  forgoing  analysis  of  the  sources  in  their 


JesoB  Olirist 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


164 


nature  and  their  relation  to  one  another  and  to 
doctrinal  development  in  the  Church  or  its  equiva- 
lent, is  indispenaable  to  every  aerious-minded  mod- 
ern student  of  the  subject.  The  har- 
12.  Besolts  monistic  method,  satisfying  to  an  age 

of  Souroe  which  made  the  equal  value  and  error- 

Analyaia.  lessness  of  all  Biblical  writings  its 
point  of  departure,  confronted  a  rela- 
tively simple  task.  Whatever  each  evangelist  said 
must  be  added  to,  or  dove-tailed  into,  the  report  of 
every  other.  Discrepancies  could  be  ignored  or  ex- 
plained away.  Variant  forms  could  be  attached 
one  after  the  other,  as  subsequent  similar  occur- 
rences or  repetitions.  To-day  the  comparative 
method  is  displacing  the  harmonistic.  The  more 
vital  the  subject,  the  less  can  the  truth-loving  and 
reverent  mind  be  satisfied  to  exempt  it  from  the 
most  searching  analysis  possible  under  the  methods 
of  documentary  and  historical  research.  The  re- 
sults concern  not  mere  individual  anecdotes  or  say- 
ings, but  the  traditional  story  of  Jesus  as  a  whole. 
As  already  seen,  the  beginnings  of  the  Christian  re- 
ligion do  not  deal  so  much  with  the  career  of  the 
carpenter  of  Nazareth,  as  with  the  glorified  Lord, 
whom  Paul  identified  with  the  redeeming  Spirit  of 
God  (II  Cor.  iii.  17),  in  whom  he  even  sees  that 
-semi-personal  wisdom  which  the  "  wisdom  "  writers 
had  presented  as  the  agency  of  God  in  creation 
(I  Cor.  viii.  6;  cf.  Prov.  viii.  22  sqq.;  Wisdom  of 
Sol.  vii.  21-^).  It  is  this  Hellenistic  incarnation 
doctrine  which  became  "  Christianity."  And  yet 
"  Christianity  "  was  saved  from  absorption  in  eclec- 
tic Gnosticism  only  by  virtue  of  the  persistence  of 
the  career  and  teaching  of  the  historic  Jesus,  the 
contribution  of  the  Syrian  type  of  Gospel  tradition, 
whose  respective  elements  "  Petrine  "  and  "  Mat- 
theap  "  fall  now  to  be  analyied. 

It  is  true  that  Paul  was  dependent  on  Peter; 
but  it  is  at  least  equally  true  that  Peter,  or  more 
exactly  those  secondary  sources  which  represent 
the  Petrine  tradition,  show  to  an  enormous  extent 
the  influence  of  Paul.  Only  the  ultimate  substrar 
turn  of  narrative  in  the  Greek  Gospels  can  claim 
to  represent  the  Aramaic  story  of  the  Galilean  fish- 
erman. The  one  source  which  in  its  original  Ara- 
maic form  was  comparatively  unaffected  by  Paul- 
ine soteriology  was  the  Matthean  collection  of  the 
"  Sayings,"  which  survives  only  in  fragments  from 
a  Greek  version  utilized  by  Luke  in  connection  with 
an  otherwise  imknown  narrative  souroe,  and  by 
Matthew  to  complete  his  manual  of  **  command- 
ments." Even  the  Loffia  must  have  started  with 
the  presupposition  of  Jesus'  superhuman  authority, 
and,  at  least  in  the  Greek  form,  applied  to  him 
the  apocalyptic  title  "  Son  of  Man  "  from  Dan. 
vii..  13. 

HL  Orltloal  OotUneofthe  Story  of  JesQB:  The 
task  here  is  to  draw  from  these  materials  a 
consistent  outline  of  Jesus'  historical  career  and 
teaching,  determining  from  these  the  character  of 
the  man,  and  the  nature  of  the  movement  which  he 
set  on  foot  "  first  in  Galilee  and  afterward  in  Jeru- 
salem." 

The  story  of  Jesus  began  '*  after  the  baptism 
which  John  preached."  (On  the  infancy  chapters  of 
Matthew  and  Luke  see  above,  I.,  i  10).   The  further 


back  the  sources  are  traced  the  more  apparent  is  it 

that  the  movement  which  Jesus  inaugurated  was 

a  continuation  of  that  of  John,  from 

ti "  ^iith  ^^^^  ^^  Church  subsequently  bor- 

J^In  the  ^^^    "**    "*®    ^   initiation.    Great 

Baptist,  s^r^n  is  ^id  in  the  earliest  source  (Q) 
on  the  distinction  between  John's  as- 
cetic life,  emphasizing  his  stem  warnings  of  judg- 
ment and  wrath  to  come,  and  that  of  Jesus,  who 
came  into  the  populous  haunts  of  men  with  his 
winning  proclamation  of  foigiveness.  The  latest 
source  (John)  is  deeply  concerned  to  show  how 
void  of  all  significance  was  the  whole  Johannine 
movement,  except  as  premonitory  of  the  Gospel. 
And  jret  the  true  relation  is  evident  in  the  rever- 
ential regard  of  Jesus  for  John,  in  whose  movement 
he  saw  no  less  a  matter  than  the  great  repentance, 
to  be  effected  according  to  Scripture  ''  before  the 
great  and  terrible  Day  of  Yahweh  "  (Q,  Matt.  xi. 
2-19,  xii.  41,  xxi.  32;  Luke  vii.  18-28,  31-^,  xi. 
32,  xvi.  14-16).  Equally  apparent  is  it  in  the 
fundamental  note  of  Petrine  story,  which  begins 
with  Jesus'  coming  into  Galilee  after  John's  arrest, 
with  an  invitation  to  the  fishermen  to  join  him  in 
gathering  men,  rescuing  the  strayed  sheep  of  the 
flock  of  Israel.  There  is  all  the  less  reason  to  doubt 
the  statement  that  Jesus  had  been  himself  bap- 
tized by  John,  inasmuch  as  later  evangelists  expe- 
rience great  difficulty  in  adjusting  this  fact  to  their 
doctrine  of  Messiah's  sinlessness  (Matt.  iii.  13-15; 
Gospel  of  Hebrews,  fragment  3).*  But  the  so-called 
Prologue  of  Mark  (i.  1-13),  wherein  this  scene  is 
depicted  on  the  basis  of  the  Jewish  legend  of  the 
anointing  of  Messiah  by  Elias,  with  employment 
of  the  voice  from  heaven  of  the  transfiguration 
apocalypse  (see  below  II.  7)  does  not  belong  to  the 
basic  Petrine  tradition,  which  begins  at  verse  14 
(cf.  Acts  X.  37). 

The  real  impulse  under  which  Jesus  took  up  the 
standard  of  the  martyred  prophet  and  carried  it 
away  from  the  wilderness  into  the  centers  of  half- 
heathen  Galilee,   is  clearly  apparent 

Sr  ??**      from  his  invitation  to  the  fishennen 

f<? JeJus'  (^**^  ^*^^  **  ^^  ^'  ^^^'  ^^'  ^^'  ^^ 
Ministry  ^&^t.  xiii.  47),  and  kindred  utterances 
from  Q  (Matt.  ix.  35-38,  x.  6,  xviii.  12- 
14;  Luke  x.  2,  xv.  3^7).  It  is  made  even  more  un- 
mistakable in  the  special  source  of  Luke,  in  which 
the  humanitarian  and  sociological  aspect  of  Jesus' 
work  is  strikingly  emphasized.  Synagogue  relig- 
ion under  the  domination  of  the  scribes  had  in  fact 
made  it  almost -impossible  for  the  ''  people  of  the 
land  "  to  expect  any  '^  share  in  the  world  to  come." 
The  spiritual  inheritance  of  Israel  as  a  whole  had 
been  monopolized  by  the  scribes  and  their  devout 
followers  the  Pharisees.  The  ideal  since  even  the 
times  before  the  monarchy  (Ex.  iv.  22;  Hos.  xi.  1) 
had  been  that  Israel  was  to  be  a  people  of  God's 
''  sons."  Now  none  were  allowed  to  be  so  reckoned 
who  did  not  "  do  the  will,"  as  revealed  in  the  sa- 
cred law  and  interpreted  by  the  scribes.  The  Jo- 
hannine movement  as  interpreted  by  Jesus  (Q,  Matt, 
xxi.  32  —  Luke  vii.  29)  was  a  protest  against  this 

*  In  John  L  32-34  the  baptism  and  votoe  of  adoption  be- 
come a  mere  manifestation  to  John  and  Israel.  The  Logos 
is  of  course  already  conscious  of  his  nature  and  mission. 


166 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jesus  Ohrlat 


usurpation.  The  rite  of  baptism  itself,  foreign  as 
it  is  to  the  Mosaic  code,  and  spontaneous  in  its 
sjrmboliBm,  justifies  this  view  of  the  movement  of 
John.  The  epithet  "  friend  of  publicans  and  sin- 
ners," flung  at  Jesus  by  his  foes  the  synagogue  au- 
thorities, the  scene  of  his  early  ministry,  the  very 
class  in  society  to  which  he  belonged,  make  it  ap- 
parent that  the  beginning  of  Jesus'  ministry  in 
Galilee  had  exactly  this  character  of  protest  in  the 
name  of  the  "  little  ones  "  whose  poverty  alone  would 
have  made  the  yoke  of  the  law,  ever  heavier  as  the 
scribes  were  making  it,  a  yoke  which  in  Peter's  words 
(Acts  zv.  7)  "  neither  we  nor  our  fathers  were  able 
to  bear."    It  was  sociological,  and  ethico-religious. 

Jesus  did  more  than  merely  carry  on  the  baptism 
of  John.  He  renewed  John's  preaching  of  repent- 
ance in  view  of  the  coming  kingdom,  but  instead  of 
awaiting  in  the  wilderness  those  whom  curiosity 
a  Vabmaaa  ^'  conscience  might  drive  to  him,  he 
i^d"**  carried  the  message  where  the  lost 

Xlzmeles.  ^heep  of  Israel  were  most  numerous. 
He  enlisted  the  aid  of  fishermen,  pub- 
licans, wage-earners  like  himself  to  proclaim  it.  He 
went  from  Capernaum  to  the  towns  of  Gennesaret, 
from  Gennesaret  to  the  villages  of  Galilee.  He 
preached  in  the  synagogues  and  in  the  streets.  Bap- 
tism itself  was  for  the  time  being  left  behind,  since 
physical  conditions  made  it  impracticable.  The 
message  also  was  infinitely  bolder,  and  at  the  same 
time  infinitely  more  hopeful  than  John's.  Fortu- 
nately much  of  it  is  preserved  in  substantially  orig- 
inal form.  The  repentance  itself  of  the  sinful  was 
to  Jesus  a  proof  of  that  divine  forgiveness  for  the 
attainment  of  which  the  repentance  had  been  de- 
manded (Matt.  xxi.  28-32 « Luke  xv.  11-32,  vii. 
36-50).  He  declared  in  the  name  of  the  great 
Father,  Lord  of  heaven  and  earth,  that  there  was 
access  to  him,  forgiveness,  adoption,  life  in  the 
kingdom,  for  those  who  **  did  the  will  ";  not  in  the 
sense  of  scribe  and  Pharisee,  but  by  simple  imita- 
tion of  the  spirit  of  the  loving  God  of  nature  (Q, 
Matt.  V.  43-48 « Luke  vi.  27-36).  He  welcomed 
such  to  spiritual  brotherhood  with  himself  (Mark 
iii.  35  and  parallels).  Inward,  not  outward,  purity 
was  Doade  the  condition  of  *'  seeing  God  ";  and  the 
essence  of  the  law  simple-hearted  devotion  to  God, 
and  God-like  goodness  to  one's  fellow  men,  *'  even 
to  the  imthankful  and  the  evil."  This  was  much 
more  than  all  whole  burnt-offering  and  sacrifice. 
The  immense  effect  of  Jesus'  preaching  was  not  due 
alone  to  the  reawakening  in  the  land  of  the  voice 
of  prophetic  authority,  with  its  moral  imperative, 
"  thus  saith  the*  Lord  ";  but  to  certain  startling 
accompaniments,  which  at  their  first  appearance 
were  the  occasion  to  Jesus  of  one  of  his  vigils  of 
prayer  (Mark  i.  35-39),  but  were  ultimately  wel- 
comed by  him  as  a  divine  aid  and  seal  upon  his 
proclamation  of  forgiveness.  His  stem  rebuke  of 
an  outcry  from  a  ''  possessed  "  person  in  the  syna- 
gogue in  C!apemaum  resulted  in  an  involuntary 
exorcism.  The  "  demon  "  went  out.  In  Peter's 
house  inunediately  after,  a  "  healing  "  took  place 
on  the  appeal  of  the  inmates  that  he  would  lay 
hands  upon  the  patient.  Straightway  Jesua  was 
besieged  with  the  importunities  of  the  sick  in  body 
and  mind,  with  the  result  that  he  appears  divided 


between  the  desire  to  give  physical  help,  and  the 
vivid  appreciation  of  the  danger  involved  of  being 
forcibly  diverted  from  his  higher  aims.  A  whole 
cycle  of  marvels  of  healing  and  exorcisms,  even  the 
subduing  of  the  demons  of  wind  and  storm,  appears 
at  this  point  of  the  Petrine  tradition.  Q,  with 
more  sobriety,  presents  Jesus'  attitude  on  the  sub- 
ject in  contrast  with  the  malignant  interpretation 
of  the  scribes.  The  "  mighty  works  "  are  the  evi- 
dence of  God's  gracious  intervention  to  overthrow 
the  power  of  Satan.  Such  evidence  would  have 
led  Tyre  and  Sidon,  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  to  re- 
pentance; but  to  that  hardened  generation  they 
were  simply  an  occasion  of  "  stimibling  in  him." 
In  point  of  fact  he  was  accused  by  leading  scribes 
of  collusion  with  Beelzebub. 

Before  relating  the  irrepressible  conflict  with  the 
scribes  into  which  Jesus  was  led  by  his  champion- 
ship of  the  ''  people  of  the  land,"  a  few  words  must 
be  devoted  to  a  cycle  of  narratives  presented  in  du- 
plicate by  Mark  and  Matthew,  occupying  a  central 

position  in  every  one  of  the  Gospels. 

*•  ^'•^-  The  chief  feature  of  these  is  the  feed- 

-^^Jtt      ing  of  the  multitude.    They  owe  their 

conspicuous  position,  as  appears  from 
the  features  on  which  they  dilate,  to  their  etiolog- 
ical significance,  as  explaining  and  defining  the 
order  of  the  church  rite  of  the  breaking  of  bread; 
and  the  very  existence  from  earliest  times  of  this 
institution,  with  its  significant  name  of  Agape  or 
Love-feast  (qq.v.;  Acts  vi.  4;  I  Cor.  xi.  ^34; 
Jude  12),  proves  the  fundamental  historicity  of  the 
tradition.  True,  Mark's  narrative  is  controlled  by 
the  idea  of  a  prodigy  outstripping  the  miracle  re- 
lated of  Elisha  in  II  Kings  iv.  42-44,  and  the  later 
evangelists  follow  this  lead.  Still  the  original  mo- 
tive is  different.  It  inculcates  that  wonderful  spirit 
of  absolute  abandon  in  self-denying  service  which 
formed  one  of  the  primitive  **  gifts  of  the  Spirit " 
(I  CJor.  xiii.  3;  Acts  ii.  44-46,  iv.  32-37),  and  which 
was  rightly  attributed  to  the  influence  of  Jesus. 
The  multitude  gathered  about  Jesus  in  the  wilder- 
ness had  hung  upon  his  words  until  the  hour  of 
tfie  evening  meal.  Yet  instead  of  dismissing  them 
to  find  shelter  and  food  as  they  best  could  in  the 
neighboring  villages,  as  the  disciples  uiged,  Jesus 
directed  that  the  whole  stock  of  their  common  re- 
sources be  set  before  them.  He  not  merely  made 
the  multitude  thus  materially  his  guests,  but  took 
them  formally  into  the  very  circle  wherein  he  was 
himself  wont  to  act  as  house-father,  *'  blessing  and 
breaking  the  bread."  The  results  in  even  a  phys- 
ical sense  seem  to  have  filled  his  followers  with 
amazement,  but  became  far  more  memorable  after 
Jesus  on  a  later  occasion  had  exemplified  the  same 
spirit  in  the  surrender  of  his  very  life-blood.  Paul 
is  the  witness  (I  Cor.  xi.  24)  that  on  the  night  of 
his  betrayal  Jesus  asked  the  continuance  of  this  cus- 
tom of  the  breaking  of  bread  as  a  fitting  memorial 
of  the  life  which  was  being  laid  down  to  open  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  to  the  spiritually  disinherited.  * 

*  In  I  Cor.  zi.  and  John  vi.  the  two  rites,  asape  and  Eu- 
charist, are  ineztrioably  interwoven;  for  church  practise 
had  already  taken  this  inevitable  course.  But  in  Luke 
xjdv.  35  men  who  know  nothing  of  the  latter  reoocnixe  the 
practise  of  the  former. 


JesasOhxist 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


166 


Authorl- 
Uea. 


Invasion  of  the  domain  of  synagogue  authority 
by  such  a  movement  as  that  of  the  prophet  of  Nax- 
areth  could  not  fail  to  provoke  a  violent  reaction. 
This  became  apparent  first  in  the  murmurs  of  the 

Galilean   Pharisees  at   the   disregard 
^'^^*y!"^  shown  by  his  followers  for  set  fasts, 
T,.*t^_   ceremonial  ablutions,  and  even  for  the 

Sabbath.      Jesus    deprecated    icono- 

clasm,  but  insisted  on  the  prior  right 
of ''  the  greater  matters  of  the  law,  judgment,  mercy 
and  good  faith."  Local  orthodoxy  was  reenforoed 
by  a  delegation  of  "  scribes  from  Jerusalem." 
These,  when  their  unworthy  ascription  of  the  heal- 
ings wrought  **  by  the  Spirit  of  God  "  to  Beelzebub 
had  been  rebuked  by  Jesus,  openly  challenged  his 
authority  to  teach,  and  demanded  a  prophet's  au- 
thentication by  "  sign  from  heaven."  Jesus'  reply 
was  a  noble  repudiation  of  such  criteria  in  favor  of 
God-given  ''  signs  of  the  times."  He  denoimced 
the  usurpation  by  the  scribes  of  the  right  to  ad- 
mit to  or  exclude  from  **  sonship,"  and  their  pre- 
tensions to  be  solely  qualified  to  reveal  ''  the  Fa- 
ther." Against  them  he  appealed  to  the  "  inward 
light."  He  thanked  the  infinite  ''  Lord  of  heaven 
and  earth"  that  his  truth  was  not  given  to  the 
wise  and  prudent,  but  to  minds  as  simple  as  babes. 
As  representative  and  champion  of  the  *'  little 
ones  "  he  even  declared  that  real  knowledge  of  the 
Father  belongs  to  him  who  has  the  filial  spirit; 
while  the  Father  reserves  to  himself  alone  the  right 
to  say  who  is  a  son  (Q,  Matt.  xi.  25-27 « Luke  x. 
21-22).* 

But  the  Jews  required  a  sign.    The  scribes  re- 
mained masters  of  the  field.    Whether  because  of 
poprJar  desertion,  or  the  threatening  attitude  of 
Antipas,  whose  secret  mimier  of  John  the  Baptist 
g.  ,n.        at  Machaerus  falls  at  about  this  period 
Ori^Si    (^*^^  ^-  ^*"29;  cf.  Luke  xiii.  31-35), 
(Hdilee.    J^^'  public  work  in  Galilee  is  from 

now  on  abruptly  broken  oflf.  He  re- 
mains in  hiding  on  the  northern  frontier  until,  after 
secretly  rallying  his  adherents  in  Capernaum,  he 
undertakes  with  them  the  last  emprise.  The  ulti- 
mate decision  was  made  at  Cssarea  Philippi,  near 
the  ancient  Dan.  Jesus  consulted  his  few  remain- 
ing followers  as  to  his  own  career.  The  campaign 
must  either  be  abandoned,  or  else  reopened  on  a 
larger,  but  far  more  perilous  scale.  The  impetuous 
Peter,  so  Petrine  tradition  relates,  broached  at  this 
time  the  daring  proposal  of  an  actual  Messianic 
coup  d*itai  at  Jerusalem.  It  was  met  by  Jesus  with 
a  rebuke  of  crushing  severity.  He  did  indeed  pn>- 
pose  to  attack  the  central  seat  of  hierocratic  usur- 
pation, to  vindicate  in  the  temple  itself  the  right  of 
all  the  people  to  their  own  national  sanctuary,  now 
perverted  into  a  mere  instrumentality  of  extortion 
by  a  godless  band  of  "  robbers."  Jesus  was  con- 
templating the  throwing  down  of  a  gage  of  battle, 
in  the  face  of  the  degenerate  priestly  aristocracy 
whose  only  relic  of  the  splendid  heritage  of  Macca^ 
bean  sovereignty  was  the  citadel  of  the  temple. 
But  he  would  do  so  in  the  name  only  of  "  the  things 
that  be  of  God."     Zealot  nationalists  should  not 

*  For  the  generio  uae  of  "  the  son  "  cf.  John  viii.  35. 
For  the  being  known  C'reoogniied")  of  God,  of.  0*1.  iv.  9; 
II  Tim.  ii  19. 


seize  the  reins  to  pervert  his  movement  into  a  mere 
fruitless  insurrection  against  the  Romans.  Once 
turned  in  this  direction  the  result  to  himself,  his 
followers,  his  cause,  as  he  could  not  but  foresee, 
would  be  inevitably  fatal.  Of  the  inuninence  of 
this  danger  he  warned  them,  once  and  again.  Yet 
withal,  in  the  spirit  of  that  unconquerable  faith  in 
God  which  they  had  learned  to  know  as  his  most 
distinctive  trait  he  assured  them  that  even  if — as 
was  only  too  probable — shipwreck  did  thus  come 
of  all  their  earthly  hopes,  even  if  they  lost  their 
lives  for  his  sake  and  the  Gospel's,  they  should  find 
them  again.  Within  the  lifetime  of  that  unworthy 
generation  should  come  his  vindication  in  the  great 
"  day  of  the  Son  of  Man  "  of  Danielle  vision. 

In  the  light  of  later  conviction  this  assurance  of 

divine  vindication  in  the  Messianic  judgment  came 

to  be  interpreted  as  a  prediction  by  Jesus  that  he 

himself  would  come  again  as  the  Son 

M**^aa    °'  **^'    '^^^  ^^"^  ^  already  con- 

of  Kan.*'  sifltently  employed  in  the  oldest  evan- 
gelic source  (Q)  as  a  self-designation 
of  Jesus,  Xhough  not  yet  in  Paul.  From  Q  it  passes 
to  Mark  and  thence  to  the  entire  evangelic  tradi- 
tion, creating  the,  wrong  impression  that  Jesus  was 
a  visionary  (Ekstaixker)^  carried  away  with  the 
apocalyptic  enthusiasm  of  the  early  post-resurrec- 
tion conventicles.  In  reality  his  ideal  was  ethioo- 
religious;  and  the  integrity  and  unswervable  fidel- 
ity of  his  simple,  straightforward  purpose  ought  to 
have  made  it  impossible  in  the  present  to  impute 
to  him  a  perversion  from  this  ideal.  In  spite  of 
Jesus'  crushing  rebuke,  a  later  element  of  the  Pal- 
estinian Gospel  (Matt.  xvi.  17)  makes  Peter's  sug- 
gestion of  Messiahship  at  this  time  the  foundation 
of  the  Chureh.  Jesus,  it  is  said,  declared  it  a  haih 
kdt,  or  revelation  from  God.  Parallel  to  this  prose 
statement  is  the  apocalypse  or  '^  vision  "  story  of 
the  transfiguration,  interjected  by  Mark  in  ix.  2- 
10  from  some  Pauline  source  of  the  symbolic  type 
represented  in  John.  Jesiis  was  "  metamorphosed  " 
(cf.  II  Cor.  iii.  18)  before  the  eyes  of  Peter,  James 
and  John  into  his  glorified  form,  while  the  trans- 
lated "  witnesses  of  Messiah,"  Moses  and  Elias, 
stood  beside  him.  The  voice  of  God  then  declared 
his  true  character.  This  again,  it  need  hardly  be 
said,  belongs  to  the  history  of  Christolpgical  doc- 
trine; not  to  the  story  of  Jesus. 

The  exodus  from  Galilee  was  accomplished  se- 
cretly.   The  little  body  of  those  who  were  willing 
to  leave  all  and  follow  Jesus  to  possible  martyr^ 
dom  went  by  way  of  the  Jordan  valley,  Peraea  and 
a  Th       Jericho.    At  this   last   stage   of  the 

P^jj^  journey  it  received  an  encouraging  ac- 
cession, whether  the  story  of  Mark  is 
followed  or  the  "  special  source  "  of  Li^e.  Shortly 
before  Passover,  Jesus  entered  the  temple,  sui^ 
rounded  by  a  motley  company  of  enthusiastic,  yet 
orderly  supporters.  The  priestly  authorities  were 
overawed.  The  most  obnoxious  of  abuses  inaugu- 
rated in  the  sanctuary  by  ^'  the  hissing  brood  of 
Annas "  was  abolished,  peremptorily,  and  yet 
without  mob  violence.  In  answer  to  the  challenge 
of  the  sanhedrin  Jesus  gave  as  the  sign  of  his  au- 
thority "  the  baptism  of  John,"  a  movement  "  from 
heaven  and  not  of  men."    He  had  succeeded  in 


167 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


JesoB  Ohrist 


averting  the  danger  of  Messianistic  outbreak,  and 
uaerted  the  religious  rights  of  the  "  lost  sons  "  in 
the  central  sanctuary,  without  affording  a  just  pre- 
text for  Roman  intervention.  But  his  success  was 
short-lived.  He  had  to  deal  with  a  hierocracy 
which  had  no  scruples  about  defending  its  suprem* 
acy  by  intrigue  and  niidnight  assassination;  a  Ro- 
man ^vemor  notorious  for  his  ruthless  harshness 
and  readiness  to  shed  innocent  blood;  and  for  sup- 
port the  broken  reed  of  a  fickle  populace,  ready  at 
a  moment's  notice  to  forsake  the  champion  of  their 
rights  in  the  kingdom  of  God.  The  tragedy  as  re- 
lated by  the  first  witnesses  has  but  a  single  act — 
"  the  night  in  which  he  was  betrayed."  The  scenes 
of  that  night,  the  last  supper  with  its  warning  of 
the  end,  its  pathetic  **  memorial,"  Gethsemane,  the 
arrest,  with  desertion  of  the  twelve,  sequestration 
of  Jesus  till  the  morning  in  the  high  priest's  house, 
Peter's  denial  and  flight,  show  a  vividness  un- 
equaled  elsewhere  in  the  Gospel  story.  All  that 
follows  is  relatively  vague  and  self-contradictory. 
Trial  was  impossible  from  time  conditions  alone. 
It  could  only  prove  self-stultifying  to  the  accusers, 
if  attempted.  Annas  and  his  fellow  conspirators 
were  far  too  shrewd  to  involve  themselves  in  such 
public  responsibility.  They  merely  "  delivered 
over  "  Jesus  to  Pilate  as  a  Messianistic  agitator. 
It  may  well  be  believed  that  Pilate  put  no  faith  in 
the  disinterestedness  of  such  accusers,  and  even 
that  he  hesitated  at  another  judicial  miutier.  But 
he  soon  discovered  that  the  popularity  of  Jesus 
was  less  formidable  than  the  pressure  of  synagogue 
authorities  and  priestly  aristocracy.  Jesus'  con- 
science-stricken disciples  emeiged  from  their  hi- 
ding-places to  hear  the  awful  issue.  On  the  day  be- 
fore the  Passover,  as  the  priests  had  planned  (Mark 
xiv.  2),  Jesus  was  crucified.  The  accusation  was 
written  as  custom  prescribed  upon  his  cross.  He 
died  as  having  aspired  to  the  throne  of  David. 
Friendly  but  unknown  hands  accorded  him  hasty 
burial. 

Such  is  the  career  whose  outline  critical  analysis 
dimly  discerns  beneath  the  tradition  of  the  Chiu%h. 
The  vindication  came,  though  not  as  Jesus  ex- 
pected it.    The  throne  to  which  he  had  not  aspired 
9   Th       ^^  given  him  by  the  love  and  faith 
j^^^*      of  humanity.    There  was  a  "  tiuming 
again  "  when  the  influence  of  Jesus, 
whether  by  the  reaction  of  memories  of  the  past, 
or  in  direct  spiritual  intervention  from  the  unseen 
world,  reawakened  the  faith  of  Simon  Peter,  and 
Christianity  began,   foimded  in  devotion  to  the 
risen  and  glorifi^  Lord.     Benjamin  W.  Bacon. 

Biblioorapht:  The  literature  is  enormous  and  the  foUow- 
iofc  is  no  more  than  a  selection  aiminc  to  direct  to  the  most 
useful  works  from  various  points  of  view.  The  literature 
cited  b  exclusive  of  works  on  the  teaching,  work,  and 
character  of  Jesus,  and  on  special  topics  or  phases  of  his 
life,  trial,  death,  resurrection,  and  ascension.  A  bibliog- 
raphy carrying  all  these  and  other  topics  is:  8.  G. 
Ayres,  Jmu9  Chritt  Our  Lord;  an  Engliih  Bibliography 
of  ChrUtology  eompriaino  over  BflOO  TiUe§  annotatod  and 
danifUd,  New  York,  1906;  cf.  W.  B.  Hill,  A  Guide  to 
Otf  lAvee  of  Chriat  for  Bnolieh  Readere,  New  York.  1905 
(gives  evaluation  of  thirty-six  lives  of  Christ).  Volumes 
which  review  discussions  of  the  life  and  works  of  Christ 
are:  A.  Schweitser,  Von  Reimarue  wu  Wrede,  Bine  Oe- 
eehidUe  dm  Leben^eeu^Forechung,  Strasburg,  1906  (re- 
views the  attempts  up  to  date  to  write  the  life  of  Jesus); 


H.  Jordan,  Jeeue  im  Kampfe  der  Parteien  der  Oeoemoart, 
Stuttgart,  1907;  F.  Spitta,  8trei$fragen  der  OeeehiehU  der 
Jeeu,  06ttingen.  1907;  W.  Sanday,  Lif  of  Chriei  in  Re- 
cent Reeeardi,  New  York.  1907;  H.  Weinel.  Jeeua  im  19. 
Jahrhundert,  Ttkbingen,  1907  (a  review  of  the  work  of  the 
century);  Q.  PfanmOller,  Jeeua  im  Urteil  der  Jahrhun' 
derU,  Leipsic,  1908. 

Possibly  the  earliest  attempt  at  a  systematic  life  was 
that  in  a  series  of  Meditationee  vUae  Chrieti  attributed  to 
Bonaventura,  Eng.  transl.  by  W.  H.  Hutchings,  New 
York,  1881;  a  corresponding  effort  in  English  b  Jeremy 
Taylor's  Great  Exemplar  of  Sanctity  and  Holy  Life,  Lon- 
don, 1649  (devotional).  A  new  period  opened  with  J.  Q. 
von  Herder,  Brldeer  dee  Menechen  and  Von  Oottee  Sohn, 
in  hb  Chriettidte  Sehriften,  Riga,  1794-^8  (the  first  no- 
table works  to  apply  scientific  research).  Stadia  were 
marked  by  H.  E.  O.  Paulus.  Dae  Leben  Jeeu,  Heidelberg, 
1828  (rationalistic);  D.  F.  Strauss.  Dae  Leben  Jeeu,  2 
vob..  Tabingen,  1835-36;  Eng.  transls.,  e.g.,  3  vols., 
London,  1846,  and  Dae  Leben  Jeeu  fUr  doe  deutedie 
Volk,  Leipsic,  1864,  Eng.  transb.,  London,  1879  (advanced 
the  mythical  theory  and  evoked  a  storm  of  protest  and 
a  large  number  of  replies);  A.  Neander,  Dae  Leben  CkrieH, 
(3otha,  1887,  Eng.  transl.,  London,  1846  (one  of  the  ear- 
liest and  best  answers  to  Strauss);  E.  Renan,  Vie  de 
JSeue,  Parb,  1863,  Eng.  transb.,  frequent  eds.,  e.g.,  New 
York,  1904  (more  appreciative  than  Strauss  of  historical 
verities,  but  yet  so  stressed  the  legendary  that  it  evoked 
as  much  opposition  as  Strauss's  work);  T.  Keim,  Oeediiehte 
Jeeu  von  Naeara,  3  vols.,  Zurich,  1867-72,  Eng.  transl., 
6  vob.,  London,  1873,  new  ed.,  1897  (critical,  rationalis- 
tic, yet  to  be  reckoned  with).  It  may  be  servioeiU>le  to 
the  hbtorieal  student  to  know  that  the  Britieh  Museum 
CaUdogue  gives  in  the  entries  under  each  of  these  notable 
works  the  titles  of  replies  or  criticbms  which  they  evoked. 
While  the  works  just  named  in  a  way  mark  stages  in 
the  study,  the  lives  which  follow  are  those  which  are  of 
chief  value  among  the  very  large  number  of  works  on 
the  life  of  Christ;  F.  W.  Farrar,  Life  of  Ckriet;  with 
an  appendix.  2  vols.,  London,  1874  (popular);  C.  Geikie, 
ib.  1876;  E.  De  Pressens^,  London,  1879;  J.  Stalker, 
Edinburgh,  1879;  A.  M.  Fairbaim,  Studiee  in  the  Life 
of  Chriet,  New  York,  1882;  A.  Edersheim,  London,  1883 
(utilises  rabbinic  sources);  S.  J.  Andrews,  New  York, 
1884  (one  of  the  beet  in  English);  B.  Weiss,  2  vob.. 
Berlin,  1884,  Eng.  transl.,  3  vob.,  Edinburgh,  1884;  G. 
Dafanan  and  A.  W.  Streane,  Jeeue  Chriet  in  1^  Tal- 
mud, Midraeh,  Zohar,  and  the  Liturgy  of  the  Syna- 
gogue, texts  and  transl.,  London,  1893;  A.  Robinson, 
A  Study  cf  the  Saviour  in  the  Newer  Light,  London,  IMM 
(critical  but  reverent);  G.  Matheson.  Studiee  in  Ae  Por- 
trait of  Chriet,  2  vols.,  London,  1900  (sympathetic  and 
spiritual):  R.  Rhees,  New  York,  1900  (concise);  O. 
Holtsmann,  Tabingen,  1901,  Eng.  transl..  London,  1904; 
N.  Schmidt,  The  Prophet  of  Nazareth,  New  York,  1905 
(critical,  of  high  value);  D.  Smith,  The  Daye  of  Hie 
Fleeh,  London,  1905  (highly  esteemed);  A.  Whyte,  The 
Walk,  Convereation  and  Character  qf  Jeeue  Chriet,  Our 
Lord,  Edinburgh,  1905  (brilliant  and  original);  W.  Bous- 
set,  Jeeue,  Eng.  transl.,  London,  1906  (a  judicial  con- 
sideration of  the  testimony  of  the  Gospels);  A.  R^ville, 
2  vob.,  Paris,  1906  (critical);  W.  Sanday,  Outlinee  cf 
the  Life  of  Chriet,  2d  ed.,  Edinburgh,  1906.  For  the 
critical  literature  on  the  sources  see  under  Gospblb; 
Paul  the  Apostle;  and  under  the  articles  on  the 
separate  (Sospeb. 

JESUS  CHRIST,  BROTHERS  OF.    See  Jambb, 
I.,  3,  §§  1-2. 

JESUS  CHRIST,  MONOGRAM  OF. 


L  Christ. 

Different  Forms  (|  1). 
Date  of  Origin  (f  2). 


Symbolism  (f  3). 
II.  Jesus. 
III.  Jesus  Chibt. 


"  Monogram  of  Christ "  is  the  term  usually  ap- 
plied to  a  combination  of  the  first  two  letters  of  the 
Greek  word  for  Christ  (XP),  although  it  is  also 
given  to  an  abbreviated  form  of  the  name  Jesus 
as  well  as  to  a  ssmthesis  of  both. 

L  Christ:  The  monogram  for  "Christ"  shows 
two  chief  forms,  the  **  rho  "  being  either  placed 


Jmiu  Christ 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


Ids 


within  the  "  chi "  ( il ),  or  the  latter  being  set 
upright  and  the  former  superimposed  on  that  arm, 
which  thus  becomes  vertical  ( f  ).  Two  additional 
forms  were  given  by  the  reversal  of  the  "  rho  " 
,   _,_ -  (4 ,  t  )i  and  the  addition  of  a  horiaon- 

in  the  first  of  the  main  types  gave  yet 
another  pair  of  monograms  (#,  U),  There  are  a\ao 
a  number  of  less  usual  forms,  as  when  the  Latin 
"  r  "  is  substituted  for  the  Greek  "  rho,"  which 
is  found  in  Syria  (420),  Gaul  (after  the  middle 
of  the  fifth  century),  and  Italy  (chiefly  at  Ravenna 
and  on  a  tombstone  at  Milan). 

The  form  f  is  exclusively  Christian,  although 
it  closely  resembles  the  Egyptian  ankh  (t  )»  the 
symbol  of  life,  which  is  twice  altered  into  the  Chris- 
tian monogram  in  an  inscription  of  the  sixth  cen- 
tury from  the  island  of  Phile,  where  it  marks  the 
transformation  of  a  temple  into  a  church.  The 
monogram  f ,  on  the  other  hand,  is  pre-Christian, 
and  appears  on  Attic  tetradrachms,  on  Ptolemaic 
coins,  and  in  an  inscription  to  Isis  of  13S-137  B.C., 
while  in  Greek  manuscripts  of  the  Christian  period 
it  forms  an  abbreviation  of  various  words. 

It  hafl  long  been  a  problem  whether  the  mono- 
gram for  the  name  of  Christ  was  introduced  by  the 
Emperor  Constantine  or  was  in  use  before  his  time. 
The  inscriptions  with  this  Bjrmbol  to  which  appeal 
has  been  made  in  confirmation  of  the  latter  hypoth- 
esis are  either  spurious  or  extremely  doubtful. 
The  oldest  Roman  epitaphs  of  certain  date  which 
bear  the  monogram  C  are  of  323  and  331,  both 
in  the  reign  of  Constantine,  while  the  earliest  dated 
monimient  from  Gaul  is  in  347.    Yet 

8.  Z^ta     giuoe  ^  monogram  was  made  for  the 

Or^ln.  nain®  Jesus  in  the  second  century,  it 
would  seem  that  the  name  Christ 
underwent  the  same  process,  and  that  Constantine 
adopted  a  form  which  was  already  current.  This 
is  confirmed  by  the  fact  that  f  as  an  abbre- 
viation for  "Christ "  is  found  in  certain  inscriptions 
of  the  third  century.  The  monogram  occurs  with 
great  frequency  in  the  inscriptions  on  Christian 
graves,  sometimes  alone  and  sometimes  with  the 
"  alpha  "  and  "  omega  "  (see  Alpha  and  Omega), 
with  the  fish,  between  two  doves,  between  palm- 
branches,  in  a  garland,  in  a  circle,  and  the 
like.  It  is  found  throughout  the  Greek  and  Ro- 
man worid,  as  well  as  among  the  Copts  and  in 
Germany.  Nor  is  it  confined  to  inscriptions,  but 
occurs  on  funeral  lamps,  gjass  vessels,  sarcophagi, 
wall-paintings,  ornaments,  and  even  on  clothing 
and  other  articles  of  daily  life.  The  two  main  forms 
of  the  monogram  long  existed  side  by  side,  and 
occasionally  occurred  on  the  same  monument,  but 
in  the  fifth  century  f  gradually  yielded  to  f ,  and 
both  finally  gave  place  to  the  simple  cross. 

The  Emperor  Constantine  placed  the  monogram, 
apparently  in  the  form  4,  on  his  standard  and 
helmet,  as  well  as  on  the  shield  of  his  soldiers,  and 
its  use  was  very  frequent  on  the  coins  of  his  suc- 
cessors (except  Julian)  until  Justinian  I.  (d.  565), 
when  it  was  replaced  by  the  cross.  In  the  second 
half  of  the  fourth  century  the  monogram  was  placed 
on  public  buildings,  the  earliest  dated  instance 
being  from  Sion  (Switzerland)  in  377.    It  was  like- 


employed  in  the  churches,  the  oldest  example 
being  a  mosaic  in  the  Church  of  St.  Conatantia  at 
Rome,  where  it  appears  in  a  scroll  in  the  hand  of 
Christ.  In  the  remarkable  church  of  the  Savior 
at  Spoleto,  which  dates  probably  from  the  Meond 
half  of  the  fourth  century,  the  monogram  A  oc- 
curs on  the  great  arch  above  the  altar,  while  the 
^  is  found  on  the  tympanum  of  two  aide-windows 
of  the  fagade.  Other  structures  showing  the  mono- 
gram are  the  temple  on  the  banks  of  the  Clitunmus 
(apparently  transformed  into  a  church  in  the  fifth 
century),  Sta.  Maria  Maggiore  in  Rome  (fifth  cen- 
tury), and  Sta.  Francesca  Romana  in  the  same 
city  (twelfth  or  thirteenth  century). 

In  epitaphs  the  monogram  is  either  uaed  as  a 
simple  abbreviation  of  the  name  Christ,  or,  if 
isolated  grammatically,  denotes  confession  of 
Christ.  In  early  art  it  stands  as  a  symbol  of  Christ, 
as  when  he  is  typified  on  a  sarcophagus  in  the 
Vatican  grottos  by  a  lamb  which  stands  on  a 
moimt  (Rev.  xiv.  1)  and  bears  the  f  on  its  head. 
It  is  likewise  associated  with  the  human  figure  of 
Christ,  a  single  monogram  being  placed  either  above 
his  head  or  in  a  halo,  while  in  other  cases  one  is 
represented  on  each  side  of  his  head. 

8.  Sym-     When  set  between   two   persons  on 

boUsm.  giafls  vessels,  the  monogram  sjnnbol- 
ises  the  presence  of  Christ  in  their 
midst.  Particularly  interesting  is  the  symbolism 
frequently  found  on  sarcophagi  which  represents 
the  monogram  f  in  a  garland  sustained  by  a 
flying  eagle  above  the  cross,  at  the  feet  of  which 
appear  the  guardians  of  the  grave.  Here  the  lower 
portion  typifies  the  crucifixion  and  the  repose  of  the 
tomb,  while  the  upper  part  is  an  emblem  of  the 
resiurection  and  ascension.  The  monogram  appears 
also  as  a  purely  ssrmbolic  figure,  as  when  a  tomb- 
stone of  355  represents  a  man  holding  the  f  in 
his  outstretched  right  hand. 

n.  Jesus:    The  oldest  form  of  the  monogram 
for  the  name  Jesus  is  the  Greek  fH,  which  is  im- 
plied in  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas  ix.,  where  in  the 
318  men  circumdsed  by  Abraham  (a  combination 
of  Gen.  xvii.  23  with  xiv.  14)  is  traced  an  allusion 
both  to  Jesus  (IH)  and  to  the  cross  (T),  the  Greek 
mode  of  writing  318  being  nrr',  an  interpretation 
which  passed  to  the  Latin  Church.    The  employ- 
ment of  this  monogram  in  ancient  Christian  menu-        | 
ments,  however,  is  rare,  although  it  is  found  in  the 
catacomb  of  Priscilla  and  in  the  atrium  of  the  so-        i 
called  Capella  Qrcoca.    In  the  Occident  the  form        | 
IHS  has  been  extremely  wide-spread  since  the  end 
of  the  Middle  Ages,  this  being  due  especially  to  the         I 
sermons  of  Bemardin  of  Sienna,  who  used  to  dis- 
play at  the  close  of  the  addresses  which  he  delivered 
in  various  cities  a  tablet  containing  these  letters 
written  in  gold  and  surrounded  by  the  rays  of  the 
sun.    This  monogram  later  became  the  spedaJ 
emblem  of  the  Jesuits. 

m.  Jesus  Christ:  The  simplest  form  for  the 
combination  of  both  the  divine  names  in  Greek  is 
Xj  consisting  of  the  initials  I  X.  This  mono- 
gram, though  ancient,  is  rare,  but  is  found  on  a 
tombstone  from  Rome  in  268  or  279,  and  on  othera 
from  Gaul  in  491  and  597.  It  likewise  occurs 
between    the    ''  alpha "    and    "  omega "    (bronse 


iM 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


JesQB  Christ 


Isnip  in  the  museum  of  Estense)  and  in  a  circle 
(above  a  throne  in  the  center  of  a  sarcoDhagus  at 
Tuaculum).  The  form  is  occasionally  modified  to 
><,  especially  in  graffiti  of  the  catacomb  of  St. 
CalixtuB,  while  a  Gallic  gravestone  of  498  shows 
the  three fonns  f  ^M  ,  and  *.  The  monogram 
occuiB  also  in  the  mosaics  of  several  churches  of 
Ravenna. 

The  usual  abbreviation  of  the  two  names  in  the 
dldest  manuscripts  of  the  New  Testament  is  ic 
xc,  which  is  also  found  in  the  Neapolitan  cata- 
combe,  while  in  the  Greek  Church  it  was  frequently 
placed  on  the  base  of  the  paten.  It  appeared  on 
the  coins  of  the  Byzantine  emperors  from  John 
Zimiskes  (96^976)  to  the  fall  of  the  dynasty,  and 
was  also  employed  in  Greek  paintings  and  sculp- 
tures, as  well  as  on  the  bromse  doors  of  1070, 
formerly  in  the  chiut^  of  St.  Paul  at  Rome.  Par- 
ticularly noteworthy  is  the  transfer  of  this  mono- 
gram to  the  medieval  Latin  Church.  In  the  ancient 
church  of  St.  P^ter  at  Rome  were  mosaics  of  the 
time  of  Innocent  III.,  which  represented  Christ 
enthroned  between  Peter  and  Paul  with  the  in- 
scription 173  JT^,  while  similar  mosaics  are  still 
preserved  from  the  early  part  of    the  fourteenth 


century  in  the  church  of  Sta.  Maria  Maggiore  at 
Rome.  Italian  easel-pieces  of  the  fourteenth  and 
fifteenth  centuries  likewise  show  this  form  of  the 
monogram.  The  Latin  form  of  the  monogram  for 
Jesus  Christ  was  lus  XBW,  which  occur  in  the 
earliest  Latin  manuscripts  of  the  Bible,  the  first 
two  letters  of  each  part  being  expressly  declared 
to  be  Greek  and  the  last  Latin.  In  the  Occident 
this  form  was  used  from  the  earliest  times  in  in- 
scriptions, sculptures,  and  paintings,  especially  in 
miniatures  of  the  Carolingian  period  and  in  medie- 
val panel-paintings,  while  it  was  placed  on  Bysan- 
tine  coins  from  Basilius  Macedo  (867-886)  to 
Romanus  Diogenes  (1068-71).  (A.  Hauck.) 

Bxbliograpbt:  SpieiUoium  SoUtmenae,  ed.  J.  B.  Pitnt,  iv. 
605  aqq.,  Poria,  1868;  E.  le  Blant,  Iniriptuma  dkrS- 
tiennM  de  la  OauU,  vol.  i.,  paosim.  ib.  1860;  G.  B.  de  Ro«8i« 
inMeripHonea  ehrUHana  tarbU  Roma,  vol.  i  paanm,  Rome, 
1861;  R.  Gamieei,  Storia  ddia  arte  cruHana,  i.  163  aqq., 
Prato.  1881;  F.  X.  Kraua,  Real-Bneuklopddis  dtr  ehri9t- 
lieKen  AUerihUmer,  ii.  126  aqq.,  412  aqq.,  Freibun;,  1886; 
V.  Schultie,  ArdUtologie  der  aUduriatUdten  Kurut.  pp. 
236  sqq..  Munioh.  1896;  DCA,  ii.  1310-14;  C.  M. 
Kaufbnann.  Handbueh  der  ^riaUiehen  Ar^AUogiB,  pp. 
2f>6  sqq..  Paderborn.  1906;  H.  Leol«roq.  Manual  d'ar- 
chMooia  dirHienne,  ii..  383  aqq.,  Paris,  1907;  F.  Gabiol, 
Dietionnairad*ardUoloifie  ohrtflMniM,  i.  178  aqq.,  Pftria.  1903. 


JESUS    CHRIST,    PICTURES    AND    IMAGES    OP. 


I.  The  Oldest  Views  and  DaU  on  the 
External  Appearanoe  of  Jesus. 

Tlie  Apoeiypha  and  Pseudepig- 
rapha(ll). 

The  Church  Fathers  (f  2). 

Other  Data  (f  3). 


L  The  Oldest  Views  and  Data  on  the  External 
Appearance  of  Jesus:  Neither  the  New  Testament 
nor  the  writings  of  the  earlier  post-Biblicd  Chris- 
tian authors  have  any  statements  regarding  the 
personal  appearanoe  of  JtsuB,  thus  contrasting 
sharply  with  the  Apocrypha  and  the  Pseudepig- 
rspha  and  especially  with  the  works  of  the  Gnos- 
tics. In  the  *'  Shepherd  "  of  Hermas  (ix.  6, 12)  the 
lofty  stature  of  the  Son  of  Ood  is  emphasized,  and 
according  to  the  Gospel  of  Peter  he  even  towered 
above  the  heaven  at  his  resurrection.  Gnostic 
influence  is  betrayed  by  visions  in  which  Christ 
appears  as  a  shepherd,  or  the  master  of  a  ship,  or  in 
the  form  of  one  of  his  apostlesj  as  of  Paul  and  of 
Thomas,  or  again  as  a  young  boy.  In  the  Acts  of 
Andrew  and  Matthew  he  assumes  the  figure  of  a 
lad,  and  the  same  form  is  taken  in  the 
!•  The     Acts  of  Peter  and  Andrew,  in  the 

Apocxypba  Acts  of  Matthew,  and  in  the  Ethiopio 

and        Acts  of  James.    Manazara  is  healed 

Pseud-      by  a  youth  in  the  Acts  of  Thomas, 

epigrapha.  and  a  beautiful  lad  appears  to  Peter 
and  Theon  in  the  Actus  VerceUauis, 
which  also  mentions  the  smile  of  friendship  in  the 
face  of  Jesus.  A  handsome  youth  with  smiling 
face  appears  at  the  grave  of  Drusiana  in  the  Acts 
of  John,  but  certain  widows  to  whom  the  Lord 
restored  their  sight  saw  him  as  an  aged  man  of 
indescribable  appearance,  though  others  perceived 
in  him  a  youth,  and  others  still  a  boy.  The 
youthfulness  of  Christ  is  also  mentioned  in 
the  life  and  passion  of  St.  Ciecilius,  and  the  pas- 


2.  Pieturas  of  Jesus  in  Ancient  Art. 
Symbolical  and  Allegorical  Repre- 
sentations (§1). 
Representations    as   Teaeher  and 
Lawgiver  (|  2). 
IV.  Origin  of  the  Pioturss  of  Jesus. 


II.  Literary  DaU  on  the  Oldest  Pio- 
turss of  Jesus. 
III.  Extant  Pioturss  of  Jesus. 
1.  Portraits  Ostensibly  Authentic. 
Portraits   by  Painters,  Soulptois, 

etc  (1 1). 
Alleged  Supernatural  Pioturss  (1 2). 

sion  of  Saints  Perpetua  and  Felidtas  ascribed  to 
the  risen  Christ  the  face  of  a  youth  with  snow- 
white  hair. 

The  eariy  Christian  authors  were  by  no  means 
concordant  in  their  opinions  of  the  personal  appear- 
anoe of  Jesus.  Some,  basing  their  judgment  on 
Isa.  lii.  and  liii.,  denied  him  all  beauty  and  come- 
liness, while  others,  with  reference  to  Ps.  xlv.  3, 
regarded  him  as  the  most  beautiful  of  mankind. 
To  the  former  class  belong  Justin 
2.  The      Martyr,  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Basil, 

Church     Isidor  of  Pelusitun,  Theodoret,  Cyril  of 

FathenL  Alexandria,  Tertullian,  and  Cyprian* 
Origen  declared  that  Christ  assumed 
whatever  form  was  suited  to  circumstances.  It 
was  not  until  the  fourth  century  that  Chiysostom 
and  Jerome  laid  emphasis  upon  the  beauty  of  Jesus. 
While  Isidor  of  Pelusium  had  referred  the  phrase, 
"Thou  art  fairer  than  the  children  of  men"  in 
Ps.  xlv.  2,  to  the  divine  virtue  of  Christ,  Chrysostom 
interpreted  the  lack  of  comeliness  mentioned  in 
Isa.  liii.  2  as  an  allusion  to  the  humiliation  of  the 
Lord.  Jerome  saw  in  the  profound  impression 
produced  by  the  first  sight  of  Jesus  upon  disciples 
and  foes  alike  a  proof  of  heavenly  bcuiuty  in  face 
and  eyes.  From  the  insults  inflicted  upon  Jesus 
Augustine  concluded  that  he  had  appeared  hate- 
ful to  his  persecutors,  while  actually  he  had  been 
more  beautiful  than  all,  since  the  virgins  had  loved 
him. 

The  problem  of  the  external  appearanoe  of  Jesus 
possessed  but  minor  interest  for  the  Church  Fathers, 


Jams  Ohrlst 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOO 


170 


although  the  Catholic  Acts  of  the  Holy  Apostles 
ascribe  to  him  an  olive  complexion,  a  b^utiful 
beard,  and  flashing  eyes.  Further  details  are  first 
found  in  a  letter  to  the  Ehnperor  Theophilus  attrib- 
uted to  John  of  Damascus  (in  MPG,  xcv.  349), 
which  speaks  of  the  brows  which  grew  together, 

the  beautiful  eyes,  the  prominent  nose, 

3  Other     the  curling  hair,  the  look  of  health, 

Data.       the   black   beard,   the  wheat-colored 

complexion,  and  the  long  fingers,  a 
picture  which  almost  coincides  with  a  hand-book 
on  painting  from  Mt.  Athos  not  earlier  than  the 
sixteenth  century.  In  like  numner,  Nicephorus 
Callistus,  who  introduced  his  description  of  the 
picture  of  Christ  (MPO,  cxlv.  748)  with  the  words, 
**  as  we  have  received  it  from  the  ancients,"  was 
impressed  with  the  healthful  appearance,  with 
the  stature,  the  brown  hair  which  was  not  very 
thick  but  somewhat  curling,  the  black  brows 
which  were  not  fully  arched,  the  sea-blue  eyes 
shading  into  brown,  the  beautiful  glance,  the  prom- 
inent nose,  but  brown  beard  of  moderate  length, 
and  the  long  hair  which  had  not  been  cut  since 
childhood,  the  neck  slightly  bent,  and  the  olive  and 
somewhat  ruddy  complexion  of  the  oval  face.  A 
slight  divergence  from  both  these  accounts  is  shown 
by  the  so-called  letter  of  Lentulus,  the  ostensible 
predecessor  of  Pontius  Pilate,  who  is  said  to  have 
prepared  a  report  to  the  Roman  Senate  concerning 
Jesus  and  containing  a  description  of  him.  Accord- 
ing to  this  document  Christ  possessed  a  tall  and 
himdsome  figure,  a  coimtenanoe  which  inspired 
reverence  and  awakened  love  and  fear  together, 
dark,  shining,  curling  hair,  parted  in  the  center  in 
Nasarene  fashion  and  flowing  over  the  shoulders, 
an  open  and  serene  forehead,  a  face  without  wrinkle 
or  blemish  and  rendered  more  beautiful  by  its 
delicate  ruddiness,  a  perfect  nose  and  mouth,  a  full 
red  beard  of  the  same  color  as  the  hair  and  worn 
in  two  points,  and  piercing  eyes  of  a  grayish-blue. 
The  unauthentic  character  of  this  letter  is  admitted 
by  all. 

n.  Literary  Data  on  the  Oldest  Pictures  of  Jesos: 
(1)  A  handkerchief  embroidered  with  the  figures 
of  Jesus  and  his  Apostles,  and  m.ide,  according  to 
legend,  by  his  mother,  is  said  to  have  been  seen  by 
the  monk  Arculfus  during  his  residence  in  Jerusa- 
lem (Adamnan,  De  locis  Sanctis,  i.  11  [12]).  (2)  In 
his  acoiDunt  of  his  visit  to  Csesarea  Philippi,  Eusebius 
mentions  {Hist,  ecd.  vii.  18)  a  group  of  statuary  in 
brass  which  consisted  of  a  kneeling  woman  and  a 
man  standing  with  his  hands  stretched  out  toward 
her.  Local  tradition  saw  in  this  a  figure  of  Jesus 
and  the  woman  healed  of  an  issue  of  blood,  who 
was  said  to  have  come  from  Csesarea  Philippi. 
This  legend  was  accepted  by  Eusebius,  Asterius 
Amasenus,  Photius,  Sozomen,  Philostorgius,  and 
Macarius  Magnes,  the  last-named  calling  the  woman 
Beronike.  The  actual  meaning  of  the  group  is 
uncertain.  Some  have  seen  in  it  an  emperor  and  a 
province,  possibly  Hadrian  and  Judea,  while  others 
have  regarded  it  as  iEsculapius  and  Hygeia,  a  view 
which  is  vitiated  by  the  fact  that  no  mention  is 
made  of  the  serpent-staff  characteristic  of  statues 
of  the  god  of  healing.  It  is  entirely  possible  that 
the  group  actually  represented  Christ  and  either 


the  woman  with  an  issue  of  blood  or  possibly  the 
woman  of  Canaan  who  implored  him  to  heal 
her  daughter.  (3)  According  to  Irensus  (H^., 
I.,  XXV.  6),  pictures  of  Christ  were  possessed  bv  the 
Gnostic  sect  of  Carpocratians,  who  crowned  them 
with  garlands  like  the  pictures  of  philosophers— 
Pythagoras,  Plato,  Aristotle,  and  others — ^while, 
accordhig  to  the  Carpocratians,  Pilate  had  a 
portrait  of  Jesus  painted  during  his  lifetime,  and 
the  Carpocratian  BiarcelUna  possessed  a  picture  of 
Christ  which  she  honored,  like  those  of  Paul,  Homer, 
and  Pythagoras,  with  prayer  and  incense.  (4) 
The  Emperor  Alexander  Severus  had  a  picture  of 
Jesus;  it  must  have  been,  however,  only  an  ideal 
portrait,  like  those  of  Apollonius,  Abraham,  Or- 
pheus, and  others,  which  were  also  included  in  his 
larariimi  (Lampridlus,  Vita  Alex,  Sev.  xxiz.). 
(5)  A  brass  statue  of  the  Savior  was  erected  by 
Constantine  the  Great  before  the  main  door  of  the 
imperial  palace  of  Chalce  (Theophanes  in  MPG, 
cviii.  817).  (6)  A  picture  of  Jesus  "  painted  from 
life  "  was  possessed  by  the  Archduchess  Margaret 
which  may  be  the  same  one  as  DQrer's  altar-piece 
of  St.  Luke  at  Brussels  (M.  Thausing,  Durer, 
p.  420,  Leipsic,  1876). 

While  the  portraits  just  mentioned  were  prepared 
by  human  agency,  there  were  others  to  which  a 
supernatural  origin  was  ascribed.  To  this  cate- 
gory belong  (7)  a  picture  at  Camulium  in  Cappa- 
docia,  apparently  on  cloth  and  perhaps  a  copy  of 
that  of  Edessa  (see  below).  It  was  mentioned  at 
the  second  Nicene  Coimcil  and  was  carried  to  Con- 
stantinople by  Justin  II.,  where  it  was  regarded  as 
so  sacred  that  a  special  festival  was  instituted  in  its 
honor,  and  it  was  frequently  carried  in  war  as  a 
potent  icon  (/.  Gretsei  opera,  xv.  196-197,  Re- 
gensburg,  1741).  (8)  In  the  war  against  the  Per- 
sians the  General  Philippicus  had  a  picture  of  Christ 
which  the  Romans  believed  to  be  supernatural  in 
origin,  and  the  same  portrait  served  to  quell  a 
mutiny  in  the  army  of  Priscus,  the  successor  of 
Philippicus.  This  icon  was  apparently  on  cloth, 
and  was  a  copy  of  an  original  which  was  frequently 
confounded  with  a  portrait  in  Amida,  although  the 
latter  is  expressly  said  to  have  been  painted,  and 
was,  consequently,  natural  in  provenience  (Zach- 
arias,  MPGf  Ixxxv.  1159).  (9)  A  Syriac  fragment 
mentions  a  picture  of  Jesus  painted  on  linen  and 
found  unwet  in  a  spring  by  a  certain  Hypatia 
shortly  after  the  Passion.  This  portrait  left  a 
miraculous  imprint  on  the  napkin  in  which  it  was 
wrapped,  and  one  of  these  pictures  found  its  way 
to  Ca3sarea  while  the  other  was  taken  to  Cornelia 
(possibly  identical  with  the  city  of  Camulium  al- 
ready mentioned),  although  a  copy  was  later  found 
at  Dibudin  (7)  (Lipsius,  Die  edesseniache  Ahgarsage, 
p.  67,  n.  1,  Brunswick,  1880).  (10)  About  570 alinen 
mantle  was  shown  at  a  church  in  Memphis  which 
bore  the  impress  of  the  Savior's  face  and  was  so 
bright  that  none  could  gaze  at  it  (Antoninus  Martyr, 
De  locis  Sanctis,  xli v. ).  (11)  Byzantine  literature  fre- 
quently mentions  pictures  of  Christ  impressed  on 
bricks.  According  to  a  legend  which  presents  sev- 
eral slight  variations,  the  portrait  of  himself  which 
Jesus  had  sent  to  Abgar  at  Edessa  was  believed  to 
have  been  walled  up  to  save  it  from  the  attack  of 


171 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


JesoB  Ohxist 


King  Ananun  and  to  have  been  rediscovered  in 
539  together  with  a  brick  which  bore  a  miraculous 
copy  of  the  original  (Georgius  Cedrenus,  ed.  Bekker, 
i-  312,  and  others).  (12)  The  patriarch  Germanus, 
when  forced  to  leave  Constantinople,  is  said  to  have 
taken  ^th  him  a  picture  of  Christ  which  later  came 
into  the  possession  of  Gregory  II.  (G.  Marangoni, 
/Maria  diw  oratorio  di  San  Lorenzo,  pp.  78  sqq., 
Rome,  1747).  (13)  The  cloth  with  a  picture  of 
Christ  presented  by  Photius  to  the  hermit  Paul  at 
Latro  in  the  ninth  century  was  merely  a  copy  of  a 
miraculous  original,  although  only  he  to  whom  the 
gift  wajs  made  was  able  to  perceive  the  portrait, 
others  seeiog  only  the  doth  (Gretses,  ut  sup.  p,  186). 
(14)  More  important  than  all  other  statements  con- 
cerning the  oldest  pictures  of  Christ  is  a  passage  of 
Augustine  (De  trin,  viii.  4),  stating  that  the  por- 
traits of  Jesus  were  innumerable  in  concept  and 


in.  Extant  Pictures  of  Jesus.     1.  Portraits  Oa- 
tenaibly  Authentio:    (1)  The  paintings  of  Luke,  of 
which  the  best  known  are  two  at  Rome.    One  of 
these  is  in  the  chapel  Sanctus  Sanctorum,  although 
the  statement  that  Luke  painted  a  portrait  of  Jesus 
dates  only  from  medieval  times,  the 
1.  Portraits  monk  Michael,  the  biographer  of  Theo- 
Ixy  Paint-   dore  of  Studium,  being  one  of  the  ear- 
era,  Scnlp-  liest  sources.    In  the  Isat  quarter  of  the 
tors*  etc     twelfth  century  the  legend  of  Luke  was 
interwoven  by  Wemher  of  Niederrhein 
with  the  tradition  of  Veronica  (see  below).    Luke, 
in  answer  to  Veronica's  entreaties,  is  said  to  have 
made  repeated  attempts  to  portray  Christ,  but  his 
endeavors  were  imsuccessful.    Jesus  then  impressed 
the  image  of  his  face  upon  the  handkerchief  of 
Veronica.    Another  picture  ascribed  to  Luke  and 
painted  on  cloth  is  in  the  Vatican  library,  while 
a    third    is   said    to    have   been  placed   in   the 
cathedral  of    Tlvoli  by  Pope  Simplicius.     Other 
pictures  are  likewise  ascribed  to  a  similar  prove- 
nience, and  very  late   traditions    even    attribute 
statues  of  Christ  to  the  chisel  of  Luke.    [In  the 
chiirch   of   San  Miniato   at    Monto,  in    the    en- 
virons of    Florence,  Italy,  is    shown    a    portrait 
of  Christ,  attributed  to  Luke.]     (2)  To  Nicode- 
mus  is  ascribed  a  statue  of  the  crucified  Christ 
carved  in  black  cedar  and  preserved  in  the  Ca- 
thedral of  Lucca.    Its  design  shows  that  it  dates 
at  the  earliest  from  the  eighth  century,  although 
tradition  states  that  the  model  of  Nicodemus  was 
furnished  by  the  impress  of  the  Savior's  body  on 
the  linen  cloths  purchased  to  cover  the  corpse  at 
the  descent  from  the  cross.     (3)  A*"  true  and  only 
portrait  of  oiur  Savior  taken    from  an    engraved 
emerald  which  Pope  Innocent  VIII.  received  from 
Sultan  Bajazted  II.  for  the  ransom  of  his  brother, 
who  was  a  captive  of  the  Christians,"  frequently 
reproduced  in  photograph,  is  in  reality  the  copy  of 
a  medal  which  may  have  been  cut  at  the  command 
of  Mohammed  II.,  and  which  is,  at  all  events,  of 
comparatively  modem  date.     (4)  The  mosaic  in 
the  Church  of  St.  Praxedis  in  Rome,  which  is  ex- 
hibited on  festal  occasions,  is  by  no  means  one  of  the 
earliest  Christian  mosaics,  although  tradition  re- 
gards it  as  a  present  to  Pudens  from  the  Apostle 
Peter. 


Alleged  supernatural  pictures  may  be  divided 
into  those  which  represent  the  entire  figure  of  Jesus, 
and  those  which  give  only  his  face.  (1)  Cloths  of 
medieval  date  containing  more  or  less  dear  outlines 
of  the  figure  of  a  man,  all  claiming  to  be  the  ''  nap- 
kin "  in  which  Jesus  was  wrapped  in  the  grave  and 
on  which  his  image  was  impressed, 
2.  Alleffod  ^g|^  formeriy  found  in  Chamb^ry, 
^^JJ^J*]"  and,  until  the  end  of  the  eighteenth 
tares.  oei^tury,  in  Besangon,  while  they  still 
exist  at  Compidgne  and  Turin,  the  lat- 
ter "  napkin  "  being  declared  authentic  by  a  bull 
of  Sixtus  IV.  Far  more  famous,  however,  are  the 
cloths  which  bear  only  the  impress  of  a  head  or  face 
and  of  these  one  of  the  best  known  is  (2)  the  picture 
of  Edessa,  or  the  Abgar  pictme.  According  to  the 
Doctrine  of  Addai  and  Moses  of  Choren,  Hanan,  the 
envoy  of  the  king  of  Edessa,  painted  a  portrait  of 
Jesus  and  took  it  to  his  royal  master.  Evagrius, 
on  the  authority  of  Procopius,  states  that  Christ 
sent  to  the  king  a  picture  of  miraculous  origin. 
The  legend  apparently  arose  about  350,  and  may 
well  have  been  based  on  an  actual  painting  which 
remained  at  Edessa  till  944,  when  it  was  brought 
to  Constantinople  by  the  Emperor  Romanus  I.  Its 
subsequent  fortunes  are  uncertain,  although  various 
cities  laid  claim  to  its  possession,  especially  Genoa, 
Rome,  and  Paris,  the  first-named  city  advancing 
the  most  probable  arguments  for  authenticity  and 
receiving  the  confirmation  of  Pius  IX.  (see  Abgar). 
This  picture  shows  only  the  head  of  Jesus,  but 
legend  also  knows  a  full-length  Edessene  portrait 
on  linen  produced  by  contact  with  the  body  of 
Christ.  It  is  mentioned  by  Grervase  of  Tilbury  in 
the  begiiming  of  the  thirteenth  century,  who  bases 
his  statement  on  ancient  sources  and  says  that  it 
was  exhibited  on  festivals  in  the  chief  church  of 
Edessa,  and  that  on  Easter  it  shows  Jesus  succes- 
sively as  a  child,  boy,  youth,  young  man,  and  in  the 
ripeness  of  years.  (3)  One  of  the  choicest  treasures 
of  the  Roman  Church  is  the  handkerchief  of  Ve- 
ronica, which  is  shown  only  on  special  occasions, 
particularly  in  Passion  Week.  This  portrait  is 
said  to  have  been  transferred  in  1297  by  Boniface 
VIII.  fit>m  the  Hospital  of  the  Holy  Ghost  to  St. 
Peter's  in  Rome,  where  it  reposes  behind  the  statue 
of  St.  Veronica.  The  picture,  which  is  now  much 
faded,  shows  an  elliptical  face  with  a  low-arched 
forehead,  in  marked  contrast  with  the  long  nose. 
The  mouth  is  slightly  open,  and  the  scanty  hair  is 
visible  only  on  the  temples.  The  beard  on  the 
cheeks  is  thin,  but  is  stronger  on  the  chin,  where  it 
ends  in  three  points,  while  the  mustache  is  more 
conspicuous  for  color  than  for  strength.  The 
eyes,  arched  by  scanty  brows,  are  closed,  and, 
combined  with  features  distorted  by  agony  and 
stained  with  blood,  complete  the  picture  of  a 
martyr  pale  in  death.  From  the  point  of  view  of 
esthetics  and  the  history  of  art,  the  picture  is 
probably  Byzantine.  Although  one  would  expect 
the  picture  of  Veronica  to  be  regarded  as  the  napkin 
which  covered  the  head  of  Christ,  there  is  no  tra- 
dition as  to  its  origin,  although  a  mass  of  medieval 
legends  connects  it  with  the  name  of  a  woman. 
These  may  be  divided  into  two  classes.  In  the  older 
group,  apparently  written  shortly  before  the  ninth 


JesnaOhxtit 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


172 


century,  Veronica  appears  as  the  woman  afflicted 
with  an  issue  of  blood,  who  had  a  portrait  of  Jesus 
either  painted  by  herself  or  at  her  bidding,  or  else 
impressed  by  Christ  himself  upon  a  piece  of  cloth. 
The  second  form  of  the  legend  sprang  up  in  France 
and  Germany  in  the  course  of  the  fourteenth  cen- 
tury and  superseded  the  older  version  before  1500. 
According  to  this  tradition,  Veronica  gave  the 
Savior  a  handkerchief  on  his  way  to  Golgotha,  and 
received  it  back  impressed  with  his  features. 
Further  amplifications  of  the  tradition  stated  that 
the  napkin  was  brought  to  Rome  by  John  VII.,  or 
even  during  the  reign  of  Tiberius,  while  it  is  certain 
that  Celestine  III.  prepared  a  reliquary  for  it.  At 
all  events,  what  is  clear  is  that  during  the  medieval 
period  Rome  possessed  a  cloth  picture  of  Christ, 
which  was  apparently  supposed  to  be  the  miracu- 
lous impress  of  the  head  of  Jesus  in  the  sepulcher. 
It  is  significant,  moreover,  that  it  bore  the  name 
mdarium  before  the  rise  of  the  legend  of  the  hand- 
kerchief given  Christ  to  wipe  his  face  on  his  way  to 
the  cross,  nor  was  it  until  the  twelfth  century  that 
the  name  of  Veronica  even  began  to  form  a  part  of 
the  tradition,  a  connection  suggested  by  a  popular 
etymology  of  Veronica  as  Vera  eliun>  ("true 
image  ")•  This  legend  of  Veronica  gave  rise  to  a 
tendency  of  art  which  reached  its  culmination  in 
DUrer,  who  represented  the  napkin  of  Veronica  and 
the  Savior  with  a  crown  of  thorns,  combining  the 
suffering  in  the  face  of  Jesus  with  the  loftiness  and 
the  majesty  of  the  Son  of  God.  (4)  The  picture  of 
Christ  in  the  apse  of  St.  John  Lateran  at  Rome  is 
supposed  to  have  been  miraculously  produced  when 
the  church  was  dedicated  by  Pope  Sylvester,  al- 
though it  is  in  reality  a  mosaic  of  recent  date. 

2.  Piotares  of  Jeans  in  Ancient  Art :  In  the  course 
of  time  pictorial  representations  of  Jesus  became 
either  real  or  symbolical  and  allegorical,  the  latter 
tendency  gradually  giving  way  to  the  former.  To 
the  category  of  symbols  belong  the  fish,  the  lamb, 
the  various  monograms  of  Christ,  and  the  Good 
Shepherd,  the  last-named  leading  to  representations 
of  Jesus  in  human  form.  As  eariy  as  Tertullian  the 
Good  Shepherd  adorned  chalices, 
^•,-*T™^^'  a^d  it  was  a  favorite  form  of  decora- 
tion  in    the    catacombs,  where    the 


ioaland 
Allefforioal 


Bepresen-  ^S^^  usually  carries  a  goat  or  a 
tationa.  aether.  In  these  pictures,  often 
adorned  with  other  animals,  trees, 
and  shrubs,  and  based  on  Luke  xv.  5;  John  x.; 
and  Ps.  xxiii.,  the  Christ  appears  only  in  youth- 
ful guise,  although  the  Shepherd  is  usually  clad  in 
garments  of  a  higher  rank  and  wears  the  Roman 
timic  and  the  pallium  as  well  as  sandals.  The 
figure,  moreover,  is  Latin  instead  of  Oriental  in 
type,  and  represents  a  youthful  and  beardless, 
sometimes  even  boyish,  figure,  a  round  head  with 
curling  hair,  and  a  frank  face  with  regular  features. 
This  type  of  picture,  purely  ideal  as  it  was,  under- 
went evolution  in  the  course  of  time.  In  the  third 
century  the  face  grew  more  oval,  while  the  unparted 
hair  grew  slightly  over  the  forehead  in  the  center 
and  flowed  on  the  sides  in  wavy  or  curly  locks. 

The  first  real  impulse,  however,  to  artistic  rep- 
resentations of  Jesus  was  given  by  his  miracles, 
though  the  risen  Lord  as  a  teacher  and  a  lawgiver 


became  more  and  more  a  subject  for  pictorial 
representation.  In  the  midst  of  idl  or  a  part  of  lus 
disciples,  including  Paul,  Christ  appears  either  on  a 
plain,  as  in  Spain  and  southern  France,  or  standing 
on  a  mountain  either  within  or  without  the  four 
rivers  of  Eden,  or  sitting  on  a  throne 
2.  Bapre-  ^^j^  jjjg  f^et  on  a  footstool  or  on  the 
■•J****^"*  clouds,  while  mosaics  represent  him 
and  Law-  ^  seated  on  the  celestial  g^obe.  As 
giver.  '  ^  teacher,  he  is  depicted  as  speaking 
and  as  holding  a  book  or  scroll  either 
in  his  hand  or  on  his  bosom,  while  as  a  lawgiver 
he  proffers  the  Gospel  to  Peter  or  Paul.  In 
both  of  these  latter  categories,  the  beardless, 
youthful  type  gradually  grows  less  frequent,  so 
that  on  Roman,  Upper  Italian,  and  French  sarcoph- 
agi the  central  Christ  appears  bearded,  although 
in  the  reliefs  on  their  sides  he  wears  no  beard,  the 
former  representing  the  risen  Lord  and  the  latter 
the  earthly  Savior.  Originally  a  characteristic  of 
the  ascended  Christ,  the  beard  was  attributed  to 
Jesus  during  his  earthly  ministry  after  the  end  of 
the  fourth  or  the  beginning  of  the  fifth  century. 
The  struggle  between  the  two  types  is  seen  in  the 
mosaics  of  Sant'Apollinare  Nuovo  at  Haveima  and 
of  St.  Michael,  but  the  earliest  specimen  of  the 
bearded  Christ  is  generally  believed  to  be  the  so- 
called  Callistinian  mosaic  which  was  found  in  the 
catacomb  of  St.  Domitilla.  In  conformity  with 
the  manhood  implied  by  the  beard,  the  body  in- 
creased in  height  and  breadth,  while  the  features 
became  more  sharply  defined  as  the  bones  gained 
in  accentuation  over  the  flesh.  The  nose  became 
longer  and  more  prominent,  and  the  eyes  were 
deeper  and  their  pupils  enlarged,  while  the  angles 
of  the  nose  and  mouth  were  more  sharply  outlined. 
The  hair,  while  frequently  less  curling  than  hitherto, 
was  now  represented  as  falling  to  the  neck  and 
shoulders,  and  was  often  parted  in  the  middle. 
The  color  both  of  the  hair  and  of  the  beard  varied 
through  all  shades  from  yellow  to  gray  and  black. 
The  upper  lip  was  never  clean-ehaven,  and  the  beard 
was  sometimes  dose  and  sometimes  either  pointed 
or  rounded,  the  parted  type  being  found  only  in 
rudimentary  form  in  early  Christian  art. 

The  bearded  Christ  represents  the  climax  of  the 
art  of  early  Christianity,  and  the  fifth  century 
ushered  in  a  period  of  decay  marked  by  all  manner 
of  exaggeration.  Majesty  became  stiffness,  ex- 
altation unapproachability,  and  earnestness  gloom. 
Thus  the  Christ  of  Saints  Cosmas  and  Damian 
(q.v.)  in  Rome,  dating  from  the  sixth  cent\iry,  is 
a  figure  with  long  face,  projecting  cheek  bones, 
ashen  complexion,  attenuated  nose,  mane-like  hair, 
and  scanty  beard. 

It  was  the  task  of  the  Middle  Ages  to  reduce  the 
multiplicity  of  concepts  of  the  likeness  of  Christ 
to  unity,  a  task  which  required  centuries  for  its 
completion.  The  Carolingian  period  saw  a  sort  of 
fruitless  recrudescence  of  the  process  of  evolution 
of  the  eariy  Christian  period.  Even  during  the 
Renaissance  the  beardless  type  struggled  for  su- 
premacy with  the  bearded,  especially  in  miniatures 
and  ivories,  but  the  former  steadily  lost  ground, 
so  that  its  last  sporadic  occurrence  is  a  Scandi- 
navian Christ  in  glory  of  the  thirteenth  century, 


173 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jesna  Ohrist 


such  pictures  as  the  Pieth  of  Botticelli  at  Munich 
being  mere  anachronisms. 

IV.  Origia  of  the  Pictures  of  Jesus:  While  the 
theory  may  be  advanced  that  the  oldest  pictures  of 
Christ  were  based  either  on  works  of  art  still  more 
ancient  or  on  tradition,  it  is  practically  certain  that 
they  axe  not  real  portraits  but  ideal  representations. 
This  is  dear  both  from  their  extreme  diversity  and 
from  the  words  of  Augtistine:  "  What  his  appear- 
ance was  we  know  not."  The  most  primitive  type, 
wherein  early  Christian  and  Gnostic  documents 
agree,  is  that  of  a  boy  or  youth.  The  youthful 
vigor  of  the  early  Church  in  religious  and  in  moral 
thought,  sustained  by  the  belief  in  the  second 
coming  of  the  Lord  and  strengthened  by  persecu- 
tion, inspired  the  artist  to  depict  the  Christ  as  the 
incarnation  of  \mdying  youth,  even  as  Noah,  Job, 
Abraham,  and  Moses  were  represented  as  beard- 
less boys.  Herein,  too,  lay  the  genesLs  of  the  con- 
cept of  the  Good  Shepherd. 

YfWh  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries  the  bearded 
type  was  evolved  side  by  side  with  the  beardless. 
The  explanation  of  this  change  lies  in  the  perfection, 
strength,  and  manliness  implied  by  the  beard. 
The  parted  hair,  on  the  other  hand,  which  is  charac- 
teristic of  the  pictures  of  Christ  in  this  period,  espe- 
cially in  the  mosaics,  typifies  his  earthly  lineage 
and  designates  him  as  one  of  the  children  of  Israel, 
since  of  human  beings  only  Jews  and  Judeo-Chris- 
tians  are  represented  with  parted  hair  in  early 
Christian  art.  The  theory,  advanced  by  many 
scholars,  that  Greek  religious  art  influenced  the 
various  eariy  Christian  concepts  of  the  personal 
appearance  of  Christ  seems  to  lack  sufficient  evi- 
dence to  be  in  any  wise  conclusive. 

(NiKOLAns  MOllbb.) 

Biblioorafht:  W.  Bayliss.  Rex  regum.  A  PainUr^M  Study 
of  the  Likeneaa  of  Chriet  from  the  Time  cf  the  Apoetlee, 
London,  1903;  A.  N.  Didron.  Iconographie  dtriHenne, 
HiMtaire  de  Dieu,  Pari«.  1843;  W.  Orimm.  Die  Sage  vom 
Ureprung  der  Chrietuelnlder,  pp.  121-176,  Berlin,  lg44; 
Mn.  Jameson,  Hietory  of  our  Lord  ae  BxempUfied  in  Worke 
cf  Art,  2  vols.,  London,  1872;  A  Hauok,  Die  BfiMthung 
dee  Ckrietuetypvm  in  der  abendldndiedten  JCuntf,  Hetdel- 
beis.  1880;  T.  Heftphy.  Likeneee  of  Chriet,  New  York, 
1886  (iUuatrations  valuable);  H.  M.  A.  Ouerber,  Legende 
of  the  Virgin  and  Ckriat,  trith  Special  Reference  to  .  ,  . 
Art,  ib.  1896;  E.  M.  Hurll.  Life  of  Our  Lord  in  Art,  Bob- 
'on,  1898  (raluable);  E.  von  Dobachats,  ChrittuebUder, 
Leipeic  1899;  F.  W.  Farrar,  Life  of  Chriei  as  Repreeented 
in  ArU  London,  1900;  J.  L.  French,  Ckriet  in  Art,  Boe- 
ton,  1900;  F.  Johnson,  Have  We  the  Likenme  ^  Ckrtti, 
Chieaso,  1903;  J.  Burns,  The  Chriet  Face  in  Art,  New 
York,  1907;  J.  S.  Weis-Liebersdorf,  Chrietue-  und  Apoe- 
teUriider,  Freiburg,  1902:  J.  Reil.  Die  frUhchrieUiehen  Dor- 
ateOungender  Kreueigung  Chrieti,  Leipsic,  1904;  K.M.  Kauf- 
mann,  Handbuch  der  chrieUichen  ArdMologie,  Paderbom, 
1906;  G.  A.  MflUer,  Die  lieUiehe  OeetaU  Jeeu  Chriet,  nach 
der  eArif&iehenund  monumentalen  UrtradiUon,  Styria,  1909. 

JESUS  CHRIST,  THREEFOLD  OFFICE  OF:  A 

phrase  connoting  the  functions  of  Christ  as  prophet, 
priest,  and  king.  From  the  earliest  times  Jesus  has 
been  recognized  as  the  representative  of  a  twofold 
and  yet  unitary  theocratic  function,  as  king  and 
priest.  The  spiritual  kingdom  of  the  Messiah  has 
its  foundation  in  the  sacrifice  of  his  life  (Matt.  xvi. 
16-25,  zx.  25-28).  This  thought  may  be  traced 
from  the  second  century  to  the  time  of  the  Refor- 
mation. But  as  early  as  Eusebius  a  threefold  office 
is  ascribed  to  Christ,  that  of  prophet,  priest,  and 


king,  and  this  is  traceable  to  Jewish  sources.  The 
view  of  a  threefold  office,  however,  did  not  suppress 
the  tradition  of  a  twofold  office,  although  the  three 
designations  of  Christ  were  always  used 
Historical  separately.  Among  the  medieval  theo- 
Snrvey.  logians,  Thomas  Aquinas  approaches 
closely  the  conception  of  Eusebius  since 
he  speaks  of  leguiatcr,  8acerdo9,  and  rex,  but  with 
him  this  is  merely  a  mechanical  division,  and  Thomas 
makes  no  further  use  of  the  threefold  scheme.  The 
Evangelical  doctrine  followed  in  the  beginning  the 
tradition  of  a  twofold  office  (cf .  the  works  of  Luther 
and  the  older  Evangelical  catechisms).  Calvin  added 
the  prophetic  office  as  a  third  function,  and  his 
conception  of  the  doctrine  of  Christ's  work  be- 
came the  basis  for  its  treatment  in  Reformed  theol- 
ogy and  soon  also  in  Lutheran  theology.  As  prophet 
the  Messiah  brings  the  full  light  of  intelligence  and 
thus  become  the  fulness  and  consummation  of  all 
revelations.  As  king  of  a  spiritual  and  eternal  king- 
dom he  not  only  brings  his  people  external  and 
passing  aid,  but  equips  them  especially  with  the 
gifts  for  eternal  life  and  guards  them  against  their 
enemies.  As  priest  (Christ  secures  to  his  people  by 
his  atonement  and  vicarious  suffering  the  blessing 
that  God  deals  with  them  not  as  judge,  but  as  gra- 
cious father.  In  accordance  with  these  principles 
Calvin  emphasized  the  truth  that  communion  with 
God  is  found  in  Christ's  living  personality  and  in 
life  communion  with  that  personality.  In  the  Hei- 
delberg Catechism  (Questions  31  and  32)  the  thought 
of  Calvin  received  a  finished  form  and  found  a  large 
circulation.  The  orthodox  followers  of  Calvin,  how- 
ever, attempted  both  to  explain  the  full  content  of 
the  Messianic  person  from  three  points  of  view,  and 
to  analyze  the  act  of  salvation  in  its  historical  de- 
velopment according  to  the  threefold  scheme,  thus 
not  easily  escaping  the  mistaken  assumption  that 
Christ  had  become  first  prophet,  then  priest,  and 
finally  king.  It  became  the  custom  to  deprive 
Christ  of  hk  royal  function  in  the  state  of  humilia- 
tion and  of  the  prophetical  function  in  the  state 
of  exaltation.  Against  this  mechanical  tendency, 
Cocceius  opened  new  and  fruitful  points  of  view  by 
returning  to  the  living  material  of  the  Bible.  The 
usual  Older  of  the  offices  of  Christ  seemed  to  him 
justified  in  so  far  as  the  dignity  of  Christ  rose  in 
the  growing  mind  of  the  people,  from  the  state  of  a 
prophet  to  that  of  a  king.  But  in  reality,  he  states, 
Christ's  priesthood  must  be  put  in  the  first  place, 
since  even  before  time  he  mediated  between  his 
Father  and  the  people;  then  follow  the  royal  and 
prophetic  offices.  The  first  office  is  that  through 
which  Christ  acquires  his  people;  the  second  tluit 
through  which  he  keeps  them;  and  the  third  that 
through  which  he  leads  them  to  the  knowledge  and 
love  of  the  king.  This  double  consideration  would 
have  resulted  in  an  organic  and  simultaneous  union 
of  the  offices  in  the  living  personality,  even  if  Coc- 
ceius had  not  expressly  added  that  the  entire  media- 
torial act  lasted  until  the  end  of  days. 

The  Roman  catechism  also  teaches  the  threefold 
office  of  Christ.  In  Lutheran  theology  the  doctrine 
was  adopted  only  at  a  late  period.  Melanchthon 
had  not  left  to  the  school  of  tl^logy  which  followed 
him  a  uniform  system  as  Calvin  had  left  for  Re- 


Jesua  Ohriat 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


174 


formed  orthodoxy.  The  interest  in  the  individual 
reception  of  justification  drew  attention  from  an  all- 
sided  objective  observation  of  Christ  and  his 
gifts.  There  was  even  a  tendency  to 
In  Lu-  reduce  the  twofold  office  of  Christ  to  a 
theran  single  function.  According  to  Me- 
Theology.  lanchthon  and  Hesshusen,  Christ  is  be- 
fore everything  priest;  even  as  king  he 
exercises  essentially  priestly  functions.  Selnecker 
seems  to  have  been  the  first  who  used  the  formula 
of  a  threefold  office,  but  his  exposition  is  governed 
also  by  the  priesthood  of  Christ,  to  which  tlie  two 
other  offices  are  related  like  introduction  and  con- 
clusion. Others  again,  like  Gerhard,  tried  to  iden- 
tify the  priestly  and  prophetical  offices.  Hemming 
and  Nicolaus  Hunnius  taught  that  the  office  of  the 
king  was  supreme  and  that  it  comprehended  the 
other  two  functions.  Everywhere  the  same  con- 
centration upon  one  point  is  foimd.  In  the  mean 
time,  however,  Hafenreffer  and  especially  Gerhard 
had  directed  their  attention  to  the  idea  of  a  three- 
fold office  as  advocated  by  Eusebius  and  Calvin. 
Gerhard  not  only  used  the  new  expression,  but 
tried  to  prove  that  only  the  sum  of  the  three  offices 
offers  the  fulness  of  Christ's  benevolent  gifts.  In 
the  regnum  potentiae  he  found  a  specific  function 
for  the  royal  office.  Since  the  middle  of  the  seven- 
teenth century,  after  the  old  Melanchthonian  scheme 
of  dogmatics  had  been  replaced  by  an  objective 
and  historical  arrangement  of  the  material,  there 
was  room  for  a  coherent  representation  of  the  work 
of  Christ,  which  was  systematized  according  to  the 
threefold  office.  There  was  a  reaction  of  the  old 
Lutheran  sentiment  in  1773  when  Emesti  criticized 
the  reigning  doctrine  because  he  could  not  see  why 
the  clear  and  sufficient  designation  of  the  work  of 
Christ  as  Mtia/actio  should  be  obscured  by  meta- 
phorical phrases.  Moreover,  he  was  of  the  opinion 
that  the  different  offices  were  not  clearly  separated 
from  each  other,  so  that  one  title  might  justly  cover 
all  of  them.  Other  dogmatidans  after  him  raised 
similar  objections  on  the  ground  that  neither  the 
prophetical  nor  the  royal  office  stands  upon  equal 
footing  with  the  priestly  office,  but  that  both  point 
to  the  atonement  which  is  included  in  it.  But  the 
majority  of  recent  dogmatidans  adhere  to  the 
scheme  of  a  threefold  office.  Schleiermacher  took 
the  lead  in  this  tendency  by  attempting  the  suc- 
cessful proof  that  the  three  offices  in  their  indisso- 
luble union  completely  define  and  circumscribe  the 
character  of  redemption  as  accomplished  by  Christ. 
With  the  exclusion  of  the  prophetic  office,  he  holds, 
the  clear  consciousness  of  the  believer  would  be  su- 
perseded by  a  magical  mediation  of  salvation. 
Without  the  royal  office,  there  would  be  lacking  the 
relation  of  the  individual  believer  to  a  community. 
Finally,  the  absence  of  the  priestly  office  would  rob 
the  foimdation  of  Christ  of  its  religious  content. 

The  doctrine  of  Christ's  threefold  office  repre- 
sents the  redeemer  as  the  fulfiUer  of  all  Old-Testa- 
ment prophecies  and  thus  of  all  needs  of  the  human 
being.  Everjrthing  that  Israel  expected  of  its  future 
salvation  had  concentrated  itself  more  and  more  in 
the  hope  of  the  Messiah,  ''  the  anointed  of  God  " 
(Johni.  41,  iv.  25).  He  was  thought  of  as  the  king 
who  was  to  restore  the  glory  of  David's  kingdom. 


In  the  course  of  time  the  prophet,  who  as  successor 
of  Moses  was  never  to  be  wanting  among  God's  people 
(Deut.  xviii.  15),  became  identical  with  the  Messiah 
(John  vi.  14-15).  The  third  office  is 
Interjireta-  reflected  in  the  picture  of  the  Mes- 
tion  and  siah  in  Isa.  liii.  God's  people  can  feel 
Significance  themselves  secure  only  when  all  con- 
of  the  flict  of  the  theocratic  offices  is  excluded 
Doctrine,  by  unity  and  every  blessing  of  sal- 
vation is  to  be  foimd  in  one  single 
person  (Heb.  vii.  23  sqq.).  There  was  a  longing 
especially  for  the  solution  of  the  frequent  historical 
conflict  between  kingdom  and  priesthood  (I  Sam. 
ii.  35;  Zech.  vi.  12  sqq.).  A  priest-king  after  the 
manner  of  Melchizedek  was  hoped  for  (Ps.  ex.  4). 
All  these  elements  were  combined  in  the  idea  of  the 
Messiah  who  was  to  possess  the  spirit  of  God  in 
many-sided  fulness  and  as  the  power  of  a  compre- 
hensive redeeming  activity  (Isa.  xi.  1  sqq.,  bd.  1 
sqq.;  cf.  Luke  iv.  18  sqq.;  John  iii.  34).  The 
anointing  with  the  spirit  mentioned  in  these  pas- 
sages has  the  significance  of  the  anointing  of  kings, 
priests,  and  to  a  certain  extent  also  of  prophets  in 
so  far  as  they  were  endowed  with  the  charismata. 
By  confessing  Jesus  as  Christ,  the  Christian  congre- 
gation expresses  that  it  finds  in  him  the  performer 
of  all  activities  which  secure  salvation  to  the  people 
of  God.  Jesus  b  king  (Matt.  xxi.  5,  xxvii.  11), 
prophet  (Matt.  xxi.  11;  Luke  vii.  16),  and  high 
priest  (Heb.  ii.  17,  iii.  1).  The  scheme  of  the  three- 
fold office  permits  of  arranging  the  Biblical  material 
in  its  original  connection,  as  it  belongs  to  a  com- 
plete representation  of  the  person  of  Christ.  Its 
systematic  value  becomes  evident  only  from  the 
proof  that  for  the  fulfilment  of  the  Messianic  ac- 
tivity there  is  necessary  nothing  more  and  nothing 
less  than  the  functions  designated  by  it.  The  three 
offices  of  prophet,  priest,  and  king  correspond  to 
the  needs  of  the  moral  education  of  man  and  of  lus 
connection  with  himnan  society  and  the  surround- 
ing world.  If  the  activity  of  Christ  on  earth  were 
restricted  to  atonement,  it  would  not  be  possible 
to  speak  of  the  perfection  of  the  human  being  in 
connection  with  Christ.  It  is  a  matter  of  course 
that  in  every  moment  of  his  earthly  and  heavenly 
activity  Christ  exercises  at  one  and  the  same  time 
all  his  offices.  Socinianism  claims  for  the  entire 
activity  of  Christ  on  earth  only  the  prophetical 
office  in  order  to  reserve  the  other  fimctions  as  faint 
ornaments  for  the  state  of  exaltation  (Racovian 
Catechism,  §§  191  sqq.,  456  sqq.).  The  permanent 
union  and  simultaneous  exercise  of  the  three  func- 
tions do  not  exclude,  however,  a  fixed  aim,  namely, 
the  kingdom.  To  this  as  the  organizing  purpose  of 
the  whole  points  before  everything  the  Biblical 
basis  of  the  formula,  the  starting-point  and  essential 
content  of  the  Messianic  office  is  royal  dominion 
over  and  for  God's  people,  the  peculiar  modification 
of  which  is  describeid  by  the  other  titles. 

(E.  F.  Karl  Mt^LLEB.) 

Bibuoobapbt:  For  history  of  the  doctrine  oonmlt:  H.  L.  J. 
Heppe,  Dogmatik  cfet  deuUdten  FroteBktnHamua  im  16. 
Jahrhundert,  pp.  209  aqq..  222  aqq.,  GotJut,  1867;  idem. 
DogmaHk  der  evangeliach'Teformirten  Kirtht,  Elberfeld, 
1861;  A.  Schweiser.  Glaubentlehre  der  evanpeU§eh-reformir' 
ten  Kirche,  vol.  ii.,  Zurich.  1847;  H.  Schmid,  DoomaUk 
der  evangeKedirmformirten  Kirehe,  Frankfort,   1676;    A. 


175 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jesaa  Christ 


Ritachl,  Die  tkriaAitht  Lekre  von  der  RecfUferHounQ  und 
Vtrm^hnung,  i.  620  sqq.,  iii.  394  sqq.,  Bonn,  1882-^,  Eng. 
tranal.,  of  vol.  i.,  Edinburgh,  1872.  For  exposition  of  the 
doctrine  consult  the  literature  under  Dooua.  Doouatics; 

WBBTMIXeTKR  AflSEMBLT. 

JESUS  CHRIST,  TWOFOLD  STATE  OF:  Thedoo- 
trine  dealing  with  the  humiliation  and  exaltation 
of  Christ.  Christian  faith  has  always  spoken  of  a 
humiliation  and  exaltation  of  Christ  when  it  com- 
pared the  earthly  appearance  of  Jesus  on  the  one 
side  with  the  mode  of  existence  of  the  preexisting 
LiOgoSy  and  on  the  other  side  with  the  present  world- 
rule  of  the  Mediator.  But  the  formula 
The  of  a  twofold  state  has  been  coined  only 
Lutheran  in  connection  with  the  definite  inter- 
Doctrine,  pretation  given  to  the  incarnation  by 
Luther  and  the  Christological  theory 
that  followed  in  his  steps.  From  the  dogmatic  idea 
of  the  unchangeableness  of  God  and  of  the  commu- 
nication of  divine  attributes  to  the  human  nature 
of  Christ  there  results  a  terminology  which  must 
make  room  in  the  earthly  life  of  the  Redeemer  for 
a  human  development,  otherwise  inconceivable,  by 
a  special  "  state  of  humiliation."  Incarnation  de- 
notes, accordingly,  not  a  descent  of  the  Logos,  but 
an  elevation  of  human  nature,  which  has  been  re- 
ceived into  the  most  intimate  connection  with  the 
divine  nature.  In  virtue  of  the  Communicatio 
Idiomatum  (q.v.)  whieh  began  with  his  incarna- 
tion, it  was  impossible  for  Christ  to  rid  himself  of 
his  divinity.  With  the  incarnation  the  exaltation 
of  human  nature  to  divine  glory  was  completed 
once  for  all.  "  When  he  [Christ]  began  to  be  a 
man,  he  also  began  to  be  God  "  (Luther).  Ac- 
cording to  Brenz,  the  real  ascension  of  Christ  began 
with  the  incarnation.  "  Divine  nature,"  however, 
"  can  neither  be  himiiliated  nor  exalted."  The  life 
of  Jesus  within  the  limits  of  human  development 
rests,  therefore,  upon  that  act  of  self-limitation  of 
the  God-man — ^not  of  the  Logos — which  is  described 
in  Phil.  ii.  5-9.  In  this  way  the  state  of  self-renim- 
ciation  is  brought  about.  The  exaltation  or  "  maj- 
esty "  of  Christ  was  self-evident,  but  the  great  prob- 
lem to  be  solved  was  how  humiliation  was  possible. 
Johann  Gerhard  among  the  Lutheran  theologians 
most  fully  developed  the  doctrine  of  the  two  states 
of  Christ.  The  communicatio  idiomatum,  accord- 
ing to  him,  was  accomplished  at  the  moment  of  in- 
carnation, but  Christ  did  not  make  use  of  them,  he 
renounced  them,  he  took  upon  himself  the  form  of 
a  servant,  until  he  ascended  to  heaven  and  sat  on 
the  right  hand  of  God;  hence  the  distinction  be- 
tween the  state  of  self-renunciation  and  the  state 
of  exaltation.  The  state  of  humiliation,  there- 
fore, does  not  denote  the  unconditional  lack  and  ab- 
sence of  the  divinity  and  majesty  commimicated  to 
the  flesh,  but  only  the  retraction  and  intermission 
of  its  use.  In  1616  there  originated  a  controversy 
between  the  theologians  of  Giessen  and  those  of 
TQbingen  (see  Chribtologt,  DC.)  as  to  the  manner 
in  which  Christ  emptied  himself  (see  Eenobib)  of 
his  divine  attributes,  whether  it  was  mere  conceal- 
ment (Gk.  krypsis)  or  an  actual  emptying  (kenli8i$). 
The  orthodox  theologians  did  not  consider  the  self- 
renimdation  of  Christ  mere  simulation,  but  a  true 
and  real  self  renunciation  of  the  plenary  communi- 
cated divine  majesty  and  virtue.    There  arose  also 


a  question  as  to  the  time  when  the  state  of  self- 
renunciation  began.  According  to  Luther's  inter- 
pretation of  Phil.  ii.  this  state  began  only  after  the 
birth  of  Jesus.  After  his  birth  Jesus  might  have 
exalted  himself  above  men,  if  he  had  not  been  will- 
ing to  serve  them.  But  according  to  the  later  dog- 
maticians  the  state  of  humiliation  began  with  the 
conception.  Since  humiliation,  however,  does  not 
consist  in  the  assumption  of  human  nature,  but  in 
the  assumption  of  the  form  of  a  servant,  incarnation 
is  distinguished  from  its  incongruous  form — ^the  in- 
carnation of  the  Logos  is  not  his  humiliation  but 
an  exaltation  of  human  nature,  while  the  act  of 
conception  is  the  first  act  in  the  humiliation  of  the 
God-man.  The  state  of  exaltation  begins  with  the 
descent  of  Christ  into  hell  as  the  triumph  of  the 
God-man  over  the  devil  (see  Descent  of  Christ 
INTO  Hell). 

For  Reformed  theologians  the  doctrine  of  the 
twofold  state  of  Christ  is  of  minor  dogmatic  im- 
portance;  their  attention  was  concentrated  not  so 
much  upon  the  dogmatic  assertion  of  the  unchange- 
ableness of  God  as  upon  the  practical  Biblical  view 
of  the  truly  human  development  of 
The        Jesus.    According    to   the    Reformed 
Reformed   doctrine  the  Logos  himself  is  the  sub- 
Doctrine,    ject  of  the  kenOsia  described  in  Phil, 
ii.    In  this  way  it  was  impossible  for 
the  Reformed  to  avoid  contradiction  with  the  dog- 
ma of  the  imchangeableness  of  God.    In  reference 
to  Phil.  ii.  they  accepted  the  Lutheran  doctrine 
that  the  Logos  did  not  assume  human  nature  in 
general,  but  the  form  of  a  servant,  and  by  identify- 
ing incarnation  with  Christ's  obedient  conduct  until 
his  death  on  the  cross,  the  Reformed  were  able  to 
speak  of  a  humiliation  of  the  God-man.    The  exal- 
tation beginning  with  the  resurrection  actually  ex- 
tols human  nature  to  a  higher  stage. 

Within  Protestant  orthodoxy  the  treatment  of 
the  doctrine  of  states  has  led  to  a  tendency  to  dis- 
solve the  theory  of  the  two  natures  in  its  scholastic 
form.    On  the  Lutheran  side  the  true 
Devetop-    humanity  of  Christ  became  inconceiv- 
ment       able,  on  the  Reformed  side  there  was 
Modem    at  least  proposed  the  full  revelation  of 
Teachings.  God  in  Christ.    Holding  to  the  ortho- 
dox standpoint  of  the  unchangeable- 
ness of  God,  the  Lutherans  could  not  make  conceiv- 
able the  humiliation  of  Christ,  while  the  Reformed 
could  not  explain  the  full  and  essential  connection 
of  God  with  the  humiliated  Christ.    By  their  efforts 
to  satisfy  merely  the  inunediate  religious  needs,  in 
consonance  with  the  practical  and  empirical  spirit 
of  modem  times,  theologians  like  Ritschl  have  dis- 
carded altogether  the  doctrine  of  states,  holding 
that  we  must  not  transcend  the  simple  belief  that 
the  man  Jesus  stands  over  against  us  on  the  side  of 
God.    Thus  they  simply  cut  off  all  insoluble  ques- 
tions concerning  the  relation  of  the  eternal  to  the 
earthly  son  of  God,  and  accordingly  there  is  no 
need  to  speak  of  a  special  state  of  him^tion.    But 
the  development  not  only  of  the  thought,  but  of 
practical  faith  results  in  the  recognition  that  the 
truth  of  God's  appearance  in  the  flesh  must  in  the 
end  suffer  if  this  side  of  the  doctrine  of  states  is  dis- 
carded.   In  this  connection  the  questicn  of  pre- 


Jesus  Ohxiat 

Jews,  Xiasiona  to  the 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


176 


existenoe  can  not  be  discussed,  but  it  is  to  be  re- 
membered that  the  Biblical  passages  relating  to  it 
confirm  an  actual  participation  of  God  in  the  revela- 
tion in  Christ.  God's  self-offer  in  Christ  becomes 
conceivable  only  by  the  humiliating  sacrifice  of  the 
eternal  son  for  sinful  humanity.  Passages  like  John 
iii.  16;  I  John  iv.  9;  Rom.  viii.  31-32;  Gal.  iv.  4 
testify  that  in  Christ  we  have  the  living  and  deci- 
sive expression  of  divine  love,  not  merely  a  histor- 
ical phenomenon  which  assures  this  love.  As  to 
the  interpretation  of  Phil,  ii.,  there  has  been  brought 
forth  only  one  really  exegetical  reason  which  ap- 
parently excludes  the  relation  of  that  passage  to 
the  descent  of  Christ  from  heaven.  It  has  been 
pointed  out  that  the  apostle  desires  to  give  in  Christ 
an  example  of  humiliation  which  is  imitable.  But 
this  objection  may  be  refuted  if  it  is  considered 
that  the  imitation  of  Christ  in  the  sense  of  the  New 
Testament  does  not  always  mean  an  actual  appro- 
priation of  his  actions  in  their  essential  quality,  but 
simply  the  mode  and  manner  of  his  actions  and 
sentiments  so  that  he,  like  God  himself,  may  be  an 
example  in  matters  which  are  not  imitable  in  their 
essence  (Eph.  v.  25;  I  Pet.  iii.  13,  ld-19;  Matt.  v.  45; 
Eph.  V.  1-2).    See  Chbibtologt. 

(E.  F.  Karl  MtLLBR.) 
Bduoobafbt:  J.  J.  Van  Ooateriee,  ChriHian  DogmaUca^ 
fi.  494  sqq..  New  York,  n.d.;  J.  H.  Ehrard,  Chn$aiehe 
DogmaUk,  vol.  ii..  KAnigBbeiv.  1852;  F.  A.  PhiUppi,  KireK- 
tteh0  OUtuUntMn,  vol.  iv..  Gflteraloh,  1885;  A.  B.  Bruoe, 
Humiliation  nf  Chriat  in  ito  Phyieal,  Ethieal  and  Official 
AtjMcia,  New  York.  1887;  J.  Kditlin,  LuAan  TKeologie, 
Stuttsart,  1901;  W.  A.  Brown,  CkritUan  Thaokvy  in 
Outline,  pp.  832-386.  New  York,  1900;  and  the  literature 
under  Coiixunicatio  ioiomatuu. 

JESUS  THB  SON  OF  SntACH,  WISDOM  OF.   See 

Apocrypha,  A,  IV.,  12. 

JETZBR^yeVser  JOHANNES:  Joumeyman-tailor 
and  religious  impostor;  b.  at  Zurzach  (16  m.  n.n.e. 
of  Aarau)  in  the  canton  of  Aargau,  c.  1483;  d.  after 
1520.  In  1606  he  entered  the  Dominican  mon- 
astery of  Bern  as  lay  brother.  He  is  described 
as  uneducated,  morally  depraved  and  deceitful, 
even  suspected  of  theft.  On  Mar.  24,  1507,  ac- 
cording to  his  story,  St.  Barbara  appeared  to  him 
and  a  few  days  afterward  the  mother  of  God  to  an- 
nounce that  she  had  been  indeed  conceived  in  sin, 
as  the  Dominicans  taught.  To  prove  the  truth  of 
her  divine  revelations,  she  impressed  upon  him  in 
repeated  visits  the  stigmata  of  Christ,  and  now  Jet- 
aer  began  to  act  the  story  of  Christ's  sufferings  in 
the  church  in  lively  manner.  The  monastery,  whose 
picture  of  Mary  shed  bloody  tears,  attracted  large 
crowds  of  people,  and  sold  with  great  success  hand- 
kerchiefs moistened  with  the  blood.  But  doubts 
arose,  and  in  July  the  bishop  of  Lausanne  under- 
took an  investigation  which  came  to  nothing.  Sub- 
sequently the  magistrate  of  the  town  investigated 
the  case.  Jetser  was  imprisoned  and  tried;  after 
various  denials  he  confessed  that  the  whole  affair 
was  an  imposture  in  which  the  four  head-masters 
of  the  monastery,  Johannes  Vatter,  Dr.  Stephan 
Boltzhurst,  Franz  Uelschi,  and  Heinrich  Steineg- 
ger,  were  implicated.  The  matter  was  immediately 
reported  to  Rome  and  after  a  competent  jury  had 
been  instituted,  the  culprits  were  tried  under  tor- 
ture.   In  1509  the  four  monks  were  condemned 


and  burned  alive  as  blasphemers,  and  Jetzer  disap- 
peared. The  scandal  caused  great  sensation  and 
indignation,  especially  at  Bern.  A  large  literature 
of  pamphlets  in  Latin,  German,  French,  and  Dutch 
told  the  scandalous  story  and  confirmed  the  gen- 
eral verdict  concerning  the  corruption  of  monastic 
life.  (E.  BLOBCHf.) 

Bibuoobaphy:  G.  Rettig.  Die  Urkunden  dsa  Jetaerproaenu, 
in  ilrcAiv  daa  hiatoriadian  Vanina  daa  KaiUon  Bam,  vol. 
xi..  1886;  R.  Paultu,  Ein  JuaHgmord  an  viat  Dciminikanem 
baoanoan,  Frankfort,  1807. 

JEWEL,  JOHN:  Bishop  of  Salisbury  and  a  noted 
defender  of  the  Reformation  settlement  in  Eng- 
land; b.  in  the  parish  of  Berimber,  Devonshire, 
May  24,  1522;  d.  at  Monkton  Farleigh  (2  m.  n.w. 
of  Bradford),  Wiltshire,  Sept.  23,  1671.  He  went 
first  to  Merton  College,  Oxford,  and  then,  winning  a 
scholarship,  to  Corpus  Christi  College,  taking  his 
bachelor's  degree  in  1540.  Two  years  later  he  was 
elected  to  a  fellowship  at  Corpus  Christi.  During 
his  university  life  he  was  strongly  influenced  in  the 
direction  of  Biblical  criticism  by  John  Parkhurst, 
his  tutor,  and  confirmed  in  a  general  Protestant  at- 
titude by  Peter  Martyr,  who  came  to  Oxford  in 
1547.  Some  time  before  1551  he  took  orders,  and 
about  the  end  of  that  year  became  vicar  of  Sun- 
ningwell,  near  Oxford.  On  the  accession  of  Mary 
in  1553  he  lost  his  fellowship,  and  ultimately,  after 
seeking  peace  even  at  the  cost  of  signing  articles 
which  he  did  not  believe,  was  forced  to  flee.  He 
arrived  at  Frankfort  in  March,  1555,  but  soon  joined 
Peter  Martyr  at  Strasbuig,  and  followed  him  to 
Zurich  in  the  following  year.  On  receiving  the 
news  of  Queen  Mary's  death  he  started  for  Eng- 
land, arriving  there  in  March,  1559,  and  was  made 
bishop  of  Salisbury  Jan.  21,  1560.  He  was  active 
in  preaching  and  in  the  visitation  of  his  diocese,  and 
soon  took  a  prominent  place  in  the  controversy 
with  Rome.  His  Apolo^  pro  ecdena  Anglicana 
(London,  1562)  has  been  called  "  the  first  methodi- 
cal statement  of  the  position  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land against  the  Church  of  Rome."  By  it  Jewel  se- 
cured acknowledgment  as  Uie  official  champion  of 
Anglicanism.  He  was  engaged  for  several  years 
in  an  exchange  of  controversial  works  with  Thomas 
Harding,  an  old  Oxford  contemporary,  who  sup- 
ported the  papal  cause.  All  his  writings  are  noted 
for  learning,  clarity,  and  precision.  Of  bis  works, 
which  are  all  deliberate,  scholarly,  and  logical,  s 
complete  edition  was  published  in  1600.  Modem 
editions  are  those  by  R.  W.  Jelf  (8  vols.,  Oxford, 
1848)  and  another  in  4  vols.,  published  by  the 
Parker  Society  (Cambridge,  1845-50). 

Bibuoobapbt:  The  ori^nal  biognphy  wbb  by  L.  Humphrey, 
Joannia  JuaUi  .  .  .  vita  at  mora,  London,  1673,  nnd  wbs 
oondenied  by  D.  Featley  in  the  Memoir  prefixed  to  the 
Worka,  1609;  »  eeoond  oondeniation  waa  prefixed  to  an 
ed.  of  the  Apology  Mid  the  Bjriatla  to  Seipio,  London.  1685, 
reproduced  in  C.  Woodtworth,  SedeaiaaUeal  Biography, 
ib.  1853.  These  lives  were  the  baaSa  of  that  by  C.  W. 
Le  Baa,  ib.  1836.  A  Memoir  ia  prefixed  alao  to  the  Pkrker 
Society  ed.  of  the  Worka.  Conault  further:  DNB,  zxix. 
878-382;  J.  H.  Overton,  The  Church  in  Bn^and,  I  460- 
461.  u.  36-37,  London,  1897;  W.  H.  Ftere.  The  BngliA 
Church  (1668-1626).  paasim,  ib.  1004;  and  ia  gaoaral  the 
worka  on  the  history  of  Jewel's  time. 

JEWS.    See  Israel,  Hibtort  of. 


177 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


JesTia  Christ 

Jews,  Xiasiona  to  the 


I.  In  the  PrimitiTe  Chnroh. 
n .  In  the  Roman  Oatholio  Church. 

Evly  Minions  (|  1). 

MiaaionB  in  Spain  (|  2). 

MiasionB  in  Other  Countries  (|  3). 
UL  In  Protestant  Churches. 


JEWS,    MISSIONS    TO    THE. 

Lutheran  and  Reformed  Churches  (fl  ). 

English  Missions  (S  2). 

Minor    English    Missionary    Societies 

(18). 
Missionary  Societies  in  Other  Countries 

(§4). 
Missions  in  the  United  States  (|  6). 


IV.  Methods  and  Practical  Conadera- 

Uons. 
Methods  in  Christian  Lands  (|  1). 
Methods  in  Non-Evangelical  Coun« 

tries  (I  2). 
Influence  of   Zionism   oi 

Missions  (S  3). 


L  In  the  Primitive  Church:  Although  the  king- 
dom of  God  which  Christ  had  come  to  realize  was 
to  extend,  according  to  the  predictions  of  the  proph- 
ets, not  only  over  Israel,  but  over  the  whole  earth, 
Jesus  had,  nevertheless,  restricted  his  personal  ac- 
tivity to  Israel;  and  had  even  commanded  his  dis- 
ciples not  to  go  in  the  way  of  the  Gentiles  (Matt. 
X.  5).  It  was  not  till  he  was  about  to  depart  from 
the  earth  that  he  conunanded  them  to  teach  and 
baptize  all  people.  The  Twelve,  however,  directed 
their  efforts  primarily  to  the  Jews;  and  the  earliest 
Christian  congr^;ations  were  composed  entirely  of 
Jews  and  proselytes  to  Judaism.  Apostolic  mi^ 
sions  among  the  Jews  were  so  successful  that  James 
could  point  out  to  Paul  thousands  of  converted 
Jews  (Acts  xxi.  20) .  A  large  number  of  priests  were 
also  obedient  to  the  faith  (Acts  vi.  7);  and  in  the 
congregations  which  Paul  founded  in  Asia  Minor, 
Greece,  Crete,  etc.,  the  nudeus  was  Jewish.  That 
the  conversion  of  the  Jews  was  not  lost  sight  of  in 
the  second  or  third  century  is  proved  by  the  dia- 
logue of  Justin  Martyr  with  the  Jew  Trypho  and 
Tertullian's  Adveraus  JudcBos.  But  Jewish  Chris- 
tianity had  long  developed  a  heretical  tendency  by 
insisting  upon  the  national  and  religious  peculiari- 
ties of  Judaism  and  by  avowing  the  most  pro- 
nounced Gnosticism.  The  further  growth  of  the 
Jewish  element  in  the  (church  would  have  seriously 
endangered  her  inner  life  and  existence,  if  the  in- 
surrection of  Bar  Kokba  had  not  led  to  a  sharp 
separation  of  Judaism  from  the  universal  catholic 
character  of  the  Church.  Deprived  of  their  polit- 
ical power  and  national  autonomy,  the  Jews  con- 
centrated their  whole  spiritual 'life  upon  the  study 
of  the  Law  and  produced  the  Talmud.  The  trans- 
formation of  prophetism  into  Talmudism  created 
a  wide  gulf  between  Jews  and  Christians.  From  the 
very  beginning,  the  spirit  of  the  Talmud  drew  a 
vefl  over  their  eyes  (II  Cor.  iii.  13-16). 

IL  In  the  Roman  Catholic  Church:    The  early 

church  did  not  possess  any  special  institutions  for 

the  conversion  of  the  Jews,  although 

I.  Eariy    there  were  alwasrs  those  whom  the  love 

Minsions.  of  Christ  compelled  to  preach  the  Gos- 
pel to  the  Jews,  and  there  were  like- 
wise other  factors  which  made  it  advisable  for  the 
leaders  of  both  Church  and  State  to  win  the  Jews 
for  Christianity.  Cassiodorus,  when  he  became  a 
monk,  felt  hixnself  constrained,  in  his  exegesis  of 
the  Psalms  (as  in  his  condtuio  to  Ps.  Ixxxi.),  to  urge 
the  Jews  to  be  converted.  So  the  Emperor  Jus- 
tinian, from  political  motives,  stated  that  the  pur- 
pose he  had  in  ordering  the  synagogues  to  use  the 
Greek  and  Latin  translations  of  the  Old  Testament, 
and  to  abstain  from  Talmudio  exegesis,  was  to  lead 
the  Jews  to  C3iristianity.  Bishops  did  not  hesitate 
to  resort  to  acts  of  violence  to  compel  the  Jews  to 
become  Christians.  Justice,  however,  demands  reo- 
VI.— 12 


ognition  of  the  fact  that  many  popes  protected  the 
Jews.  Gr^ory  I.  condemned  all  compulsory  bap- 
tisms, and  by  kindliness  and  rewards  tried  to  win 
the  Jews  for  the  Church.  Although  he  put  no 
high  estimate  upon  converts  gained  in  this  way,  he 
counted  upon  their  descendants.  ''  If  we  do  not 
win  the  parents,"  he  said,  *'  we  shall  have  their 
children  " —  a  remark  which  experience  proved  to  be 
ill-founded,  especially  in  Spain.  There  was  huxlly  a 
century  that  works  were  not  written  to  bring  about 
the  conversion  of  the  Jews,  hardly  one  in  which  re- 
wards were  not  ofifered  to  secure  them  for  the  Church, 
and  also  not  a  century  in  which  numbers  of  prose- 
lytes, thoroughly  convinced,  did  not  pass  over  to 
Christianity,  many  of  whom  became  an  honor  to 
the  Church. 

Proselytes  have  ever  been  especially  active  in 

missions  to  the  Jews.    In   the  seventh  century 

Bishop  Julian  of  Toledo  (d.  690)  wrote 

3.  Missions  the  De  sextce  oetatia  comprcbatume  corir 

in  Spain,  tra  Judceoa  to  refute  the  Jewish  no- 
tion, then  asserting  itself,  that  Jesus 
could  not  be  the  Messiah,  as  he  was  not  to  appear 
until  the  sixth  millennium  of  the  world.  Almost  at 
the  same  time  Isidore  of  Seville  wrote  two  books  in 
which  he  proved  the  Christian  doctrine  of  faith 
from  the  Old  Testament  and  especially  pointed  out 
that  the  Christians  now  formed  the  true  Israel. 
Raymond  of  Pennaforte,  general  of  the  Domin- 
icans, introduced  the  study  of  the  Hebrew  language 
and  Talmudic  writings  in  his  order,  especially  for 
the  promotion  of  missionary  activity  among  the 
Jews;  and  another  Dominican,  Pablo  Christiani 
of  Montpellier,  a  Jew  by  descent,  was  the  first 
real  missionary  preacher.  He  traveled  in  southern 
France  and  elsewhere,  preaching  and  disputing  with 
the  Jews  in  churches  and  synagogues,  and  proving 
the  Messiahship  and  divinity  of  Jesus  from  Bible 
and  Talmud.  At  the  same  time  the  Dominican 
Raymimd  Martin,  a  Christian  by  birth,  but  well 
versed  in  Hebrew,  Aramaic,  and  Arabic,  wrote  his 
Puffio  fidei  contra  MauroB  el  JudcBoa,  an  armory  for 
the  disputes  of  the  following  times.  Abner  of  Bur- 
gos, a  respected  ph3rsician  and  Christian  convert, 
wrote  several  Hebrew  and  Spanish  books  for  the 
conversion  of  the  Jews.  John  of  Valladolid,  an- 
other proselyte,  wrote  an  exposition  on  Ibn  Ezra's 
commentary  on  the  Ten  Commandments  and  a 
Concordia  ligum  of  Judaism  and  Cfiistianity.  Car- 
dinal Pedro  de  Luna,  later  Benedict  XIII.,  himself 
had  a  debate  in  Pampeluna  with  Rabbi  Shem  Tob 
ben  Shaprut,  and  took  a  lifelong  interest  in  the 
conversion  of  the  Jews.  He  was  the  first  patron  of 
Rabbi  Solomon  Halevi  (1353-1435),  later  known 
as  Paul  of  St.  Maria,  archbishop  of  Burgos,  and  in- 
terchanged controversial  letters  with  Joshua  of 
Lorca,  until  he  finally  became  a  Christian.  Among 
the  thousands  who  at  that  time  entered  the  Church, 


Jews,  XiaalonB  to  the 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


178 


frequently,  it  is  true,  for  secular  reasons,  or  from 
fear  or  compulsion,  there  was  a  great  number  of 
sincere  believers  in  Christ.  In  the  beginning  of  the 
fifteenth  century  the  Dominican  Vincent  Ferrer 
(q.y.),  who  wandered  through  Italy,  France,  and 
Spain  as  a  missioner,  developed  an  astonishing  ac- 
tivity in  converting  Jews;  at  least  20,500  are  said 
to  have  been  baptized  in  Castile  and  Aragon.  The 
reason  for  such  zeal  of  conversion  in  Spain  was  due 
to  the  extraordinary  power  of  the  Jewish  popula- 
tion which  threatened  to  suppress  the  spiritual  and 
material  development  of  Spain. 

In  France  there  were  comparatively  few  efforts 

in  this  direction;    and  at  the  court  of  Louis  the 

Pious  there  was  even  a  suspicious  sympathy  with 

Judaism.    With  the  exception  of  Nicholas  of  Lyra 

(130(M0),  of  Jewish  descent,  though 

3.  Miflsiona  bom  a  Christian,  who  wrote  a  mmiber 

in  Other  of  controversial  writings  against  the 
Countries.  Jews,  there  was  hardly  any  one  who 
labored  for  the  conversion  of  the  Jews. 
Still,  France  lacked  neither  pious  proselytes  and 
families  of  proselytes  nor  numerous  compulsory 
baptisms,  persecutions,  and  acts  of  violence.  In 
Italy  both  power  and  monks  were  deeply  interested 
in  the  conversion  of  the  Jews.  Lorenzo  of  Brun- 
disium  (d.  1619),  general  of  the  Capuchins,  preached 
with  great  power  and  traveled  through  Italy,  He- 
brew Bible  in  hand,  converting  rabbis  and  laymen. 
In  Rome  many  Jews  accepted  Christianity  at  all 
periods,  and  in  1550  Paul  III.  founded  an  institute 
for  the  conversion  of  the  Jews;  while  Pius  V.  won 
more  than  a  hundred  learned  and  rich  Jews  for  the 
Church.  Many  of  the  innumerable  proselytes  in 
Italy  occupied  high  positions  in  the  Church,  or 
were  received  into  the  nobility  of  the  nation.  The 
history  of  missions  among  the  Jews  in  England  is 
singular.  During  the  reign  of  William  Rufus,  the 
Jews  complained  because  so  many  of  their  number 
became  Christians;  the  king  attempted  to  force 
them  to  return  to  Judaism,  but  the  steadfastness  of 
these  proselytes  liindered  the  execution  of  his  men- 
aces (1100).  About  1200  Richard,  prior  of  Bei^ 
mondsey,  esCablished  a  hospital  of  converts,  and 
the  Dominicans  in  Oxford  opened  a  similar  institu- 
tion. Henry  III.  set  apart  a  special  house  in  Lon- 
don for  the  reception  and  care  of  proselytes,  for 
which  it  soon  became  necessary  to  oi^ganize  branch 
institutions.  Under  Edward  I.  500  proselytes  re- 
ceived baptism  in  the  Converts'  House,  yet  this 
same  king  was  compelled,  in  1290,  to  banish  16,500 
Jews  for  usury  and  coining.  Germany  stands  in 
the  strongest  contrast  to  England.  Here  there  is 
no  record  of  any  missionary  efforts,  but  only  of 
compulsory  baptisms  occasioned  by  the  persecu- 
tions during  the  crusades,  the  invasions  of  the  Ta- 
tars, and  the  Black  Death. 

Modem  Roman  Catholic  efforts  for  the  conver- 
sion of  the  Jews  began  in  France.  The  two  brothers 
Lehmann,  both  proselytes,  worked  successfully  un- 
der Pius  IX.  among  the  Jews  of  France.  The 
proselyte  Abb4  Bauer  used  his  brilliant  oratorical 
gifts  for  the  conversion  of  the  Jews  in  Paris  and 
Vienna.  The  most  extensive  work,  however,  was 
carried  on  in  Palestine  by  the  proselyte  Maria  Al- 
phonse  Ratisbonne,  who  joined  the  Roman  Catho- 


lic Church  in  1842.  With  his  brother  he  established 
the  order  of  N6tre  Dame  de  Sion  for  the  education 
of  Jewish  girls  and  foimded  many  charitable  insti- 
tutions, not  only  in  Palestine,  but  also  in  France, 
England,  Chaicedon,  Qalatia,  and  elsewhere. 

in.  In  Pxoteetant  Churches:  Luther's  attitude 
toward  the  Jews  was  at  first  favorable,  as  is  evi- 
dent from  his  Daas  Jesua  ein  gebomer 
I.  Lutheran  Jvde  war,  but  in  later  works,  as  in  his 
and  Von  den  Juden  und  ihren  Lugen,  he 
Reformed  showed  utter  hopelessness  of  the  con- 
Churches,  version  of  the  Jews,  so  that  little  zeal 
in  that  direction  could  have  been  ex- 
pected. Nevertheless,  there  were  numerous  pros- 
elytes in  the  Lutheran  and  Reformed  Churches, 
among  them  Immanuel  Tremellius  of  Ferrara,  who 
at  Heidelberg,  with  Ursinus  and  Olevianus,  took 
part  in  the  compilation  of  the  Heidelberg  Catechism. 
In  the*  seventeenth  century  Ezra  E(hsard  (b.  at 
Hamburg  June  28,  1629;  d.  there  Jan.  1,  1708)  of 
Hamburg,  was  greatly  interested  in  the  conversion 
of  the  Jews,  and  from  his  own  means  established  a 
considerable  fund  for  that  purpose.  His  sons  Georg 
and  Sebastian  continued  his  work.  Similar  fimds 
seem  to  have  existed  in  other  cities;  as,  for  example, 
in  Geneva,  where  a  part  of  the  ecclesiastical  rev- 
enue is  still  called  Fond  des  proselytes^  and  again  in 
Darmstadt  and  Frankfort.  Among  the  Pietists, 
who  distinguished  themselves  by  their  missionary 
zeal,  Spener  declared  it  the  duty  of  the  government 
to  take  care  of  the  conversion  of  the  Jews;  while 
the  Moravian  Samuel  Lieberkahn  labored  thirty 
years  among  the  Jews.  In  1728,  at  the  suggestion 
of  A.  H.  Francke,  Callenberg  founded  at  Halle  an 
Institutum  Judaicum,  which  lasted  until  1792. 
The  two  first  missionaries  of  that  institution  were 
Widmann  and  Manitius,  who  from  1730  to  1735 
traveled  through  Poland,  Bohemia,  Germany,  Den- 
mark, and  England.  In  1736  they  were  joined  by 
Stephan  Schulz,  the  most  important  worker  of  that 
institute,  who  extended  his  travels  over  the  whole 
of  Europe  and  the  Orient.  Through  the  instru- 
mentality of  Lessing,  and  still  more  through  Moses 
Mendelssohn,  a  reform  movement  took  place  among 
the  Jews,  starting  from  Germany  and  penetrating 
the  East,  while  in  the  Romance  countries  similar 
results  were  achieved  by  the  French  Revolution. 
The  gradual  renunciation  of  the  Talmud  on  the 
part  of  the  liberal  Jews  dates  from  that  time.  The 
immediate  result  was  that  large  numbers  turned 
to  Christianity,  especially  in  Berlin.  In  1816-43, 
3,984  Jews,  and  these  the  richest  and  most  cultured, 
were  baptized  in  the  eight  old  Prussian  provinces. 

The  corruption  of  the  churches  and  their  institu- 
tions, and  the  apostasy  of  thousands  from  all  faith, 
led  many  in  England  to  believe  that 
a.  BngUsh  the  end  of  the  world  was  near,  and 
Misstons.    that  soon  a  general  conversion  of  the 
Jews  was  to  take  place.    With  Simeon 
of  Cambridge,  Marsh  of  Birmingham,  the  proselyte 
J.  F.  Fry,  and  the  preacher  Legh  Richmond,  Lewis 
Way,  a  wealthy  clergyman,  founded  in  1808,  imder 
the  patronage  of  the  Duke  of  Kent,  the  London 
Society  for  Promoting  Christianity  among  the  Jews, 
which  included  both  churchmen  and  dissenters  until 
1815,  when  the  latter  withdrew  from  the  organiza- 


179 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jews,  Kisaioaa  to  the 


tion.  Way  traveled  in  Holland,  Germany,  and 
Russia  to  better  the  political  and  social  position  of 
the  Jews  and  to  awaken  missionary  zeal  among  the 
Christians.  He  induced  Alexander  I.  to  promise, 
in  1817,  his  special  protection,  as  well  as  lands,  to 
baptized  Jews.  In  1814  the  Duke  of  Kent  laid  the 
corner-stone  of  a  church  for  the  Jews,  to  which  was 
added  an  educational  institution  for  children  of 
proselytes,  a  Hebrew  college  for  the  training  of  mis- 
sionaries, and  a  trade  school  for  proselytes.  Bap- 
tisms became  so  numerous  that  in  1832  the  found- 
ing of  a  Hebrew-Christian  Church  in  England  was 
planned,  but  could  not  be  realized.  The  society  is 
the  oldest,  largest,  richest,  most  enterprising,  and 
best  organized  of  its  type,  and  has  auxiliary  socie- 
ties throughout  the  British  Isles  and  Canada.  The 
society,  whose  income  in  1900-01  was  £46,338,  with 
an  expenditure  of  £30,910,  employed  at  52  mission- 
ary stations  199  workers,  among  them  25  clergy- 
men, 19  physicians,  34  female  missionaries,  20  lay 
missionaries,  35  colporteurs,  58  teachers,  and  8 
apothecaries.  Of  these,  82  were  converts  from  Ju- 
daism. Of  the  52  stations  18  are  in  England,  3  in 
Austria,  1  in  France,  4  in  Germany,  2  in  Holland, 
1  in  Italy,  4  in  Rumania,  1  in  Russia,  1  in  Constanr 
tinople;  in  Asia  there  are  10  stations,  among  them 
JeniJBalem  with  27  workers;  in  Africa  there  are  7 
stations.  About  5,000  Jews  have  been  baptized  by 
the  society  since  its  foundation.  Its  principal  or- 
gans are  the  Jewish  Misnonary  InteUigenee  and  the 
Jewish  Misnonary  Advocate. 

Among  the  other  English  missionary  societies  for 
the  conversion  of  the  Jews  are  the  following:  The 
Free  Church  of  Scotland  Jewish  Mission,  estab- 
lished in  1840,  with  about  77  workers 

3.  Minor    and  stations  at  Budapest,  Constanti- 

English  nople,  Breslau,  Tiberias,  Safed,  and 
Missionary  Edinburgh,  and  publishing  the  Free 

Societies.  Chwrch  of  Scotland  Monthly  and  The 
Children's  Record;  the  Presbyterian 
Church  in  Ireland  Jewish  Mission,  established  in 
1841,  with  stations  at  Hamburg- Altona  (with  two 
ordained  missionaries  and  three  colporteurs  and 
Evangelists)  and  Damascus  (with  four  ordained 
missionaries  and  four  other  laborers),  and  publish- 
ing The  Missionary  Herald  of  the  Presbyterian  Chwrch 
in  Ireland;  the  British  Society  for  the  Propagation 
of  the  Gospel  among  the  Jews,  established  in  Lon- 
don in  1842,  its  membership  including  representa- 
tives of  the  various  dissenting  bodies,  with  twenty- 
two  missionaries  and  sixteen  stations  in  England, 
Germany,  Austria,  Russia,  and  Turkey,  and  pub- 
lishing The  Jewish  Herald;  the  Church  of  Scotland 
Jewish  Mission,  established  in  1841,  with  stations 
in  Alexandria,  Beirut,  Smyrna,  Constantinople,  and 
Salonica,  and  publishing  The  Church  of  Scotland 
Home  and  Foreign  Mission  Record;  The  Presby- 
terian Church  of  England  Jewish  Mission,  estab- 
lished in  1860,  with  two  missionaries  in  London, 
one  agent  in  Aleppo  and  one  in  Corfu;  Parochial 
Missions  to  the  Jews  at  Home  and  Abroad,  estab- 
lished in  1875,  imder  the  auspices  of  the  Estab- 
lished Church,  laboring  chiefly  in  parishes  with  a 
large  percentage  of  Jewish  population,  having  sta- 
tions in  EngUnd  and  Bombay,  and  publishing 
Chwrch  and  Synagogue;  the  Mildmay  Mission  to  the 


Jews,  established  in  1876,  with  stations  in  Russia, 
South  Africa,  Egypt,  and  Bulgaria,  and  publishing 
Trusting  and  Toiling;  the  East  London  Mission  to 
Jews,  established  in  1877,  with  a  mission  house  and 
orphans'  home;  the  Barbican  Mission  to  the  Jews, 
established  in  1879;  The  Jerusalem  and  the  East 
Mission  Fund,  established  in  1897  by  Bishop  Blyth 
of  Jerusalem,  with  eighteen  assistants  in  Jerusa- 
lem, Beirut,  Haifa,  Cairo,  and  Suez,  and  publish- 
ing Bible  Lands;  The  Kilbum  Mission  to  the  Jews, 
established  in  1896  by  the  proselyte  Ben  Oliel,  es- 
pecially for  the  well-to-do  business  men  of  London; 
and  The  London  City  Mission  to  Jews  with  sixteen 
laborers  among  the  250,000  foreign  Jews  in  Lon- 
don. Besides  these  societies,  a  Hebrew  Christian 
Union  and  a  Prayer  Union  for  Israel  were  founded 
in  1897,  the  latter  publishing  The  Friend  of  Israel, 

In  Germany  there  are  three  societies  for  missions 

among  Jews.    The  Gesellschaft  zur  Verbreitimg  des 

Christentums  unter  den  Juden  was  established  in 

1822  at  Berlin  under  the  influence  of 

4.  Mission-  Lewis  Way  and  Tholuck.    It  has  sta- 

aiy        tions  in  Berlin,  Posen,  Czemowicz,  and 

Societies    Stanislau.    Since  its  existence  about 

in  Other  713  baptisms  have  taken  place.  Its 
Countries,  official  oigan  is  the  Nathanad,  Inde- 
pendently of  this  missionary  society 
Prof.  H.  L.  Strack  manages  the  Institutum  Judai- 
cum,  an  association  formed  for  the  purpose  of  ac- 
quainting theological  students  at  the  university 
with  the  mission  among  the  Jews.  The  Evangel- 
isch-luthenscher  Centralverein  fUr  Mission  unter 
Israel  was  established  in  1871  at  Leipsic.  It  tries 
to  unite  all  Lutheran  missions  among  the  Jews  to 
uniform  activity  and  employs  three  laborers  in 
Leipsic  and  in  Galicia;  its  oigan  is  the  Saat  at^ 
Hoffnung,  In  connection  with  it  Professor  De- 
litzsch  founded  in  1880  the  first  Institutum  Judai- 
cmn.  There  is  also  a  seminary  for  missionaries 
among  the  Jews.  The  Westdeutscher  Verein  fOr 
Israel  was  established  in  1843  in  Cologne.  It  has 
stations  at  Cologne,  Frankfort,  and  Strasbuig.  Its 
organ  is  the  MissionsbkUt  des  westdeuischen  Vereins 
far  Israel, 

Switzerland  has  a  Verein  der  Freunde  Israels  at 
Basel,  established  in  1830.  It  publishes  Der  Freund 
Israels  and  L*Ami  d^Israel.  France  has  a  Soci6t^ 
fran^aise  pour  T^vang^lisation  d 'Israel,  established 
in  1888  by  the  Rev.  G.  Krtlger,  with  one  mission- 
ary for  France  and  agencies  in  Algiers  and  Oran. 
Its  organ  is  Le  R&oeU  d*Israil.  Scandinavia  has 
three  societies  for  missions  among  the  Jews:  the 
**  Evangelical  National  Society,"  established  in 
1856,  with  a  station  at  Hamburg;  the  "  Society  for 
Missions  among  Israel,"  established  in  1875  by  the 
Rev.  A.  Lindstrdm  at  Stockholm,  with  a  home  for 
proselytes  at  Stockholm  and  lay  missionaries  at 
Budapest  and  Cracow,  and  publishing  Missions 
Tidningfdr  Israel;  the  **  Norwegian  Central  Com- 
mittee for  Missions  to  Israel,"  established  in  1865 
at  Christiania,  with  two  missionaries  at  Galaz  and 
BraHa  in  Rumania,  and  publishing  Missions  Blad 
for  Isra/d.  In  Russia,  where  half  of  all  the  Jews  of 
the  world  live,  the  government  limits  Protestant  mis- 
sionary work  among  the  Jews.  Missionary  work  in 
the  proper  sense  is  restricted  to  the  State  Church. 


Jaws,  Xiaaiona  to  tha 
Jamal 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


180 


In  Kiflhinef  Faltin  developed  a  Buooeasful  miaaion- 
ary  activity  after  1859,  and  Joseph  Rabinowitz  in 
1882-00.  In  Melbourne,  Aiutralia,  there  is  the 
Friends  of  Israel  Association,  of  which  the  proselyte 
Abramowita  is  the  head. 

In  the  United  States  there  are  eleven  church  mis- 
sions: the  Church  Society  for  Promoting  Christian- 
ity amongst  the  Jews  (Protestant  Epis- 
5.  Hifliions  copal)  established  in  1842  in  New  York, 
in  the  with  stations  at  New  York  and  Phila- 
United  delphia  and  five  missionaries,  and  pub- 
States,  lishing  The  Ooapd  of  the  Cireumcinon; 
the  Board  of  Foreign  Missions  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church  of  North  America,  established 
in  1871  in  New  York,  working  at  Urumia,  Teheran, 
Hamadan,  and  Sidon,  and  publishing  The  Aesemr 
hly  Herald;  the  Reformed  Presbyterian  Mission  to 
the  Jews,  established  in  1804  in  Philadelphia,  with 
three  laborers;  and  the  Messiah  Mission  of  Chicago, 
established  in  1806  and  continued  since  1800  as  the 
Mission  of  the  Women's  Association  of  the  United 
Presbyterian  Church  of  North  America.  Specif- 
ically Lutheran  are  the  four  following  missions: 
the  Norwegian  Zionsforeningen  for  Israelsmiasionen 
blandt  norske  Lutheranere  i  Amerika,  established 
1878  at  Minneapolis,  with  three  laborers  in  Minsk 
and  Odessa  in  Rusfsia  and  New  York;  the  Jewish 
Mission  of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Synod  of  Mis- 
souri, Ohio,  and  Other  States,  established  in  1885 
in  New  York;  the  Jewish  Mission  of  the  Joint 
Synod  of  Ohio,  established  in  1802;  and  the  Mis- 
sion of  the  German  Lutheran  Synod  of  the  Jews  in 
Chicago,  established  in  1804  in  Chicago.  The 
Methodists  have  the  New  York  City  Church  Ex- 
tension and  Missionary  Society,  established  in  1802; 
the  Baptists,  the  Missionary  Society  of  the  Seventh 
Day  Baptists,  established  in  1887;  and  the  Quakers 
the  Friends'  Mission  at  Ramallah  in  Palestine,  es- 
tablished in  1870  by  English  Quakers,  and  continued 
in  1887  by  American  Quakers  as  the  Eli  and  Sibyl 
Jones  Mission.  Besides  these,  there  are  twenty-one 
independent  missions,  the  most  important  of  which 
are:  the  New  York  City  Mission,  the  oldest  of  all 
American  missions,  established  in  1828;  the  Chicago 
Hebrew  Mission,  founded  in  1887  and  publishing 
The  Jewish  Era;  the  Gospel  Mission  of  the  Jews, 
formerly  the  Hope  of  Israel  Mission,  established  in 
1802  in  New  York;  the  Brooklyn  Christian  Mission 
to  the  Jews,  established  1802  in  New  York  and  pub- 
lishing Our  Hope  and  the  Yiddish  **  Hope  of  Israel  "; 
the  World's  Gospel  Union,  established  in  1802  at 
Kansas  City,  Mo.,  with  eight  missionaries,  one  in 
Morocco;  the  Ainerican  Mission  to  the  Jews,  es- 
tablished in  1805  by  the  proselyte  Warschaviak; 
and  the  Inmianuel  Mission  to  the  Jews  in  Cleveland, 
established  in  1808,  and  publidiing  Itnmanud'a 
WUnees.  The  American  missions  to  the  Jews  en- 
gage 150  laborers  in  all. 

IV.  Methods  and  Practical  Consideiattoni:  A  dis- 
tinction must  be  drawn  between  missions  among 
those  Jews  who  live  scattered  in  a  Christian  coun- 
try, and  those  who  live  in  a  compact  mass  and  have 
their  own  language  and  customs,  and  those  in  Mo- 
hammedan and  heathen  countries.  Missions  to  the 
Jews  living  within  the  pale  of  Christian  churches 
can  have  no  other  purpose  but  to  incorporate 


them  in  the  churches.    This  is  especially  the  case 

with  the  Jews  of  western  Europe.    For  more  than 

a  century  they  have  been  in  a  process  of  assimilation 

with  Christian  nations.    Self-preserva- 

z.  Math-    tion,  if  no  other  motive,  must  compel 
odt  in      the  Christian  Church  to  carry  on  mis- 

Christian  sionary  work  among  the  Jews;  for  it 
Lands,  would  be  extremely  dangerous  if  so 
many  thousands  of  Jews  in  the  midst  of 
Christians  were  equal  or  even  superior  to  them  in 
political,  social,  moral,  and  economical  respects, 
and  yet  opposed  in  religion.  It  Ls  the  duty  of  the 
Church  to  educate  suitable  catechetes  and  evangel- 
ists for  this  work  among  the  Jews.  All  missionary 
activity  should  start  from  the  Church.  Among  the 
Evangelical  churches  only  the  English  and  Scotch 
and  some  smaller  free  churches  promote  these  mis- 
sions as  a  branch  of  their  churchly  activity.  It  is 
not  the  duty  of  the  Church,  however,  to  provide 
for  the  material  assistance  of  proselytes;  this  be- 
longs rather  to  private  charity  and  independent 
associations.  The  proper  persons  to  be  employed 
in  converting  the  Jews  are  Christian  deigymen; 
although  it  is  much  more  difficult  to  prepare  bom 
Christians  for  work  of  that  kind  than  bom  Jews, 
who  can  more  easily  adapt  themselves  to  the  mode 
of  thinking  of  their  brethren.  But  it  would  be  en- 
tirely wrong  to  gather  the  Jews  into  a  separate 
JudflBO-Christian  Church,  since  that  would  lead  only 
to  a  new  sect;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  extreme 
caution  must  be  observed  that  baptism  may  not  be 
granted  too  hastily  or  to  unworthy  recipients. 
Methods  of  missionary  work  differ  according  to  the 
various  conditions  of  the  Jews.  While  the  Jews 
lived  almost  without  any  l^al  rights  among  the 
Christians,  the  State  and  the  Church  could  force 
them  to  bear  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  in  their 
own  synagogues  or  in  churches.  Since  the  eman- 
cipation of  the  Jews,  this  method  has  become  im- 
possible, land  they  have  accordingly  been  visited 
in  their  homes,  and  the  Gospel  has  been  announced 
to  them  by  the  distribution  of  tracts  and  books. 
But  as  such  visits  may  be  considered  by  the  Jews 
an  invasion  of  their  homes,  nothing  is  left  but  occsr 
sional  meetings  in  public  places.  Public  lectures, 
reading-rooms,  and  free  schools  have  also  contrib- 
uted to  the  success  of  missions.  The  instruction  of 
catechumens  must  be  adapted  to  their  religious  con- 
dition and  spiritual  training.  Special  considera- 
tion must  be  devoted  to  those  difficult  doctrines 
which  for  the  Jew  are  not  only  offensive,  but  even 
detestable,  such  as  the  doctrines  of  the  Trinity,  of 
the  divinity  of  Christ,  and  of  the  atonement. 

Missionary  activity  must  assimne  a  different  atti- 
tude in  non-EvangeUcal  countries,  where  Jews  live 
in  a  compact  mass.    This  is  the  case 

a.  Metfa-    principally  in  eastern  Europe,  espe- 

ods  in        cially  in  the  western  provinces  of  Rus- 

Hon-Bvan-  sia  that  formerly  belonged  to  Poland. 

gelical      The  number  of  Russian  Jews  is  esti- 

Coontrifls.  mated  at  from  4,500,000  to  6,000,000. 

Thousands  of  Jews  are  also  crowded 

together  in  Galicia  and  Rumania.    In  countries  like 

Russia  missionaries   encounter  special  difficulties, 

owing  to  deep-rooted  Jewish  fanaticism,  hatred  of 

the  Christians,  Jewish  narrowness,  and  great  eru- 


181 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


[ewa,  Mlasions  to  the 


ditioD  in  the  Tahnud  and  Cabala.  A  missionary  who 
is  not  thoroughly  versed  in  Hebrew  literature  and 
science  will  here  be  little  respected.  As  only  con- 
verted Jews  thoroughly  know  the  Jewish  heart  and 
the  Jewish  head,  they  have,  almost  without  excep- 
tion, been  used  for  this  kind  of  missionary  work. 
But  there  is  always  danger  that  inefficient  mission- 
aries may  be  employed  merely  because  they  are 
proselytes,  and  that  bom  Jews  may  be  too  indul- 
gent to  Jewish  peculiarities  and  prejudice.  Such 
deficiencies  and  dangers  will  best  be  avoided  by  the 
combined  work  of  bom  Christians  and  proselytes. 
Missionary  activity  among  foreign  Jews  has  offered 
almost  insuperable  difficulties.  If  an  individual 
person  or  family  in  the  midst  of  large  Jewish  con- 
gregations adopts  Christianity,  reception  into  a 
Christian  congregation  already  in  existence  is  often 
impossible.  The  conversion  of  whole  families  has 
been  almost  impossible,  but  since  a  peculiar  inter- 
est in  Evangeliod  Christianity  has  arisen  in  Poland 
and  Russia,  and  dozens  of  Jews  desire  instruction 
from  clergymen  and  missionaries,  it  will  perhaps  be 
possible  to  gather  eventual  converts  into  Judseo- 
Christian  congregations;  for  the  Jews  of  the  East 
are  neither  suited  nor  willing  to  be  absorbed  into 
another  nationality  and  church.  Literature  is  a 
very  important  means  of  influencing  Jews,  espe- 
cially as  the  Hebrew  New  Testament  is  well  received 
and  much  read  by  the  Jews  of  the  East,  particu- 
larly in  the  excellent  translation  of  Delitzsch.  Jews 
in  heathen  or  Mohammedan  countries  form  the 
smallest  part  of  the  population  and  they  are  on  the 
lowest  level  in  spiritual  and  moral  respects.  Though 
not  leamed  in  the  Talmud,  they  cling  obstinately 
to  their  old  traditions,  and  Christianity  has  taken 
little  root  among  them. 

Since  1897  the  movement  of  Zionism  has  pre- 
sented new  problems  to  Christian  missions.    It 
arose  as  a  reaction  against  the  efforts 
3.  Influence  of  assimilation,  and  as  a  means  of 
of  Zion-    remedying  the  oppressions  of    anti- 
km  on     Semitism;   and  its  object  is  to  regain 
Jewish      the  Jewish  country  for  the  Jewish  peo- 
Missions.    pie.    It  looks  upon  missions  as  an  in- 
strument by  which  an  increasing  nimi- 
ber  are  cut  off  from  the  national  body  of  the  Jews; 
but  on  the  other  hand,  the  Zionists  seek  the  friend- 
ship of  the  Christians  because  they  need  their  moral 
and  material  aid  in  the  realization  of  their  plans. 
Thus  Zionists  are  enemies  of  missions,  but  not  ene- 
mies of  Christianity.    Missionaries  must,  therefore, 
convince  the  Jews  that  acceptance  of  Christianity 
does  not  necessarily  include  the  sacrifice  of  Jewish 
nationality,  and  that  a  national  regeneration  of 
their  people  is  impossible  without  a  religious  re- 
generation. 

The  total  nimiber  of  missionaries  working  among 

the  10,000,000  or  more  Jews  in  the  world  is  about 

500.  (F.  Hbman.) 

Bibuoobapht:  F.  F.  A.  de  U  Roi,  Die  mangdudte  ChriaUn- 

heil  und  die  Juden  unUr  dem  OeediiehUpufJU  dm  Af  uaion, 

3  volt..  Garlanihe,  1884-92;    A.  A.  Bonar,  J^Tomilitw  c/  a 

Mimon  of  Enquiry  to  the  Jew»  from  the  Churdi  cf  Scotland, 

Edinburgh,    1854;     J.   Mason,    Three   Yeare  in   Turkey; 

Medical  Mieeion  to  the  Jewe,  London,  1860;  Mn.  Edwards, 

Mieeianary  Work  among  Oie  Jewe  in  Moldavia,  OaUna, 

and  Sileeia,  ib.  1807;  C.  K.  Kalkar.  ierael  und  die  Kirehe, 

Hamburs.  1809;    Q.  A.  Dalman.  Kurtfnfaeeiee  Handhueh 


dear  Mieeion  unter  Ierael,  Berlin,  1898;  J.  Dunlop,  Memoriee 
of  Ooepel  Triumphe  among  the  Jewe,  London,  1894;  The 
Jewieh  Queetion  and  the  Mieeion  to  the  Jewe,  ib.  1894; 
A.  L.  Williams;  Mieeione  to  the  Jewe,  ib.  1897;  W.  T.  Oid- 
ney.  The  Jewe  and  their  EvangeliuUion,  ib.  1899;  idem, 
Mieeione  to  Jewe,  ib.  1899;  At  Home  and  Abroad,  ib.  1900; 
A.  E.  Thompson,  A  Century  of  Jewieh  Mieeione,  Eidinburgh, 
1902;  J.  Riohter.  JUdiedte  MieeionegeechiOUe,  Gfltendoh, 
1906;  H.  O.  Dwight.  Blue  Book  of  Mieeione  for  1007, 
New  York,  1907;  J.  Schneider,  Kirddiehee  Jahrtueh, 
Gfltetsloh.  1909. 

JEZEBEL:  Wife  of  Ahab,  seventh  king  of  Israel 
She  was  a  daughter  of  Ethbaal,  king  of  Tyre,  and 
one  of  the  most  unscrupulous  yet  eneigetic  queens 
of  history.  She  seems  to  have  swayed  the  mind  of 
her  husband,  and  where  he  was  weak  and  vacilla- 
ting, she  supplied  courage  and  resolution.  She  es- 
tablished the  worship  of  the  Phenician  Baal  in  the 
kingdom,  and,  while  supporting  at  her  own  table 
the  priests  of  Baal,  persecuted  the  prophets  of  Israel 
(I  Kings  xviii.  4),  and  vowed  vengeance  upon  Elijah 
(I  Kings  xiz.  2).  When  her  husband  despaired  of 
getting  Naboth's  vineyard,  she  ordered  the  judicial 
murder  of  Naboth  and  secured  for  her  husband  the 
coveted  possession  (I  Kings  xxi.  5).  She  survived 
Ahab  fourteen  srears,  but  continued  to  have  great 
influence  at  court,  and  saw  her  daughter  Athaliah 
married  to  the  king  of  Judah  (II  Kings  viii:  26). 
When  Jehu  drove  into  Jezreel,  with  the  design  of  ex- 
tirpating the  house  of  Ahab,  Jezebel  was  thrown 
from  the  upper  story  of  the  plalaoe  to  death  on  the 
stones  beneath.  Her  body  was  crushed  imder  Jehu's 
chariot-wheels,  and,  according  to  II  Kings  ix.  dO- 
35,  devoured  by  dogs.     See  Ahab;  and  Eluah. 

Bxbuogbapht:  Consult,  bendee  the  pertinent  sections  in  the 
works  named  under  Ahab:  DB,  u.  66<M}67;  BB»  u.  2467; 
JE,  viL  186. 

JEZREBL:  A  plain  mentioned  Josh.  xvii.  16; 
Judges  vi.  33;  Hos.  i.  5,  etc.  The  name  C'  God 
sows  ")  denotes  the  fruitfulness  of  the  plain  as 
something  unusual,  extraordinary,  and  wrought 
by  God,  and  indicates  that  from  the  most  ancient 
times  agriculture  was  adequately  recompensed  in 
the  region.  Jezreel  is  the  laigest  plidn  in  the 
mountain  land  of  Israel,  and  is  therefore  called 
the  **  valley  "  (Judges  v.  15;  I  Sam.  xxxi.  7),  and 
"  the  great  plain  "  (I  Mace.  xii.  49).  It  was  of 
great  significance  in  commerce,  and  the  road  from 
Egypt  led  by  three  branches  to  the  southern  edge 
of  the  plain  and  continued  northwest  to  the  coast, 
northeast  to  Tabor  and  Damascus,  while  the  eastern 
edge  was  crossed  by  the  road  from  Samaria  to  Gali- 
lee. This  made  it  a  continual  cause  of  strife.  The 
Israelites  first  gained  possession  of  it  by  the  victory 
of  Barak  and  Deborah  (Judges  v.),  though  the 
Canaanites  retained  possession  of  M^ddo,  Ibleam, 
Taanach,  and  Dor  imtil  the  time  of  the  kings  (Judges 
i.  27).  To  Manasseh  belonged  the  southern  portion 
(Josh.  xvii.  11-13),  to  Issachar  the  eastern  part 
(Josh.  xix.  18-20),  while  Zebulim  was  on  the  north 
(Josh.  xix.  10  sqq.).  The  Israelites  under  Saul  and 
Jonathan  sustained  a  defeat  beneath  Gilboa  (I  Sam. 
xxxi.);  Ahab  defeated  Ben-hadad  II.  near  Aphek 
(I.  Kings  XX  26) ;  and  Josiah  was  defeated  by  Necho 
II.  at  Megiddo  (II  Kings  xxiii.  20).  The  dty  of 
Jezreel,  belonging  to  Issachar,  was  situated  on  the 
plain,  at  the  foot  of  Gilboa  (Josh.  xix.  18),  above 
Beth-shean  (I  Kings  iv.  12),  not  far  from  Garmel 


Joab 
Joaohim 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


183 


(I  Kings  xviii.  45),  and  was  the  home  of  Ahab  and 
Naboth  (I  Kings  xzi.  1)  and  the  scene  of  Jehu's 
exploit  (II  Kings  ix.  17  sqq.).  It  is  called  Esdrae- 
Ion  in  Judith,  iii.  9,  iv.  6,  and  in  later  times,  as  in 
the  Ononuuticon  of  Eusebius;  the  modem  village 
Zer'in  has  preserved  the  name.  There  were  other 
places  of  note  on  the  plain.  Josephus  {AtU,  XX.,  vi. 
1)  mentions  Ginaea,  the  modem  Jenin,  the  old  En- 
gannim  of  Josh.  xix.  21.  Taanach  of  Judges  v.  19 
is  the  modem  Ta'annuk.  The  city  of  Megiddo  lay 
on  the  south  border  of  the  plain,  and  appears  as 
the  Egyptian  Maketi  and  as  Magidda  in  the  Amama 
Tablets;  it  was  a  royal  Canaanitic  city,  and  was  re- 
fortified  by  Solomon.  In  the  western  part  lay  the 
village  of  Nein,  to  be  identified  with  the  Nain  of 
Luke  vii.  11  sqq.  The  modem  Endur  bespeaks  the 
ancient  En-dor  of  Josh.  xvii.  11,  south  of  which  is 
Sulem,  the  Shunem  of  Josh.  xix.  18.  Aphek  must 
be  sought  not  far  from  the  city  of  Jezreel,  possibly 
in  the  ruins  of  the  modem  El-Fule. 

(H.  GUTHB.) 

Biblxoobapht:  G.  A.  Smith,  Hiatorieal  Otography  of  the 
Holy  Land,  ohap.  xix.,  London,  1897;  H.  R«land,  PolO*- 
lifio,  pp.  359-370,  Utrecht.  1714;  C.  Ritt«r,  ComparaHvo 
Ooographv  cf  PaiuHno,  ii.  314-316.  317.  322.  iv.  333.  343- 
360.  Edinburgh,  1866;  O.  Eben  and  H.  Quthe,  PaUiatina 
in  BUd  und  Wort,  i.  276-290.  Stuttgart,  1883;  W.  M. 
ThomBon.  Th«  Land  and  ths  Book,  ii.  177-191.  New  York. 
1886;  W.  M.  MOUer.  Aaien  und  Europa,  pp.  167-168,  167, 
Leipoio,  1893;  F.  Buhl,  Goof/raphU  de»  alien  PaUuUna, 
pp.  106  sqq.,  204  sqq..  Tflbingen.  1896;  Robinaon, 
RMoardiM,  ui.  161-168;  SohOrer.  Otediichte,  i.  494-496. 
Eng.  tranid..  I.,  ii.  89;  DB,  u.  667-668;  EB,  u.  2468-2460. 
JS,  vii.  18^-187. 

JOAB:  One  of  the  most  notable  contemporaries 
of  David,  son  of  Zeruiah,  sister  of  David,  and 
brother  of  Abishai  and  Asahel  (II  Sam.  ii.  18).  He 
first  appears  in  II  Sam.  ii.  13  as  one  of  David's  cap- 
tains in  the  war  with  Ish-bosheth,  thougjb  I  Sam. 
xzii.  1  implies  that  he  had  then  been  long  a  com- 
panion of  David.  In  this  war  Abner,  the  leader  of 
Ish-bosheth's  forces,  slew  Asahel,  Joab's  brother, 
causing  a  blood  feud  with  Joab,  who  avenged  his 
brother  by  kiUing  Abner,  but  imder  such  circum- 
stances as  to  involve  David  in  the  suspicion  of 
playing  Abner  false,  since  he  was  treating  with 
Abner  for  the  union  of  the  northern  tribes  under 
his  sway  (II  Sam.  ii.-iii.).  Joab  was  so  powerful 
in  the  army  that  David  had  to  confess  his  inability 
to  punish  Joab  for  the  murder  and  the  consequences 
which  might  have  resulted  (II  Sam.  iii.  39).  I 
Chron.  xi.  4-8  makes  Joab  win  his  position  of 
leader  by  capturing  the  fortress  of  Jerusalem;  but 
this  does  not  agree  with  II  Sam.  v.  6-9  and  the 
context,  according  to  which  Joab  was  already  a 
leader. 

According  to  II.  Sam  viii.  16,  when  David  became 
king  of  all  Israel,  to  Joab  was  given  command  of 
the  army,  but  since  military  achievements  there- 
after were  ascribed  to  David  himself,  the  name  of 
Joab  appears  only  occasionally.  He  waged  a  bloody 
war  in  Edom  and  drove  the  Edomitio  king  in  exile 
to  Egypt  (I  Kings  xi.  15-17);  defeated  the  Ara- 
mean  allies  of  the  Ammonites  (II  Sam.  x.  6-14); 
executed  the  command  of  David  to  have  Uriah 
killed  in  a  skirmish  (II  Sam.  xi.  14-27) ;  and  shielded 
to  David  the  glory  of  a  hard-eamed  victory  over 
the  capital  of  the  Ammonites  (II  Sam.  zii.  2&-dl). 


It  was  Joab  who,  by  employing  a  stratagem  carried 
through  by  a  wise  woman  of  Tekoa,  persuaded 
David  to  recall  from  exile  Absalom,  who  had  killed 
his  brother  Amnon,  and  two  years  later  secured  a 
formal  reconciliation  between  father  and  son  (II 
Sam.  xiii.  39-xiv.  33).  In  the  rebellion  of  Absalom 
Joab  remained  true  to  David,  killed  the  imfilial 
rebel,  and  advised  the  king  wisely  when  the  latter 
in  mourning  for  his  son  was  likely  to  alienate  the 
affections  of  his  people.  He  defeated  an  attempt 
of  David  to  appoint  Amasa  in  his  place  (II  Sam. 
xvii.-xx.),  killing  Amasa  in  the  war  which  arose 
over  the  rebellion  of  Sheba  and  thus  raising  another 
blood-feud.  He  opposed  the  census  of  the  people 
ordered  by  David  (II  Sam.  xiv.  1-9).  At  the  end 
of  David's  reign  Joab  favored  Adonijah  as  the  rightr 
ftd  heir  to  the  throne,  and  thereby  incurred  the  en- 
mity of  Solomon,  who  was  designated  David's  suc- 
cessor and  was  favored  by  the  party  of  Nathan. 
For  this  and  earlier  offenses  Joab  was  slain  at  the 
altar  by  command  of  Solomon  (I  Kings  ii.  18-34). 

(H.  GUTHE.) 
Bibuoobapht:  The  oommentuies  on  Samuel  and  Kinicfl  and 
the  relevant  eeetions  in  the  works  on  the  history  of  Israel 
(named  under  Ahab);  Z>B.  ii.  658-660;  J?B.  iL  2460-2462; 
JE,  vu.  187-189. 

JOACHIM  L,  jO'a-kim:  Margrave  of  Branden- 
burg; b.  Feb.  21,  1484;  d.  at  Stendal  (40  m.  n.n.e. 
of  Magdebuig),  July  11,  1535.  Although  only  fif- 
teen years  of  age  at  the  death  of  his  father  he  as- 
sumed control  of  the  government  and  appeared  in 
the  diet  of  1500  with  the  dignity  of  electoral  prince, 
having  associated  his  ten-year-old  brother  with 
himself  as  nominal  co-ruler.  Through  Dietrich  of 
BqIow  the  young  prince  had  received  a  thorough 
humanistic  education,  and  in  his  intense  admiration 
for  the  new  learning  he  sought  and  secured  the 
friendship  of  the  famous  Tritheim,  abbot  of  Spon- 
heim,  who,  after  a  long  solicitation,  visited  Berlin 
in  1505  And  took  part  in  the  following  year  in  the 
foundation  of  the  University  at  FrankfortH>n-the- 
Oder.  Both  by  Tritheim  and  by  Aleander  Joachim 
was  praised  as  a  learned  prince  and  as  a  patron  of 
the  sciences.  In  the  government  of  his  territories 
he  displayed  exceptional  energy  in  the  suppression 
of  public  disorder  and  he  followed  this  up  with  the 
introduction  of  the  Roman  law  and  important  ju- 
dicial reforms  which,  however,  were  slow  in  com- 
ing into  effect.  In  the  imperial  election  which  re- 
sulted in  the  choice  of  Charles  V.,  Joachim  played 
an  unworthy  r6le  of  mingled  duplicity  and  weak- 
ness, carrying  on  secret  negotiations  both  with  Em- 
peror Maximilian  and  with  Francis  I.  of  France  and 
appearing  finally  as  a  candidate  himself.  He  failed, 
however,  to  secure  the  vote  even  of  his  brother 
Albert,  whom  his  influence  had  made,  in  1514, 
archbishop  of  Mains  (see  Albbht  of  Branden- 
burg). He  held  himself  aloof  from  the  imperial 
court  until  the  victory  of  Pavia  in  1525  made  Charles 
all-powerful  in  Germany.  Thereupon  Joachim  be- 
came a  thorough  partisan  of  the  House  of  Hapsbuig. 

As  early  as  1514  he  had  allowed  the  sale  of  in- 
dulgences to  be  carried  on  in  his  dominions,  and 
three  years  later  Tetsel  was  permitted  to  pursue  his 
practises  there.  The  theologians  at  the  University 
of  Frankfort  took  sides  against  Luther,  whom  the 


188 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDU 


Joab 
Joftohlxn 


maigrave  regarded  with  personal  dislike  because  of 
the  former's  bitter  attack  on  Archbishop  Albert. 
A  personal  interview  with  Luther  previous  to  the 
meeting  of  the  Diet  of  Worms  served  only  to  inten- 
sify the  opposition  between  the  two.    In  the  exe- 
cution of  the  provisions  of  the  Edict  of  Worms 
Joachim  took  the  leading  part,  gaining  thereby  in- 
creased favors  from  the  emperor.    In  1524  he  mar- 
ried his  eldest  son  to  a  daughter  of  Luther's  enemy, 
George  of  Saxony,  and  in  the  following  year  joined 
the  association  formed  at  Dessau  for  the  destruction 
of  "  The  Abominable  Sect  of  Lutherans."    In  spite 
of  all  his  efforts,  however,  the  new  teachings  niade 
rapid  progress  in  Brandenburg  and  created  dissen- 
sions in  his  own  household.    In  1527  his  wife  Eliza- 
beth received  the  communion  secretly  from  a  Lu- 
theran priest,  largely  through  the  influence  of  her 
brother  Christian  II.  of  Denmark,  whose  interfei^ 
ence  in  his  domestic  affairs  aroused  bitter  resent- 
ment in  Joachim.    The  electress  escaped  lifelong 
imprisonment  only  by  flight,  and  Luther's  inter- 
vention served  but  to  intensify  the  elector's  hatred. 
At  the  Diet  of  Augsbuig  he  appeared  as  one  of  the 
leading  champions  of  a  policy  of  relentless  warfare 
against  the  Lutherans.    In  1533  he  concluded  with 
George  of  Saxony  and  Archbishop  Albert  a  league 
at  Halle  in  opposition  to  the  Schmalkald  League. 
In  his  will,  drawn  up  in  1534,  he  laid  the  injunction 
upon  his  successors  to  remain  faithful  to  the  Roman 
communion,  and,  when  his  son  Joachim's  wife  died, 
he  obtained  for  him  the  hand  of  Hedwig,  daughter 
of  Sigismund,  king  of  Catholic  Poland.    His  death 
revealed,  however,  that  his  efforts  against  the  spread 
of  the  reformed  faith  were  practically  vain. 

(G.  Kawsrau.) 
Bibuoobapht:  J.  O.  I>ro3r8eii,  OeathiehU  der  prtuuiMch^n 
Politik,  U.  2.  pp.  1-103,  Leipsio,  1870;  A.  MOlIer.  CfetdiiehU 
<Ur  Reformation  in  der  Mark  Brandentmrg,  Berlin,  1830; 
G.  W.  Spieker,  OeaehidUe  der  EinfOhruno  der  R^ormaHon 
in  ,  .  ,  Brandenhurg,  ib.  1830;  D.  Erdmann,  Litiher  und 
die  HoheruoUem,  pp.  37  sqq.,  Breiilau,  1883;  J.  Heidemftnn, 
Die  Reformation  in  der  Mark  Brandenburg,  Berlin.  1880. 
For  matter  upon  the  ehoioe  of  the  emperor  oonmilt: 
Reichetagmiklen,  new  aeriee,  vol.  L.  Gotha,  1803;  E.  R. 
Boeder.  Die  KaiaerwM  CarU  V.,  Vienna,  1878.  Ckinsult 
also  the  literature  given  under  Tritbkmxub. 

JOACHIM  n.:  Margrave  of  Brandenburg;  b. 
Jan.  9,  1505;  d.  at  KOpenik  (8  m.  s.e.  of  Berlin), 
Jan.  3, 1571.  He  was  the  son  of  Joachim  I.  (q.v.), 
was  educated  under  the  supervision  of  his  uncle  the 
Elector  Albert  (see  Albert  of  Brandenburg), 
and  at  an  early  age  conceived  an  interest  in  theo- 
logical questions.  By  his  marriage  with  the  daugh- 
ter of  Geoige  of  Saxony  in  1524  and  of  Sigismund  of 
Poland  in  1535,  his  father  had  sought  to  bind  him 
to  the  Roman  faith.  But  it  was  early  apparent 
that  he  would  not  follow  doeely  in  the  footsteps  of 
his  father,  whom  he  succeeded  in  1535.  At  first  he 
attempted  to  play  the  part  of  mediator  between 
the  two  parties  and  eagerly  embraced  the  plan  of  a 
general  council  for  the  settlement  of  the  religious 
schism,  but  when  the  convocation  of  such  an  as- 
sembly was  repeatedly  postponed  he  turned  his 
efforts  solely  in  the  direction  of  establishing  har- 
mony within  the  empire.  In  1538  he  submitted  to 
the  emperor  a  compromise  program  for  the  attain^ 
ment  of  such  an  end,  which  led  to  prolonged  nego- 
tiations in  that  and  the  following  year  without  re- 


sulting in  any  definite  achievement.  The  death  of 
George  of  Saxony  in  1539  removed  one  of  the  strong- 
est ix^uences  for  Catholicism  in  Brandenburg.  For 
some  years  before  this  event  Joachim  had  per- 
mitted the  open  extension  of  the  Lutheran  influ- 
ence, and  in  1538  he  submitted  to  Melanchthon  a 
program  of  church  reform  drawn  up  for  him  by  the 
dean  of  Elgersma.  Melanchthon  rejected  the  con- 
stitutions as  insufficiently  Evangelical,  and  the  wide- 
spread movement  among  the  nobles  and  the  third 
estate  convinced  the  maigrave  that  the  time  for  a 
radical  change  had  come.  New  church  constitutions 
were  drawn  up,  after  preparation  by  Prince  Geoig 
von  Anhalt,  by  a  commission  comprising  Jacob 
Stratner,  Georg  Buchholzer,  and  Georg  Witzel  and 
were  approved  by  Melanchthon.  In  November,  1539, 
the  margrave  formally  received  the  Lord's  Supper 
according  to  the  Lutheran  form  and  subsequently 
the  revised  church  constitutions  were  sent  to  Wi1>- 
tenberg,  where  they  received  the  approval  of  Lu- 
ther, Melanchthon,  and  Jonas,  though  of  all  Prot- 
estant Church  systems  they  represented  the  least 
departure  from  the  Roman  Catholic  position. 
Joachim  succeeded  in  obtaining  the  confirmation 
of  the  emperor  on  the  promise  of  submission  to  the 
decisions  of  a  future  council.  The  new  ordinances 
were  speedily  introduced  and  the  gradual  abolition 
of  the  monastic  system  was  begun. 

In  the  field  of  politics  also  Joachim  attempted  to 
play  the  r61e  of  arbitrator  between  the  two  parties. 
At  the  Colloquy  of  Worms  (q.v.)  in  1540-41  his  rep- 
resentatives sat  with  the  **  submissive  "  as  opposed 
to  the  "  protesting  "  deputies,  and  he  based  much 
hope  upon  the  plan  here  secretly  formulated  for 
another  conference  at  Regensbuig  where  it  was 
hoped  that  the  reunion  of  the  parties  might  be 
achieved.  Luther,  to  whom  the  project  was  sub- 
mitted, rejected  its  terms  as  unsatisfactory  both  to 
the  Roman  Church  and  to  the  Protestants,  but 
Joachim  did  not  abandon  his  activity,  and  when  the 
emperor  contemplated  the  despatch  of  a  special 
mission  to  Luther  he  offered  himself  for  the  service. 
Before  the  outbreak  of  the  Schmalkald  War  (1546) 
he  attempted  to  mediate  between  the  leaders  of  the 
League  and  the  emperor,  but,  failing,  sent  a  force 
of  cavalry  in  the  following  year  to  the  aid  of  Maurice 
of  Saxony  in  return  for  the  elevation  of  his  second 
son  Frederick  to  the  post  of  coadjuu>r  bishop  of 
Magdebuig  and  Halberstadt.  He  pledged  himself 
to  abide  by  the  decisions  of  the  coimcil  to  be  assem- 
bled at  Trent  and  obtained  the  same  concessions 
in  the  religious  sphere  that  had  been  granted  to 
Maurice  of  Saxony.  He  was  active  in  advocating 
the  adoption  of  the  Augsbuig  Interim  (see  Aoric- 
OLA.,  Johann;  Interim,  2).  From  this  time  his 
political  importance  declines;  his  subsequent  efforts 
were  directed  toward  dynastic  aggrandisement,  and 
with  this  ambition  he  permitted  his  son  Sigismund 
to  accept  the  archbishopric  of  Msgdebuig  and  the 
see  of  Halberstadt  on  the  condition  of  complete  sub- 
mission to  the  pope.  It  was  only  political  interests, 
however,  that  prevented  the  complete  introduction 
of  the  Protestant  confession  in  his  dominions,  an 
event  which  followed  the  death  of  Joachim  and  the 
succession  of  his  son  John  Geoige. 

(G.  Kawxrau.) 


Joaohlm  of  Vlore 
Joftoh 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


184 


Bibuooeapht:  Beaides  the  Utemture  siven  under  Joacbim 
I.,  consult:  A.  Hartung,  Joaehim  II.  und  aein  Sohn  Jdhann 
Owrg,  Berlin,  1798;  F.  Meine,  Die  vermiUelnde  SteUung 
JoaehimMlI,  .  .  .  bu  den  politUdiien  und  r€lioi69en  Parieien 
miner  Zeit^  LOneburg,  1808;  artioles  in  the  Foraehungen 
Mur  hrandenbvrgiMehen  und  preiamdken  OeednehU,)!  (1880), 
306  sqq.,  and  vii  (1804).  181  ■qq..  by  F.  Hoftie.  and  vi 
(1803),  620  sqq.,  by  H.  Landwehr;  and  new  artiolea  of  im- 
portance by  N.  Holier  in  Jahrbueh  fUr  hrandenlwrgiBche 
Q—ehichU,  1004  sqq. 

JOACHIM  OF  FIORE  (Lat.  Florxs)  and  the 
<<  EVBRLASTHffO  GOSPEL  "  {Evangelium  aeiemum) : 
Joachim,  abbot  of  San  Giovanni  in  Fiore  (in 
the  Sila  Mountains,  25  m.  e.  of  Co- 
Joachim's  senxa),  Calabria,  is  said  to  have  been 
Life  and  bom  of  wealthy  parents  at  Celico,  a 
Writings,  village  near  Cosenza,  in  1145(7),  to 
have  made  a  pilgrimage  to  Palestine, 
and  then  to  have  become  a  monk.  In  1177  he  was 
abbot  of  a  Cistercian  monastery  at  Corasso  (12  m. 
s.e.  of  Cosenza),  but  often  withdrew  to  the  mother 
monastery  of  Casamari  (near  Veroli,  50  m.  s.e.  of 
Rome)  to  pursue  his  studies.  Later  (not  before 
1188)  he  gave  up  his  place  at  Coraszo  and  founded 
San  Giovanni  in  Fiore,  which  became  the  center  of 
a  congregation  comprising  more  than  thirty  monaa- 
teries.  Leading  a  strictly  ascetic  life  and  being  re- 
puted a  prophet,  he  was  highly  respected  by  po- 
tentates and  popes,  who  encouraged  him  in  his 
Biblico-apocalyptie  studies.  He  was  very  loyal  to 
the  papacy,  and  required  the  members  of  his  order 
not  to  publish  the  writings  which  he  left  before  they 
had  passed  the  examination  of  the  papal  censor. 
Of  his  works  only  the  three  which  he  considered  the 
most  important  have  been  printed,  viz.:  (1)  Liber 
concordiae  novi  ac  veteria  tettamerUi  (Venice,  1519); 

(2)  PaaUerium  decern  ehordarum    (Venice,    1527); 

(3)  Expoeiiio  apocalypeia  (also  called  ApocalypeU 
nova,  Venice,  1527).  There  are  other  works  still  in 
manuscript.  The  commentaries  on  Isaiah  and  Jere- 
miah, attributed  to  him  as  early  as  the  middle  of 
the  thirteenth  century,  are  not  his  and  differ  from 
his  genuine  writings  especially  by  their  harsh  atti- 
tude toward  the  Church  of  Rome.  Now  that  they 
have  been  eliminated  (by  Engelhardt  and  Fried- 
erich),  a  correct  estimate  of  Joachim  is  first  made 
possible.  • 

He  belongs  in  part  to  those  of  the  twelfth  cen- 
tury who,  like  Bernard  of  C^Hairvaux  and  Gerhoh  of 
Reichersberg,  in  spite  of  their  ecclesia^- 
His  Rela-  tical  sentiment  and  attitude,  had  never- 
tioiis  and  theless  a  keen  eye  for  the  shortcomings 
Significance,  of  ecclesiastical  life.  To  this,  like  the 
visionaries  Hildegard  of  Bingen  and 
Elizabeth  of  SchOnau,  he  added  an  excited  expec- 
tation of  an  impending  transformation  of  all  things. 
The  ancient  hope  of  a  glorious  time  of  the  Church 
on  earth,  preceded  by  fearful  struggles,  was  revived 
anew.  This  hope  Joachim  based  not  on  new  revela- 
tions, but  mainly  upon  the  Holy  Scriptures,  for 
whose  deeper  imderstanding  he  imagined  himself 
especially  equipped  through  divine  illumination. 
This  illumination,  however,  did  not  take  the  place 
of  study,  but  rather  led  him  to  a  very  thorough  and, 
in  his  way,  closer  examination  of  the  Scriptures,  re- 
quiring much  time  and  pains,  and  united  to  an 
artificial  system  of  historioo-prophetical  theology. 
One  may  say  that  in  this  respect — following  certain 


predecessors  like  Rupert  of  I>eutz->4ie  opens  up  a 
new  development  in  the  department  of  prophetical 
theology — a  treatment  which  was  afterward  con- 
tinued by  Cboceius  and  Bengel,  but  it  must  not  be 
forgotten  that  Joachim  differs  from  both  suc- 
cessors at  least  as  much  as  each  differs  from  the 
other. 

Upon  the  principles  indicated  above  the  following 
notion  of  history  is  established.  It  is  divided  into 
three  dispensations  (ttatiu)  of  the  Fa- 
His  Ex-  ther,  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Spirit;  or, 
position  of  with  reference  to  the  three  chief  classes 
History,  in  the  Church,  the  times  of  the  pre- 
dominance of  the  married,  of  the  clerics, 
and  of  the  monks.  The  first  commenced  with  Adam, 
the  second  with  John  the  Baptist;  the  preparation 
for  the  third  began  with  St.  Benedict,  its  develop- 
ment conmienced  with  the  order  of  the  Cistercians, 
and  about  1260  the  final  development  will  take 
place.  The  helping  power,  the  Parvuli  de  ecdesia 
kUifuif  will  come  from  the  Church  of  the  West,  which 
he  thinks  of  as  a  monastic  order,  the  ardo  fuatorum. 
The  elect  in  the  Greek  Church  will  also  be  united 
with  the  Roman  Church,  and  the  conversion  of 
Gentiles  and  Jews  will  take  place.  This  is  the  time 
in  which,  as  is  written  in  the  Scriptures,  Spirit  and 
Life  shall  be  in  the  Church,  the  time  of  the  eternal 
Gospel  (cf.  ALKO,  i.  52  sqq.  and  iii.).  But  there 
must  still  take  place  a  last  fight  against  the  power 
of  evil,  which  appears  in  the  person  of  the  last  and 
worst  antichrist,  in  Gog.  After  this  will  follow  the 
final  judgment  and  the  great  Sabbath  of  the  con- 
sunmiation  will  be  ushered  in. 

These  thoughts,  as  further  expanded  in  Joachim's 
writings,  were  favorably  received.    The  thirteenth 
century  was  filled  with  more  eztravsr 
His  Infiu-   gant  expectations  of  the  future  than 
ence  and    the  twelfth  even,  and  the  zealous  Fran- 
FoUowers.  ciscans,  who  thought  more  of  the  ideal 
The  '*  Ever-  of  poverty  than  of  the  official  Church, 
lasting      were  not  the  last  to  foster  them.  Here 
GospeL"    the  ideas  of  Joachim  found  the  most 
ready  reception,  and  received  an  inter- 
pretation and  expansion  which  were  contrary  to  his 
own  meaning.    Here  belong  also  the  commentaries 
on  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah.    The  Minorite  Gerhard  of 
Borgo  San  Donnino  went  the  furthest.    He  regarded 
the  three  principal  works  of  Joachim  as  truly  in- 
spired and  canonical  writings,  as  the  last  and  high- 
est part  of  the  canon,  which  as  Evangeiium  ader- 
num  surpassed  the  Old  and  New  Testaments.    He 
prepared  an  edition  of  the  same,  supplied  it  with 
glosses  and  an  Introdudarius  in  evangeUum  aeter- 
num.    This  work,  published  at  Paris  in  1254,  caused 
a  great  stir  (cf.  the  passage  from  the  Roman  de  la 
rose  in  Haupt,  379,  note  1).    The  theologians  of  the 
University  of  Paris,  who  saw  themselves  threatened 
in  their  ecclesiastical  and  scientific  position  by  the 
mendicant  monks,  took  up  the  gauntlet  and  made 
a  complaint  at  Rome.    In  1255  Alexander  IV.  i^ 
pointed  a  commission  to  examine  the  matter  (cf. 
the  protocols  in  AKLGy  i.  99-142).    On  Nov.  4, 
1255,  a  bull  was  issued  which  oondenmed  the  In- 
trodudariue,  without  censuring,  however,  the  wri- 
tings of  Joachim.    When  a  synod  at  Aries  (1260  or 
1263)  afterward  condenmed  the  writings  of  Joachim, 


186 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Joaohim  of  Fiore 
JoMh 


this  decision  obtained  no  general  ecclesiastical  au- 
Uioiity.  His  name  remained  as  that  of  one  beati- 
fied (fieaiua)  in  the  memory  of  the  Churoh,  and  as 
such  he  has  a  place  in  the  Acta  Sanctorum.  StiU  less 
could  this  condenmation  prevent  Joachim's  pro- 
phetical expositions  from  being  read  over  and  over 
again,  and  finding  believers,  though  the  year  1260 
pasaed  without  change  in  the  ecclesiastical  relations. 
Johannes  Petrus  Olivi  and  Ubertinus  of  Casale,  in 
general  the  SpirHuales  of  the  Minorites,  are  under 
their  spell.  There  were  Joachimites  who  adhered 
to  the  pope  as  well  as  GhibeUine  JoachimiteSi  and 
through  the  entire  medieval  period  traces  of  Joa- 
chiTniwm  are  found.  S.  M.  Dbxttbch. 

Bibuoobapht:  Bendm  the  writinsa  of  Joaohim  and  scat- 
tered notices,  the  first  source  is:  SynojmB  virtutuin  beaii 
Joathimi,  by  Luea  Consentinas,  in  F.  Ughelli,  Italia  sacra, 
iz.  205  sqq..  Venice,  1722  (also,  with  the  Vita  by  Jacobus 
Qraeeus  Syllanaeua  and  prefatory  remarks,  in  ASB, 
May,  viL  83-112).  Consult:  J.  Q.  V.  Engelhardt,  JCtrdUn- 
ffsaoMcMuAs  Abhandlwtaen,  pp.  1-160.  260-201.  Erlangen, 
1832  (fundamental):  C.  U.  Hahn,  Geathiehie  dmr  Ktlter 
im  MitteiaiUr,  iii.  72-176,  260-346,  Stuttgart,  1860  (in 
Engelhardt  and  Hahn's  oomprebensive  extracts  from 
Joachim's  works);  Friederieh,  in  ZWT,  U  (1860),  840-303, 
444-614  (on  Joachim's  oomoMntaries  on  Isaiah  and  Jere- 
miah); J.  J.  I.  von  DAUinger.  in  Hiatoritehet  Taaehenbueh, 
▼.,  i  (1871).  267-870;  W.  Preger.  Guekidiie  dtr  dmOMthen 
MyaHk,  I  106-207,  Leipeic  1874  (defeotiTe);  H.  F. 
Renter.  Oe§eki^U  der  religidaen  AufkUkrung  im  MiUelatUr, 
ii.  101-218.  364-368,  636  sqq.,  BerUn,  1877;  8.  Denifle, 
DoM  Bvang^utm  atUrnum  und  dis  Coimmssum  su  Anagnij 
in  ALKG,  i  (1886),  40-141;  H.  Haupt.  Zur  OeaehidUe 
dm  /oacfcimMmiM,  in  ZKQ,  vii  (1884),  872  sqq.  (agrees 
with  Denifle  on  independent  grounds);  W.  Bousset,  Der 
AnUdkriA  in  dtr  UAtrliaferuna,  OAttingen,  1806;  E. 
Wadstein,  Die  Mdtaiologia€hs  Idatngrwppa,  Anlichrui^ 
Walitabbat  und  WeiioeridU,  Leipaic,  1806;  Neander, 
ChrifUan  Church,  iv.  220-232  et  passim;  Moeller,  Chria. 
Han  Church,  U.  416^17. 

JOAN,  POPE:  An  alleged  female  pope,  the  cen- 
tral figure  of  a  legend  dating  from  the  middle  of 
the  thirteenth  century.  The  story  occurs  for  the 
first  time  in  the  chronicle  of  Jean  de  MaiUy,  whence 
it  was  borrowed  by  his  brother  Dominican  Stephen 
of  Bourbon  (d.  1261),  both  dating  Pope  Joan  about 
1100.  The  legend  was  chiefly  disseminated,  how- 
ever, by  the  chronicle  of  Martinus  PolonuB  (d.  1278). 
According  to  him,  she  was  bom  either  in  Mains  or 
England,  disguised  as  a  man  studied  in  Athens, 
aroused  deep  admiration  at  Rome  by  her  learning, 
and  was  finally  elected  pope  in  855,  ruling  two  and 
a  half  years  under  the  name  of  Johannes  Angelicus. 
She  died  in  childbirth  in  the  street  during  a  public 
procession  and  was  buried  where  she  expired.  In 
the  fifteenth  century  the  legend  of  Pope  Joan  was 
regarded  as  a  fact  and  was  one  of  the  main  aigu- 
ments  in  the  controversies  on  the  justification  and 
extent  of  the  papal  power,  additional  credibility 
being  given  the  story  through  its  circulation  by 
Roman  Catholic  historians.  The  legend  is  now  re- 
garded as  based  on  a  local  Roman  tradition  con- 
cerning an  ancient  statue  which  has  disappeared, 
but  which  seems  ^to  have  represented  a  priest  of 
Mithra  and  a  child.  This  figure  of  the  priest  was 
popularly  supposed  to  be  a  woman;  and  the  unin- 
telligible inscription  on  the  group  was  taken  to  be 
the  epiti^h  of  the  female  pope.  The  name  Joan 
(Johanna,  Johannes)  is  obviously  due  to  the  nu- 
merous popes  John,  some  of  whom  bore  an  indififer- 
ent  reputation.    The  double  date  of  855  and  1100 


originated  in  an  attempt  to  fill  a  supposed  lacuna 
in  the  list  of  popes  at  those  times.  (R.  Schmid.) 
BiBuoaRAPHT:  The  one  book  of  importance  is  J.  J.  I.  von 
D61Unger.  Papttfabeln  de§  MiltglaUera,  ed.  Friedrieh, 
Munich,  1800,  Eng.  transl.  of  1st  ed..  pp.  3-74,  New  York, 
1872.  Consult  also:  E.  Rhoides,  La  Papetm  Jeanne, 
Paris,  1878.  Eng.  transl.,  London,  1887.  Germ,  transl., 
Leipsie,  1004;  Neander,  ChriaHan  Church,  iii.  307,  v.  28fi. 
307;  Moeller,  Chrietian  Church,  ii.  150. 

JO  ASH  (JEHOASH;  the  two  forms  are  used 
interchangeably  in  the  sources):  1.  Seventh  king 
of  Judah,  son  and  successor  of  Ahaziah  after  the 
six  years'  usurpation  of  his  mother  Athaliah.  His 
dates  according  to  the  old  chronology  are  878-838 
B.C.;  according  to  Kamphausen,  836-797  B.C.;  ac- 
cording to  Dimcker,  837-797  B.C.;  and  according 
to  Curtis  (DB,  i.  401),  836-796  B.C.  He  was  hidden 
by  his  aimt  Jehoshebah  when  Athaliah  massacred 
the  seed  royal,  and  in  his  seventh  year  was  brought 
out  from  his  concealment  and  made  king  under  the 
practical  regency  of  the  priest  Jehoiada  (q.v.).  The 
important  external  event  of  his  reign  was  a  threat- 
ened or  real  attack  on  Jerusalem  by  the  Arameans 
under  Hasael,  which,  according  to  II  Kings  xii.  18, 
was  averted  by  a  heavy  tribute  which  stripped  the 
city  of  its  treasures,  but  according  to  the  Chronicler 
(II  Chron.  xxiv.  23-24)  was  consmnmated  and 
proved  disastrous  to  the  kingdom.  Joash's  relig- 
ious significance  lies  in  his  services  to  the  temple, 
which,  imder  the  usurpation  of  Athaliah,  had  been 
allowcxl  to  fall  into  disrepair.  This  was  first  com- 
mitted to  the  charge  of  the  priests  and  Levites,  but 
was  neglected  by  them.  The  matter  was  then 
taken  out  of  their  hands  and  entrusted  to  the  chief 
priest  and  a  civil  officer.  The  sources  seem  to  im- 
ply a  defection  from  religious  zeal  after  the  death  of 
Jehoiada;  both  sources.  Kings  and  Chronicles, 
record  his  death  by  assassination  at  the  hand  of 
"  his  servants,"  and  the  Chronicler  asserts  that  he 
was  not  buried  "  in  the  sepulchera  of  the  kings." 

2.  Twelfth  king  of  Israel,  son  and  successor  of 
Jehoahaz.  His  dates,  according  to  the  old  chronol- 
ogy, are  840-823  B.C.;  according  to  Elamphausen, 
797-782  B.C.;  according  to  Duncker,  798-790  B.C.; 
according  to  Curtis,  798-782  B.C.  He  gained  a 
series  of  victories  over  Ben-hadad  of  Damascus  by 
which  he  recovered  laige  parts  of  the  kingdom 
which  had  been  lost  to  Hazael  under  Jehoahaz--an 
event  made  possible  by  the  fact  that  under  Sham- 
shi-Ramman  Assyria  had  renewed  its  battering  at 
the  gates  of  Damascus  (see  Abstria,  VI.,  3,  {  9), 
and  the  Syrians  were  therefore  fully  employed 
guarding  their  eastern  frontier.  A  second  important 
matter  was  the  defeat  of  Amaziah  of  Judah  after 
the  latter  had  wantonly  provoked  a  conflict,  and 
his  punishment  by  a  partial  destruction  of  the  wall 
of  Jerusalem  and  reduction  to  vassalage.  Some 
light  is  cast  upon  the  religious  status  of  Joash  by 
II  Kings  xiii.  14  sqq.,  telling  of  a  real  attachment 
between  himself  and  the  prophet  which  suggests  that 
the  sentence  of  condemnation  uttered  in  II  Kings 
xiii.  11  implies  a  Judaic  standpoint  from  which  all 
the  kings  of  Israel  were  regarded  as  recreant. 
Bibuoorapht:  For  1  the  souroes  an  IT  Kings  zi.-sL; 
II  Ghron.  zzii.  11-zziv.;  and  f or  2,  II  Kincs  xiii  10-2S, 
xiv.  8-16.  Besides  the  literature  given  under  Ahab,  con- 
sult: C.  F.  Bumey,  Notea  on  the  Hebrew  Text  of  ,  ,  , 
Kinge,  Oxford,  1908;  DB,  ii.  66(HM(7;   BB,  il  2463. 


Job,  Book  of 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


186 


I.  Plmoe  of  the  Book  in  the  Canon. 
II.  The  Text. 

The  Septuagint  Text  Shorter  then 

the  Hebrew  (|  1). 
Poaaible  Explanetione  of  Difference 

of  Text  (S  2). 
Parellelittn  ae  an   Aid  to    Text- 

Criticiem  (f  3). 
Corruptione  of  Conaonantal  Text 

Explained  (f  4). 


JOB,    BOOK   OF. 

Early  Ck>ndition  of  the  Text  (f  6). 
III.  Plan,  Contents  and  Purpose. 

The  EUhu  Section  a  Later  Addition 

(ID. 
The  Plan  (|  2). 
The    Religion    of    Job    and    His 

Friends  (|  3). 
Genuineness  of  the  Prologue  (|  4). 
8»tan  in  the  Prologue  and  in  Other 

Scripture  (f  6). 


The  Purpose  (|  6). 

Organic   Interconnection   of  Dia- 
logue and  Narrative  (|  7). 

Result  of  the  Divine  Admonitioos 
(§8). 

Job's  Attempt  to  Comprehend  His 
Misfortunes  (S  9). 

Job's  Ultimate  Position  (f  10). 
IV.  The    Author    and    the    Time    of 
Composition. 


L  Place  of  the  Book  in  the  Canon:  Among  the 
Kethubhim,  constituting  the  third  diviBion  of  the 
Hebrew  canon  (see  Canon  of  Scriptdrb),  three 
books  stand  together  as  a  class  marked  by  a  sys- 
tem of  accentuation  different  from  that  of  the  other 
books  of  Scripture.  These  are  Psalms,  Proverbs, 
and  Job.  The  position  of  Job  in  the  sources,  how- 
ever, varies  greatly.  The  Talmud  (Baba  batra  14b) 
places  it  between  Psalms  and  Proverbs;  Jerome's 
Proloffua  galeatus  puts  it  before  Psalms;  Origen 
seems  to  say  (Eusebius,  HiH,  ecd.,  vi.  25)  that  while 
Psalms  and  the  three  Solomonic  writings  separate 
the  historical  and  prophetical  books,  Job  stood  after 
the  prophetical  books  and  before  Esther.  Melito 
places  Job  after  Psalms  and  the  Solomonic  books 
and  before  the  prophetic  writings.  Indeed  no  uni- 
formity appears  and  a  very  varying  order  of  ar- 
rangement is  attested;  it  is  sufficient  to  say  that 
the  order  in  the  English  Bible — Job,  Psalms,  Prov- 
erbs, Ecclesiastes,  (^tides — ^is  attested  by  a  large 
group  of  patristic  writings.  There  is,  on  the  other 
hand,  a  group  of  authorities  which  arrange  the  his- 
tory of  pious  Job  with  those  of  other  pious  persons, 
Tobit,  Judith,  Esther,  and  Ezra,  placing  these 
among  the  historical  books.  A  noteworthy  posi- 
tion, due  to  the  supposition  that  Job  is  a  work  of 
Moses,  k>cates  it  with  Joshua  immediately  follow- 
ing the  Law.  The  idea  underlying  these  various 
arrangements  is  either  the  poetic  form,  the  relation- 
ship of  contents,  or  the  supposed  authorship  or  the 
connection  of  its  hero  with  early  celebrities. 

n.  The  Text:  The  best  helps  to  the  text  are  the 
direct  translations,  including  that  of  the  Targum 
(which  often  gives  a  double  rendering),  the  Pe- 
shito,  the  translations  of  Jerome  and  the  Greek  of 
Origen.  The  Hebrew  basis  of  these  versions  wit- 
nesses to  the  same  recension  of  the  Hebrew  as  un- 
derlies the  Masoretic  text.  From  this  the  Septua- 
gint varies  in  an  astonishing  manner,  not  only  in 
its  additions  (like  that  of  the  speech  of  Job's  wife 
in  chap,  ii.,  explicable  on  psychological  groimds) 
but  in  its  omissions;  and  with  the  Septuagint  goes 
the  Old  Latin  derived  from  it.  With  this  corre- 
sponds also  the  Old  Latin  which  Jerome  sought  to 
supplement  by  his  Latin  translation  of  the  Septua- 
gint juxta  Oraecos  and  later  by  his  editio  jwda  He- 
braeos.  Jerome  testifies  to  the  lacunas,  amounting 
to  seven  or  eight  hundred  verses,  in  the  Old  Latin 
and  the  Septuagint,  which  Origen  had  supplied  from 
other  versions  in  which  the  readings,  according  to 
Jerome,  were  often  without  sense.  The  number  of 
omissions  might  be  suspected  as  exaggerated  in  the 
foregoing  statement  were  it  not  that,  in  the  first 
place,  Jerome  indicates  that  the  Old-Latin  version 
is  more  defective  and  disfigured  than  the  Greek 
basis,  and,  in  the  second  place,  the  statement  ex- 


ceeds only  a  little  the  results  from  stichometric 
counts.  Zahn  gives  the  reckoning  for  the  first 
form  as  varying  between  1,800,  1,700, 
I.  The  and  1,600  stichoi,  the  last  testified  by 
Septuagint  a  number  of  manuscripts,  for  which 
Text  the  niunber  of  the  corresponding  im- 
Shorter  proved  text  is  2,200.  This  last  num- 
tfaan  the  ber  as  a  roimd  statement  agrees  closely 
Hebrew,  with  the  count  of  a  number  of  man- 
uscripts and  editions,  and  also  with 
the  Masoretic  count  of  the  verses  of  Job  as  1,070, 
which  gives  2,140  stichoi,  allowing  two  stichoi  to 
each  verse.  According  to  this  testimony,  the  im- 
proved Greek  was  500  or  (according  to  Hesychius) 
600  stichoi  longer  than  the  earlier  Septuagint;  but 
how  this  result  was  reached  or  upon  what  basis  the 
statement  was  made  is  now  unknown.  It  is  further 
noticeable  that  the  statement  refers  to  a  form  of 
the  Septuagint  which  differs  from  that  of  Origen. 
And  the  situation  is  further  complicated  by  the  | 
fact  that  the  Hexaplar  notes  transmitted  can  not 
be  either  fully  or  rightly  understood.  At  any  rate, 
it  is  possible  to  affirm  that  the  Job  of  the  old  Sep- 
tuagint was  at  least  a  fourth  part  shorter  than  the 
present  Hebrew  text.  The  traditional  explanation 
was  that  a  text  corresponding  to  the  present  lay  | 
before  the  Greek  translator,  but  that  the  rendering 
was  shortened  either  by  one  of  the  ordinary  mi»- 
haps  attending  copying  and  translation,  or  pur- 
posely because  the  contents  were  offensive  to  the 
translator,  or  because  the  words  were  not  unde^ 
stood,  or  because  the  book  seemed  too  long.  If  it 
is  noted  that  in  many  cases  corruption  is  inherent 
in  the  Greek  text,  individual  cases  are  explained 
upon  that  ground.  But  when  it  is  noted  that  the 
translator  is  dexterous  in  substituting  phrases  in- 
telligible in  Greek  for  obscure  Hebrew  phrases  and 
in  making  the  condensed  Hebrew  luminous  by  ad- 
ditions, it  becomes  more  difficult  to  hold  that  the 
translator  wilfully  shortened  the  text  or  passed 
over  passages  because  they  were  difficult. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  has  often  been  the  case 
that  scholars,  prejudiced  in  behalf  of  the  Hebrew, 
have  found  in  the  other  Greek  versions  and  in  the 
tradition  reaching  back  to  Jerome  pure  creation, 
even  where  the  paraphrase  is,  like  that  of  the  Tai^ 
gum,  suggested  by  the  Hebrew.  Such  a  passage 
is  vi.  7,  where,  instead  of  orgif  hormd  is  to  be  read 
as  the  rendering  of  naphshi  in  the  sense  of  intensity 
of  hunger.  The  extension  of  this  verse  is  not  to  be 
explained  by  the  introduction  of  a  gloss,  but  by  the 
attempt  in  the  paraphrase  to  express  clearly  the 
meaning  of  the  original.  A  similar  example  is 
found  in  the  passage  iv.  12,  where  the  free  transla- 
tion expresses  well,  though  in  expanded  form,  the 
original  Hebrew,  with  slight  changes  in  reading. 


187 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Job,  Book  of 


These  and  similar  cases,  of  which  many  might  be 
adduced,  show  that  the  Septuagint  is  an  independ- 
ent and  close  equivalent,  and  that,  no  matter  how 
changed  it  may  be,  the  translator  exercised  thought 
and  criticism  upon  the  text  which  lay  before  him, 
which  was  in  very  close  relationship  with  that 
which  is  now  in  our  possession.  This  is  shown 
in  vi.  6  in  which  the  difficult  phrase  in  the 
present  Hebrew  text  TWuPH  1^3  was  read  in 
the  text  before  the  translator  of  the 
a.  PosBible  Septuagint  Tmhn  nan3.  It  is  to  be 
Expbma-  recognized  that  alongside  of  the  pres- 
tiona  of  ent  Hebrew  text,  which  may  be  called 
Difference  Palestinian,  there  was  in  the  father- 
ofXext  land  of  the  Septuagint  a  second  to 
which  the  name  Egyptian  may  be  ap- 
plied, and  that  these  had  the  same  parentage. 
For  both  of  these,  the  Septuagint  in  rather  extended 
form,  have  prologue  and  epUogue,  the  omission  of 
the  third  speech  of  Zophar  for  which  another  by  Job 
is  substituted;  and  both  have  the  speech  of  Elihu 
and  the  same  plan  of  dialogue.  In  the  translation, 
even  when  paraphrastic,  the  correspondence  of  the 
Greek  with  the  Hebrew  is  so  close  that  the  text  out 
of  which  the  translation  arose  can  be  restored.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  Hebrew  text  has  often  a  longer 
reading  of  which  at  most  the  rudiments  appear  in 
the  Egyptian.  No  a  priori  decision  can  be  made  in 
either  case,  for  it  is  a  possibility  both  that  the 
Palestinian  text  has  received  additions  and  that  the 
Egyptian  has  been  abbreviated.  It  is  possible  to 
solve  the  question  in  one  of  two  ways.  Our  Pales- 
tinian text  may  be  considered  as  the  last  edition  of 
an  archetype  meant  for  the  Palestinian  community, 
which  became  the  ancestor  of  the  Egyptian  Job. 
The  fact  that  it  has  certain  parts  which  the  Eg3rp- 
tian  lacks  may  be  emphasized  without  attempting 
to  make  it  a  characteristic  of  the  whole.  The  sec- 
ond way  is  to  discriminate  in  the  Greek  Job,  after 
eliminating  the  corruptions  of  the  Greek  as  such, 
between  the  translation  of  the  Hebrew  and  the  ex- 
pansion of  the  translator  and  to  try  the  resulting 
text  with  reference  to  its  congruency  and  to  the 
impression  it  makes  of  deficiency  and  fragmentari- 
ness.  Of  the  Hexapla  there  are  only  fragments, 
and  there  is  no  text  which  gives  the  Septuagint  and 
that  alone;  the  Sahidic  and  the  Old-Latin  Job  were 
translated  from  Greek  manuscripts  more  or  less 
exactly,  but  from  them  it  can  not  be  deduced  how 
they  were  related  to  the  original.  Moreover,  it  ap- 
pears that  the  Alexandrian  translator  was  influenced 
in  his  understanding  by  an  Aramaic  targum  (cf .  F. 
Buhl,  Kanan  und  Text,  p.  171;  TLB,  1899,  pp.  446- 
447),  a  fact  which  further  complicates  the  problem. 
Another  help  to  the  recovery  of  the  text  is  the 
poetic  form  based  upon  the  principle  of  parallelism. 
The  clearly  apprehended  structure  of  a  first  line  is 
a  sure  indication  of  the  sense  and  the  content  of 
the  second,  when  couplets  are  in  question;  but  when 
one  passes  from  the  distich  and  possibly  the  tris- 
tich  to  the  strophe  of  four,  five,  or  more  lines,  this 
canon  fails  as  a  help  to  the  recovery  of  the  text  or 
as  a  test  upon  which  to  decide  upon  the  correctness 
of  the  text.  Moreover,  the  question  of  the  transmis- 
sion of  the  author's  text  arises,  since  the  task  of  the 
editor  was  to  present  a  text  intelligible  and  instruc- 


tive to  the  community,  in  which  it  is  probable  that 

the  matter  of  metrical  and  strophical  structure  was 

disregarded.      Modem    studies,    also, 

3.  PanUlel-  have  too  inexact  a  basis,  since  the  pro- 
ism  as  an   nunciation  and  accent  of  Hebrew  is  all 

Aid  to  Text-  but  imknown,  and  schemes  of  strophes 
Criticism,  presented  differ  greatly.  Moreover,  it 
is  improbable  that  the  author  would 
present  a  uniform  meter  and  strophe  in  the  varying 
parts  of  the  poem.  Thus  in  chap.  iii.  the  "  why  " 
and  "  wherefore  "  of  verses  11  and  20  divide  that 
chapter  into  three  parts,  3-10,  11-19,  20-26,  the 
first  of  which  has  eighteen  lines,  the  second  eight- 
een, but  the  third  only  fourteen;  further,  when  in 
verse  6  "  that  day  "  is  restored  for  "  that  night " 
(as  the  sense  requires),  verses  4-6  give  nine  lines  in 
three  tristichs,  devoted  to  the  cursing  of  the  day, 
while  verses  7-10  give  as  many  lines  devoted  to  the 
cursing  of  the  night,  but  in  distichs,  except  verse  9 
which  is  a  tristich.  This  change  from  the  tristich 
to  the  distich  seems  to  be  grounded  in  the  nature 
of  the  contents,  and  Bickell's  attempt  to  do  away 
with  the  tristich  of  verse  9  has  no  basis  outside  of 
his  preconception.  On  the  other  hand,  the  balance 
of  the  first  two  parts  of  the  chapter  raises  the  ques- 
tion why  the  last  part  has  only  fourteen  lines.  The 
answer  that  we  do  not  know  may  possibly  be 
deemed  sufficient.  But  on  exegetical  grounds  verse 
23  can  not  be  connected  with  verse  20  and  the  ab- 
rupt introduction  of  the  first  person  and  of  the 
idea  of  eating  in  verses  24-26  suggests  a  loss  of  two 
couplets  from  the  text,  though  neither  in  the  Pales- 
tinian text  nor  in  the  Egyptian  is  there  a  trace  that 
their  ancestor  possessed  them. 

The  punctuation  of  the  Masoretic  text  is  a  most 
valuable  commentary  upon  Job,  and,  in  view  of  the 
great  difficulties,  an  extremely  significant  one.  The 
passages  are  many  in  which  the  punctuation  is  in- 
dicative of  difficulties  which  the  Masorites  re- 
solved by  seeing  in  the  consonantal  text  the  tele- 
scoping of  words,  as  mirUam  in  xv.  29  is  taken  for 
min  lahem.  The  fact  that  the  Masorites  made  so 
many  mistakes  may  be  explained  either  as  due  to 
false  divisions  of  the  unseparated  words  or  to  de- 
fect in  the  text  as  it  lay  before  them.  Examples 
explicable  from  both  causes  are  at  hand. 

The  older  consonantal  text  is  to  be  regarded  as 
the  edition  (established  by  an  authority  of  the  com- 
munity) of  a  text  still  older  which  existed  in  a  num- 
ber of  manuscripts,  fidelity  to  which  was  traversed 
by  a  desire  to  furnish  to  the  community  an  intel- 
ligible text,  and,  where  the  exemplar  was  meaning- 
less or  corrupt,  to  set  carefully  aside  possible  shocks 
to  the  religious  feeling  of  the  reader.  Ebcamples  of 
this  are  found  in  i.  16-18,  where  in  the  exemplar  a 
defective  *iy  was  changed  to  the  fully  written  *1iy, 
while  in  xxxiv.  23,  ygO,  having  lost 

4.  Corrup-  its  iuitial  sound  through  the  effect  of 
trans  of  the  closing  syllable  of  the  preceding 
Conso-      D^^  was  protected  against  the  pos- 

nantal  Text  gibie  meaning  ny  "  witness."     A  false 

EzpUined.  ^ji^^iQ^  Jq  xvyj  20  has  been  mediated 

by  the   introduction  of  a  1  in  tovP, 

which  was  then  separated  into  the  two  words  to1^"PJ^ 

The  short  or  abbreviated  form  of  the  suffixes  and 


Job,  Book  of 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOO 


188 


aflSxes  which  the  earlier  scribe  used  was  treated 
with  the  greatest  freedom  and  became  a  potent 
source  of  error.  In  such  cases  as  xiv.  3,  xix.  28 
(cf.  R.  V.  maz^),  ix.  IQb,  the  third  person  is  in- 
dicated by  the  parallelism,  the  logical  sequence; 
and  the  versions.  There  are  directions  in  rabbin- 
ical instructions  which  point  the  same  way,  as  when 
in  xii.  2b  the  instruction  reads:  say  not  tmwthf  but 
twnUh.  Changes  due  to  religious  timidity  are  also 
in  evidence.  Thus  in  xxxii.  3c  "  Job  "  is  substi- 
tuted for  a  word  which  might  through  changes  in 
the  text  have  been  read  as  "God."  Similarly 
xxxii.  lb,  Septuagint,  reads  "  in  their  eyes,"  and  is 
justified  by  logic,  since  there  is  no  adequate  reason 
in  Job's  self-justification  alone  for  the  silence  of  the 
friends.  Probably  also  to  the  same  cause  is  due 
the  identical  expressions  in  xxxviii.  1,  xl.  6,  where 
**  out  of  the  whirlwind  "  is  to  be  explained  by  the 
dropping  of  a  word  beginning  with  n  after  a  word 
ending  with  the  same,  which  would  be  represented 
by  the  expression  "  out  of  the  roar  of  the  storm." 
It  is  not  impossible  that  by  myo  in  the  passages 
just  cited,  differently  from  the  mpfe^  of  ix.  17 
(where  the  Targum  reads  **  hair  ")>  w&s  understood 
not  an  atmospheric  storm,  but  the  theophanic  hur- 
ricane like  that  in  which  Elijah  was  rapt  away. 
But  other  causes  have  brought  about  changes  in 
the  text,  such  causes  as  are  conunon  in  the  trana- 
mission  of  all  texts  of  antiquity.  In  reading  the 
copyist  has  dropped  out  a  letter  or  a  syllable.  Thus 
in  xiL  2  the  unintelligible  word  Dy,  "  people,"  is 
doubtless  .to  be  explained  as  the  remains  of  the 
word   D^^^n,  and  the   verse   should  read:    "  No 

doubt  ye  are  the  possessors  of  knowledge,  and  wis- 
dom shah  die  with  you  "  (cf.  xxxiv.  2).  Other  mis- 
takes are  due  to  the  confusion  of  letters  that  look 
alike,  either  in  the  old  form  or  in  the  square  wri- 
ting, and  still  others  to  similarity  in  sound  when  the 
copy  was  made  from  dictation.  Still  another  po- 
tent source  of  error  are  glosses,  which  have  either 
lengthened  the  text  or  miade  it  unintelligible. 

From  a  view  of  all  these  cases  it  is  possible  to  as- 
sert that  the  Hebrew  consonantal  text  is  the  edition 
of  a  copy  which  goes  back  to  an'  archetype,  trana- 
mitted  through  we  know  not  how  many  transcrip- 
tions, which  was  also  the  original  to  which  the  He- 
brew text  which  the  Greek  translator  used  is  to  be 
traced.    This  archetype  was  already  characterised 
by  mistakes  and  corrections,  by  gaps  in  the  text 
and  by  conflate  readings.    In  the  course  of  trana- 
mission  these  changes  have  been  so  increased  that, 
in  spite  of  the  dose  general  resemblance,  in  particu- 
lar passages  copies  seem  altogether  foreign  to  each 
other.    In  proportion  as  we  are  successfiil  in  recon- 
structing this  archetype  out  of  its  descendants  and 
in  imderstanding  it  with  its  gaps,  mis- 
5.  Bariy     takes,  and  additions,  we  approach  the 
Condition   form  which  the  poet  gave  to  his  work, 
of  the      There  is  a  consensus  among  modem 
Text       critics  to  the  effect  that  the  original 
Job  has  been  enlarged  by  the  insertion 
of  the  four  speeches  of  Elihu,  chaps,  xxxii.-xxxvii. 
But  the  circumstance  that  the  surviving  text  refers 
neither  in  the  preceding  nor  in  the  following  parts 
to  the  entrance  of  Elihu  (for  which  preparation 


could  have  been  made  in  a  few  words),  which  is  the 
chief  ground  for  suspecting  the  originality  of  the 
section,  is  proof  positive  that  the  one  who  inserted 
the  passage  regarded  with  respect  the  text  to  which 
he  made  the  addition.  This  is  indeed  a  guaranty 
that  in  the  earliest  times  Job  was  looked  on  as  the 
inviolable  possession  of  an  inspired  man  for  which 
he  himself  assumed  the  responsibility.  When  it 
became  a  book  for  the  community,  for  which  the 
leading  authorities  in  that  community  assumed  ac- 
countability, the  liberty  was  taken  of  changing  it 
where  the  interests  of  instruction  of  the  community 
seemed  to  demand  it. 

in.  Plan,  Contents,  and  Purpose:  Prior  to  con- 
sideration of  the  artistic  form  of  the  book  it  is  neces- 
sary to  take  up  the  question  of  the  originality  of 
the  Elihu  section.    The  aigument  from  linguistic 
considerations  may  be  answered  by  the  suggestion 
that  it  was  prematurely  given  out  and  has  been  cor- 
rupted.   The  consideration  that  the  section  brings 
nothing  new  against  the  friends  and  anticipates 
what  Yahweh  is  to  say  is  explained  by  Elihu's  dif- 
ferent attitude  toward  Job  and  his  sorrows.    On 
the  other  hand,  in  ii.  11-13  only  the  three  friends 
are  mentioned  and  in  xlii.  7-8  reference  to  them 
alone  is  found.    Does  Elihu  belong  to  the  party  on 
whose  side  the  truth  is,  though  he  charges  Job  with 
adding  to  his  sin  that  of  rebellion  (xxxiv.  37),  or  to 
those   of  whom   Yahweh  demanded  repentance? 
When  Yahweh  gives  his  testimony  of 
X.  The      truth  to  his  servant  Job  or  ignores  this 
Blihu      judge  of  Job,  nothing  more  can  be 
Section     meant  than  that  the  author  of  the 
a  Later     book  and  the  readers  have  also  ignored 
Addition.    Elihu,  since  neither  had  in  him  any  in- 
terest.   In  other  words,  this  points  to 
a  time  when  the  book  of  Job  was  read  without  the 
speeches  of  Elihu,  when  at  the  silence  of  the  friends 
and  the  last  speech  of  Job  God  entered  to  teach  and 
instruct.    This  is  substantiated  by  the  express  tes- 
timony of  Elihu,  xxxii.  12-14.    Since  the  friends 
have  nowhere  said  that  Job  seemed  to  have  so  sui^ 
passed  them  and  all  men  in  cleverness  that  God 
alone  could  overcome  his  error,  Elihu  must  speak 
under  the  impression  that  the  intention  of  the  au- 
thor was  to  have  deity  take  up  the  discourse  that 
Job  might  recognise  his  folly.    Mai.  iii.  16  speaks 
of  a  book  of  remembrance  caused  by  Yahweh  to  be 
written   for  discernment   between   righteous  and 
wicked;   and  this  recaUs  the  fact  that  Job  wished 
for  such  a  book  (xix.  23)  and  that  Elihu  (xxxvii. 
20)  raises  the  question  whether  a  scribe  is  noting 
for  Yahweh  what  he  has  to  say.    Elihu  comes  for- 
ward as  a  man  filled  with  new  knowledge.    There 
can  be  no  doubt  that  he  does  so  on  the  ground  of 
a  newer  insight  into  the  instructive  meaning  of  evil 
for  the  community  gained  from  the  teaching  of  the 
prophets  and  thus  comes  forward  as  a  jroung  man 
pushed  out  from  his  position  of  reserve  to  confront 
the  older  men  who  stand  for  the  old  wisdom. 
Whether  the  writer  who  introduced  this  section 
wished  to  identify  himself  with  Elihu  or  to  differ^ 
entiate  himself  from  him  must  be  decided  in  favor 
of  the  latter  supposition  by  consideration  of  the 
stilted  vanity  of  Elihu's  introduction  of  himself,  in 
which  he  vaunts  that  he  is  bringing  into  view  new, 


189 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Job,  Book  of 


weighty,  and  incontrovertible  arguments,  by  which 
oouree  he  prejudices  his  hearers  against  himself. 
While,  then,  the  innovator  introduced  Elihu  with 
great  promises  and  then  let  him  conclude  in  terri- 
fied fashion  with  the  statement  of  the  unsearchable- 
ness  of  God  (xxxvii.  23),  whither  the  approach  of 
the  storm  appears  to  bring  him  (zxxvii.  1),  the  con- 
clusion of  the  original  Job  so  returns  to  the  point 
reached  before  the  introduction  of  Elihu  as  to  make 
it  clear  that  the  book  of  Job  rightly  understood  is 
not  affected  by  the  indirect  criticism  represented  by 
£3ihu.  In  that  case  the  writer  of  the  section  was 
a  man  of  like  spirit  with  the  original  poet  and  the 
speeches  of  Elihu  are  as  worthy  a  place  in  Scripture 
as  are  those  of  the  three  friends.  But,  in  taking  ac- 
count of  the  book  of  Job  in  its  original  form,  this 
part  must  be  put  out  of  accoimt.  The  meaning  of 
the  book  with  Elihu  included  can  best  be  seen  in 
Budde,  who  has  used  great  industry  and  keenness 
in  attempting  to  vindicate  that  section. 

The  real  body  of  the  poem  is  built  about  the  in- 
tercourse of  the  four  friends  mentioned  in  ii.  11, 
from  early  times  r^arded  as  set  forth  in  three  sets 
of  speeches  (chaps,  iii.-xiv.,  xv.-xxi.,  xxii.-xxvi.), 
followed  by  two  addresses  of  Job  (chaps,  zxvii.- 
xxviii.,  xxix.-xxxi.),  after  which  Yahweh  speaks 
out  of  the  storm  (chaps,  xzxviii.-xxzix.,  xl.  6- 
xli.).  Since  the  author  has  placed  Job's  cry  of 
pain  (which  opens  and  defines  the  whole  discus- 
sion) in  dose  connection  with  the  seven  days  of 
silence  and  since  the  sDence  of  the  friends  during 
that  time  is  intelligible  only  on  the  groimd  that  Job 
first  broke  that  silence,  it  is  reasonable  to  assume 
that  the  first  round  of  speeches  filled  the  first  day 
of  the  second  week,  and  that  each  of  the  two  next 
rounds  consumed  a  day.  Such  a  reckoning  is  im- 
plied in  xxiii.  2,  where  a  distinct  difference  in  time 
is  expressed.  This  helps  to  explain 
3.  The  the  similarity  of  formulas  in  xxvii.  1 
Plan.  and  xxix.  1,  different  from  that  in  iii. 
1,  and  also  the  identity  of  formulas  in 
xxxviii.  1,  xl.  6.  The  reader  was  expected  to  im- 
derstand  that  the  two  speeches  of  Job  in  xxvii.- 
xxxi.  occupied  the  fourth  and  fifth  days,  while  the  ad- 
monitions of  Yahweh  occupied  the  sixth  and  seventh 
days.  So  that  the  seven  days  of  silence,  the  tor- 
tures of  which  led  Job  to  curse  his  life,  are  carefully 
balanced  against  the  seven  days  of  speech,  at  the 
end  of  which  Job  yields  humble  submission.  Theo- 
dore of  Mopsuestia  rightly  compared  Job  to  the 
drama  of  the  Greeks  in  which  the  speeches  of  the 
characters  owe  their  origin  to  the  art  of  the  poet. 
To  criticisms  of  the  treatment  it  may  be  said  that 
the  rangQ  of  the  poem  reveals  to  the  ear  the  tones 
of  an  inner  life,  that  a  stream  out  of  experience  is 
flowing  in  our  presence  which  at  length  reaches  the 
appointed  end  of  its  course.  In  vi.  2-7  Job  aban- 
dons the  cry  of  pain  of  chap.  iii.  as  an  error  forced 
from  him  by  the  very  fever  of  his  sorrow,  that  over 
against  the  argumentation  which  had  so  shocked 
Ida  friends  he  protests  solemnly  in  xxvii.-xxviii.  his 
willingness  to  persevere  m  piety  as  the  basis  of  life, 
and,  at  the  conclusion  of  the  contrast  between  for^ 
mer  happiness  and  present  misfortime  (which  is  in 
spite  of  his  good  oonsdenoe  toward  God  and  men), 
he  reveals  his  heart's  desire  for  the  living  God. 


Job  is  no  prophet  receiving  his  instruction  direct 
from  God;  he  gets  his  religious  instruction  from 
men  and  with  it  a  limitation  of  thought  and  judg- 
ment from  which  he  is  freed  only  by  his  experience 
of  God  (xlii.  5),  through  seeing  him  with  his  own 
eyes.  His  earlier  experiences  do  not  appear  as  fal- 
sity, but  only  as  incompleteness.  The 
3.  The      religion  of  Job  and  his  friends  is  not  a 

Religion  folk-religion,  but  that  of  the  wise,  so 
of  Job      far  as  an  orderly  view  of  the  world 

and  His     goes,  and  it  may  be  compared  with 

Friends,  that  of  (say)  Plutarch  and  Seneca. 
God  is  the  incomparably  wise  and 
mighty  one,  the  creator,  the  pattern  of  morals  who 
has  ordered  life  and  its  penalties  for  evil.  Man  who 
is  bom  of  woman  is  bound  up  in  native  sinfulness, 
his  life-course  is  marked  out  and  comprises  a  period 
of  growth,  of  activity  in  work,  and  of  enjoyment 
which  makes  that  life  worthful.  There  is  implanted 
in  man  knowledge  of  the  right  way  of  using  life, 
knowledge  also  of  God  as  creator  and  giver  of  all 
good.  O^rrect  appreciation  of  this  knowledge  is 
the  pivot  upon  which  move  right  and  wrong,  good 
fortune  and  bad,  as  the  direct  reaction  of  righteous 
or  evil  acts.  And  at  the  end,  after  the  enjojrment 
of  a  satisfied  life,  he  is  brought  to  the  rest  of  the 
grave  like  the  wheat  which  is  gathered  to  the  gamer 
after  it  has  reached  the  end  of  its  being.  Such  a  view 
tells  of  a  simple  mode  of  life  in  a  primitive  com- 
mimity,  where  the  paterfamilias  is  directly  respon- 
sible to  God  for  his  household  and  its  ordering,  and 
where  the  complexities  of  later  society  and  world- 
empire  had  not  yet  entered.  Judgment  is  drawn 
from  standard  facts  and  concatenations  of  circum- 
stances as  to  the  rule  of  God  over  man.  Man  the 
individual  is  brought  into  connection  with  his  suc- 
cessors in  life,  and  thus  the  time  period  in  which 
the  heaven  of  divine  righteousness  returns  is  pro- 
longed besrond  the  death  of  the  individual.  The 
present  good  fortune  of  the  evil  is  balanced  by  the 
greatness  of  final  loss,  the  sorrow  of  the  good 
is  compensated  by  the  overbalancing  good  of  man's 
final  end.  This  conception  has  close  relations  with 
the  religion  of  Israel,  and  the  speeches  of  the  three 
friends  may  be  put  alongside  the  didactic  Psalms. 
But  great  elements  of  the  religion  of  Israel  are  lack- 
ing, those  which  relate  to  the  world-purpose  of 
Israel's  being  and  the  full  balancing  of  the  great 
day  of  Yahweh.  Still  there  is  to  be  discovered  the 
firm  grip  of  the  idea  of  God  as  a  living  personality 
and  of  man  as  being  so  related  to  him  as  to  find 
therein  possibilities  of  joy;  there  is  also  a  firm 
faith  in  God  as  the  one  in  whom  the  course  of  nature 
is  fixed.  A  limitation  which  must  be  observed, 
however,  is  the  view  of  death  and  the  life  beyond, 
which  seems  to  place  the  soul  deprived  of  God  for 
endless  time  in  absolute  darkness.  Though  even 
here  the  trust  in  God  which  shines  through  the  book 
points  to  a  possibility  of  the  developments  which 
were  reached  in  other  parts  of  Scripture. 

But  how  shall  the  primitive  irrational  dogma  of 
the  end  of  man's  relationship  with  God  at  death  be 
shaken  and  faith  be  raised  to  a  basis  of  confident 
verity  7  Clearly  by  presenting  the  case  of  one  who 
has  faith,  whose  conduct  in  the  fear  of  God,  in  self- 
instruction,  righteousness,  and  charity  is  univer- 


Job,  Book  of 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


190 


Bally  known,  but  who,  in  the  midat  of  an  unwonted 
accumulation  of  misfortunes  inflicted  by  divine  de- 
crees which  deprive  him  of  his  dearest  and  best, 
after  he  has  bowed  to  the  stroke  and  has  been  af- 
flicted personally  with  a  terrible  illness,  appears  to 
man  to  be  delivered  over  to  judgment,  whose  faith 
even  brings  a  conflict  into  his  own  soul,  which  faith, 
short  and  defective  as  it  was,  is  given  up  for  a  bet- 
ter. The  problem  before  the  author  therefore  took 
flesh  and  blood;    Job  appears  as  the 

4.  Genu-  hero  and  is  himself  the  problem.  Who- 
ineness  ever  has  caught  the  connection  of  the 
of  the      seven  days  of  silence  of  the  introduo- 

Prologue,  tion  and  the  seven  days  of  the  dialogue 
will  be  prepared  to  see  in  the  introduc- 
tion and  in  the  poem  the  work  of  a  single  hand.  A 
recent  hypothesis  sees  in  chaps,  i.-ii.  and  xlii.  the 
remains  of  an  independent  **  folk-book."  And  this 
view  has  led  to  interesting  developments,  in  the 
course  of  which  attempts  were  made  to  discover 
how  this  book  handled  the  problem.  It  has  been 
thought  that  Ezekiel  knew  it,  while  it  was  held  that 
the  poet  of  the  dialogue  was  later  than  Ezekiel. 
Parts  of  this  theory  are  not  entirely  new.  While 
Pseudo-Origen  regarded  the  poem  as  older  than 
Moses,  who  (according  to  him)  wrote  the  prologue, 
it  was  probably  the  authority  of  Theodore  which 
led  Junilius  to  place  Job  among  the  historical  books. 
Theodore  thought  that  the  historical  Job  could  not 
have  spoken  the  irrational  curses  of  chap.  iii.  nor 
have  given  to  his  daughter  the  heathen  name  Keren- 
happuch.  Yet  it  seems  impossible  for  a  right  un- 
derstanding of  the  speeches  to  take  the  two  parts 
for  anything  but  the  necessary  work  of  the  same 
author.  The  opening  of  the  drama  in  the  changing 
of  scene  between  heaven  and  earth,  the  presenta- 
tion of  the  secret  divine  counsel  preceding  the 
events,  and  the  conduct  of  men  following  them  be- 
tray the  same  hand  as  the  dialogue.  Evidences  of 
the  intent  of  the  author  to  model  the  narrative  after 
the  mashed  exist  in  the  monotony  of  the  reiteration 
of  the  four  misfortimes  by  the  messengers  (i.  13 
sqq.),  and  in  the  repetitions  of  i.  6,  and  ii.  1,  of  i. 
11,  and  ii.  5,  of  1,  7,  and  ii.  2,  while  the  introduction 
of  the  reader  to  the  scenes  in  heaven  serves  the  same 
purpose  as  the  prologues  of  Euripides  in  giving  him 
the  key  to  the  action  of  the  persons  in  the  drama. 
There  is  a  correspondence  also  in  the  religion  of 
Job  and  his  friends  in  the  dialogue  and  the  position 
assigned  them  as  Edomites,  therefore  nearly  related 
to  Israel,  with  an  ancestor  brother  to  Jacob,  conse- 
quently heir  of  Abraham  and  his  religion,  but  with- 
out the  special  promises  which  were  Israel's,  while 
the  hero  as  a  shepherd-prince  reproduces  the  life  of 
the  patriarchs.  Further  correspondence  is  found  in 
particular  incidents,  such  as  the  sin-offering  of  Job 
for  his  children  (i.  5)  and  the  curt  rejection  by  Job 
of  his  wife's  advice  to  curse  God  and  die  (ii.  0),  with 
Job's  reiterated  claim  to  right  speech  (vi.  10,  xxiii. 
11-12)  and  with  Bildad's  statement  that  the  death 
of  Job's  children  was  punishment  for  the  sin  they 
had  committed  (viii.  4). 

A  large  element  in  the  supposition  that  prologue 
and  epilogue  are  from  a  folk-book  is  doubtless  the 
figiure  of  Satan  which  corresponds  to  the  Satan  of 
folk-lore,  the  thought  that  as  Goethe  drew  his  Faust 


from  the  book  of  Dr.  Faustus,  so  our  poet  borrowed 
his  figure.  But  the  analogy  does  not  hold.  Job  and 
his  friends  know  nothing  of  a  Satan  or  that  he  is 
Job's  foe.  The  friends  think  that  God  is  Job's  foe, 
and  so  thinks  Job;  they  know  nothing  of  the  coun- 
cil in  heaven.  But  the  heavenly  council  and  the 
figure  of  Satan  correspond  to  the  representation  of 
Hebrew  prophecy,  while  the  relations  of  God  to 
man,  spirit,  and  the  world  at  large  are  those  of  the 
Old  Testament.  Not  folk-lore,  but  the  current  ideas 
of  revelation  in  Israel  are  the  basis  of  the  presenta- 
tion. So  the  creation  of  man  and  his  expulsion 
from  Eden  were  the  result  of  a  heavenly  council 
(Gen.  i.  26,  iii.  22).  But  Job  and  Adam  may  be 
regarded  as  counterparts.  Job  recognizes  that  God 
has  simply  used  the  rights  of  a  creator  in  depriving 
him  of  the  free  gifts  bestowed  (i.  21) ;  Adam  yielded 

to  his  wife's  suggestion.  Job  refused 

5.  Satan    the  leading  of  his  wife  toward  the  same 

in  the      end  (ii.  10).    The  Fall  was  the  work  of 

Prologue    the  serpent  who  would  persuade  man 

and  in      that  the  creator  was  a  jealous  tyrant 

Other       and  would  also  destroy  God's  pleasure 

Scripture,    in  his  creation;  in  Job  Satan  b^rudges 

Yahweh  the  joy  he  has  in  his  pious 
servant  and  seeks  to  produce  in  Job  the  same  idea 
of  God  as  a  tyrant;  the  purpose,  however,  is  ex- 
posed in  the  prologue  in  the  part  Satan  takes  in  the 
heavenly  coimcil.  In  any  case  the  magnificent  view 
of  the  world,  one  which  entirely  lacks  the  quahties 
of  folk-lore  presentations,  which  makes  God's  many- 
sided  wisdom  crown  the  climax  of  creation  in  the 
creation  of  man,  which  he  justifies  to  the  spirits  who 
watch  the  work  in  wonder,  is  rooted  in  Gen.  i.-iii. 
Inherent  in  the  contest  between  Satan  and  God  is 
the  assumption  of  partiality  in  deity  in  that  he 
sought  by  unearned  gifts  to  win  man  for  himself 
(Adam),  in  that  he  guards  from  attacks  of  misfor- 
tune by  prosperity  the  man  represented  as  pious 
(Job),  when  man  has  fallen  he  saves  him  as  a  brand 
from  the  burning  (Joshua  in  Zech.  iii.),  and  that 
now  his  impartiality  must  come  out  in  the  calami- 
ties of  Job  that  the  enemy  may  be  silenced.  In- 
deed, there  is  a  reminiscence  of  the  creation  story 
in  the  "  enmity  "  between  the  seed  of  the  woman 
and  of  the  serpent  in  the  play  upon  the  name  of 
Job  (aVK)  and  yiK,  "enemy  "  of  Jobxiii.  24  (of. 
xix.  11);  but  the  prologue  shows  that  the  enemy 
is  not  God  but  Satan.  The  marks  of  derivation  of 
the  prologue  from  folk-lore  are  wholly  lacking. 

Are  the  sorrows  of  Job  a  punishment,  a  chastise- 
ment, or  a  trial?  and  what  would  the  poet  teach 
by  them?  Since  the  prologue  ascribes  to  God 
knowledge  of  Job's  purity,  to  Satan  doubt  of  it,  it 
might  be  held  that  the  purpose  is  to  use  Job  as  a 
witness  to  show  the  lying  nature  and  impotence  of 
Satan  (cf.  Budde).  It  is  a  ciuiosity  that  some  have 
seen  in  the  book  of  Job  the  question  opened  whether 
there  is  an  unrewarded  piety.  But  men  beheve  in 
God  because  faith  makes  them  blessed;  blessedness 

is  not  the  wages  of  faith,  but  the  living 

6.  The      activity  of  the  God  set  forth  in  faith. 

Purpose,    the  very  essence  of  which  is  that  he  is 

the  cause  of  blessedness  in  man.  It  is 
the  greatest  folly  to  speak  of  an  uninterested  piety, 
since  piety  is  the  prophecy  of  the  highest  interest  of 


191 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Job|  Book  of 


the  soul  which  is  created  by  and  for  God.  Job  does 
not  regret  his  lost  sheep  and  camels  as  if  they  were 
the  due  of  his  piety;  but  he  longs  for  a  gracious 
God.  The  poet  has  placed  Job  outside  the  region 
where  God's  promises  held  and  in  a  realm  where  in- 
dividual faith  was  compelled  to  overcome  the  ob- 
stacles of  experience  and  a  view  beyond  death  was 
not  possible.  Satan's  plea  is  that  if  God  cuts  Job 
loose  from  ancestral  rules  of  guidance,  Job  will  cast 
God  under  his  feet.  But  Job's  entire  course  of  ac- 
tion proves  that  his  fear  of  God  was  rooted  in  his 
inner  life.  The  death  of  Job  would  have  convicted 
Satan  of  lying,  but  would  have  left  a  puzzle  for  Job's 
contemporaries.  But  the  poet  has  not  introduced 
a  third  scene  in  heaven  corresponding  to  the  two 
first  in  which  Satan  might  be  represented  as  saying 
that  a  living  dog  is  better  than  a  dead  lion  (Eccles. 
ix.  4).  The  poem  would  have  needed  then  to  deal 
with  the  world  beyond  the  grave,  which  would  have 
been  against  poetic  canons.  The  makers  of  the  ca- 
tenae remarked  that  God  had  left  room  on  this  side 
for  the  rehabilitation  of  his  pious  sufferer  before  the 
resurrection. 

The  trial  of  Job  is  not  in  order  that  he  may  turn 
away  from  his  wife's  suggestion  of  impiety  and  pa- 
tiently depend  upon  the  divine,  nor  that  he  may 
disown  his  first  outbreak  of  impatience.    A  severer 
trial  comes  when  authorities  upon  faith  and  relig- 
ion, teachers  of  it  as  he  had  been  a  teacher  (iv.  3), 
decide  that  his  sorrows  are  the  result  of  his  own 
wrong-doing;  the  very  faith  in  which  he  had  lived 
and  of  which  he  had  been  an  exponent  is  turned 
against  himself  as  a  proof  of  his  own 
7.  Oxganic  impiety.    According  to  the  common 
Intercon-   belief  implied  in  the  poem,  the  narrow 
nection  of  part  of  the  universe  within  the  ken  of 
Dialogue    mortals  makes  dear  the  righteousness 
and        of  the  world-ruler,  while  the  result  of 
nairative.  man's  life  is  the  expression  of  man's 
worth  before  God.    Job  could  not  deny 
his  own  godly  fear  and  fidelity;  similarly  God  had 
not   chaE^ged   without   right   reasons.    If,   as  the 
friends  might  maintain,  God  had  formerly  seemed 
favorable,  only  to  emphasize  and  intensify  his  real 
disfavor  to  be  manifested  later,  Job  only  sighed  the 
more  for  a  gracious  God  whose  image  he  cherished 
in  his  heart,  whose  truth  had  been  his  guaranty  in 
Job's  early  blessedness.    He  can  not  dismiss  the 
idea  of  a  righteous  God  who  knows  his  innocence; 
the  sharper  the  argument  of  his  adversaries,  the 
more  necessary  that  idea  became.    It  is  incompre- 
hensible how  one  can  assert  (with  Laue)  that  in  his 
speeches  Job  has  completed  his  aposta^  in  view  of 
the  fact  that  when,  at  the  end  of  the  dialogue,  the 
friends  are  confoimded,  the  poet  has  put  into  Job's 
mouth  a  solenm  oath  that  he  will  hold  fast  to  that 
virtue  and  righteousness  in  which  he  had  felt  him- 
self blessed,  even  though  he  had  not  solved  the 
riddle  of  his  suffering  (xxvii.  2  sqq.). 

The  prophetic  idea  of  a  theophany  or  vision  is 
employed  by  the  poet  to  exhibit  the  divine  coimsel 
in  intelligible  form.  Job  lives  in  a  region  not  of 
revealed  but  of  natural  religion  where  man  sees  in 
a  glance  the  totality  of  natural  phenomena  in  their 
living  eternal  basis,  and,  uplifted  by  this  intuition 
of  the  movement  of  these  phenomena,  becomes 


aware  of  the  voice  of  God.    But  this  could  not  ex- 
plain Job's  experience;  the  plot  forbade  this,  since 
Satan  must  not  be  permitted  to  call 
8.  Result    "  foul  play."    Job's  sufferings  must  be 
of  the      endured  under  the  same  conditions  as 
Divine  Ad-  those  in  which  his  aspersed  piety  had 
monitJons.  existed.  He  experienced  nothing  which 
might  not  have  come  in  the  natural 
course  of  things;    but  the  combination  of  events 
brought  before  him  God's  all-power  in  the  world 
(xlii.  2  sqq.).    Then  God  reestablished  him  in  the 
position  of  a  servant  and  witness  of  the  truth,  with 
which  fact  and  with  Job's  intercession  he  bound  up 
the  exemption  of  the  three  friends  from  punishment, 
a  significant  indication  that  their  sin  consisted  in 
their  persecution  of  Job.    Job  acted  as  the  intimate 
friend  of  God  when  he  prayed  for  the  friends;   as 
such  they  recognized  him  whom  they  had  previ- 
ously regarded  as  a  rebel  from  God.    Job,  too, 
learned  that  God  was  far  greater  and  mightier  and 
more  an  object  of  faith  than  he  had  supposed  in 
the  exercise  of  his  earlier  faith. 

In  chap.  vi.  Job  explains  his  wild  outburst  in 
chap.  iii.  as  due  to  the  imendurable  weight  of  his 
visitation  which  robe  his  soul  of  peace  becaiise  the 
hope  of  coming  alleviation  which  belongs  to  faith 
is  made  impossible  by  the  imchecked  diminution 
of  his  physical  strength.  He  can  not  therefore  re- 
gard his  sorrows  as  those  of  a  short  period  which 
will  be  superseded  by  a  period  of  restoration,  as 
his  piety  had  hitherto  bidden  him  do.  To  the  im- 
possibility of  restoration  on  this  side  the  grave  is 
added  the  consideration  that  death  withdraws 
man  from  the  eye  and  hand  of  God  (vii.  6-10). 
Yet  the  experience  of  faith  teaches  that  God's  wrath 
exhausts  itself  and  the  mood  of  pity  for  the  creature 
finds  place.  Will  not  the  approach  of  death  wake 
up  this  pity  in  God  (vii.  8,  21)  for  the  work  of  his 
hand  (x.  8-13)7  Can  God,  who  has  created  man 
and  who  knows  him  thoroughly  and 
9.  Job's  his  sin,  refuse  to  exercise  forgiveness 
Attempt  (vii.  21),  and  wiU  he  demand  absolute 
to  Compre-  responsibility  (xiv.  3)  of  so  poor  a 
hend  His  creature?  What  value  for  God  must 
Misfor-  a  being  have  for  whose  purification  he 
tunes.  has  so  great  concern?  Shall  not  man 
think  that,  when  death  has  completed 
his  penance  and  God's  wrath  is  exhausted  (xiv.  13), 
God's  yearning  for  his  creation  wiU  cause  him  to 
awaken  that  creation  to  new  life  in  communion 
with  him  (xiv.  7,  8,  13-15)?  In  that  case  Job's 
hope  would  make  him  endure  to  the  very  end  (xiv. 
14).  It  may  be  thought  that  Job  is  on  the  way 
here  to  extend  his  old  faith  to  the  point  where 
death  itself  is  included  in  the  region  of  suffering 
after  which  God's  help  comes,  and  not  merely  in 
his  particular  case,  but  as  a  general  fact  (cf.  xiv. 
10,  12  with  14a).  But  this  idea  must  give  way  in 
the  face  of  his  postulate  that  death  is  a  final  judg- 
ment which  excludes  man  from  feDowship  with 
God  (xiv.  20,  cf.  Gen.  iii.  23).  The  poet  has  let 
Job  discover  a  better  ground  of  hope  for  the  con- 
quest of  death  than  the  thought  of  the  philosophers 
from  Plato  to  Leibnitz,  who  found  basis  for  such  a 
hope  in  the  indestructibility  of  the  indivisible  and 
inmiaterial  soul.    Job's  reason  is  the  ethical  yearning 


bb.  Book  of 


it^ 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


192 


of  Qod  for  man,  who  is  worthful  to  God  as  tbe 
work  of  his  hand. 

The  vexed  soul  of  Job  makes  still  other  attempts 
in  the  consciousness  that  he  may  not  hope  for  res- 
toration here,  since  he  counts  himself  as  already 
belonging  to  the  world  of  the  dead  whither  his  hopes 
and  his  expectations  may  not  accompany  him 
(xvii.  1^16).  His  friends  chaige  him  with  de- 
manding that  the  course  of  nature  be  changed  for 
his  benefit  (xviii.  4),  but  his  thoughts,  when  allowed 
full  course,  do  change  night  into  day.  He  protests 
anew  his  innocence,  while  exhausting  the  category 
of  his  sufferings  in  which  nevertheless  he  seems  to 
have  been  treated  as  actually  the  sinner  his  friends 
believe  he  must  be  (xvii.  7-17),  in  spite  of  the  wit- 
ness he  has  within  the  mystery  of  heaven  (19-21). 
God  might,  he  thinks,  at  the  end  of 
10.  Job's  life,  halt  the  processes  of  decomposi- 
mtfanate  tion  and  disintegration  in  order  by 
Position,  this  unusual  phenomenon  to  arouse 
the  thought  that  Job's  case  was  spe- 
cial and  so  an  explanation  of  his  lot  be  brought 
about.  But  he  remembers  that  he  has  already 
become  to  mankind  a  sort  of  monstrosity  whidi 
confounds  the  pious  (xvii.  6).  His  final  appeal 
must  be  to  God,  confidence  in  whom  still  remains 
in  his  breast  (xix.  23-27).  A  connection  is  con- 
ceived between  what  God  does  here  on  earth  in 
order  to  purify  the  thought  of  the  pious  and  the 
state  of  the  soul  abiding  in  Hades  (verses  28-20). 
There  is  a  living  religious  certainty  of  a  righteous 
God  and  of  a  personal  relationship  to  him  possessed 
by  the  pious.  Account  must  be  taken  of  the  criti- 
cism which  is  exercised  npoD  the  dogma  of  a  visible 
justification  of  a  righteous  God  on  tliL  side  of  death. 
The  apparent  good  fortune  of  the  wicked  is  not 
requited  through  the  eventual  misfortune  of  his 
descendants;  he  himself  ought  to  bear  his  pimish- 
ment,  but  he  is  snatched  away  before  evil  comes 
upon  his  children  (xxi.  7-21).  When  the  same  lot 
of  death  befalls  the  lucky  tyrant  and  |the  unfortu- 
nate poor,  how  can  man  affirm  that  through  their 
hap  God  teaches  men  what  is  right  (xxi.  22-34)7 
By  the  question  in  xxiv.  1  and  in  the  reflections 
suggested  Job  intimates  that  he  would  be  able  to 
understand  the  inactive  watching  by  deity  of  the 
raging  of  tjrrants  and  the  suffering  of  the  innocent 
if  human  history  ran  in  cycles  in  which  exact  re- 
quital was  discerned.  But  this  the  Israelite  could 
do,  having  the  compensations  of  the  "  day  of  Yah- 
weh  "  in  view — a  thought  to  which  Job's  heart  in- 
stinctively turns.  And  the  poet  attempted  to 
widen  and  deepen  the  old  faith  in  God  when  he 
allowed  God  to  decide  that  Job,  in  contrast  with 
his  friends,  had  spoken  the  thing  that  was  right, 
meaning  by  this  not  Job's  affirmations  of  innocence, 
but  the  considerations  which  led  him  to  hold  that 
not  even  the  world  of  the  dead  and  the  burial  of 
man  therein  could  deprive  man  of  the  proof  of  that 
€rod  who  is  man's  final  blessedness. 

IV.  The  Author  and  the  Time  of  Composition: 
The  book  neither  names  its  author  nor  gives  data 
regarding  its  authorship,  and  there  is  no  independ- 
ent tradition  respecting  either.  Its  date  has  been 
placed  all  the  way  along  the  ages  from  Moses  to  the 
Fbrsian  times.    The  apocryphal  conception  made 


Job  and  the  Edomitic  king  Jobab  the  same  person 
and  made  Moses  the  author.    The  thought  that  the 
book   belonged    to  Solomonic   times,    entertained 
from  Chrysostom  to  Delitzsch,  rests  upon  the  state- 
ment that  the  wisdom  of  the  Israel  of  that  time 
exceeded  the  wisdom  of  the  East  with  which  Job 
is  connected  (i.  3)  and  upon  correspondences  be- 
tween Job's  thought  and  that  of  Solomonic  prov- 
erbs;  but  such  wisdom  did  not  die  with  Solomon. 
Attempts  have  been  made  to  prove  Job  the  personi- 
fication of  suffering  Israel  in  Assyrian  times  or  under 
MsnsBseh.    Neither  the  orthography  of  the  book 
nor  the  linguistic  features  give  sure  indications  of 
the  date,  since  emendations  and  changes  have  ap- 
peared in  so  great  numbers  as  to  vitiate  the  aigu- 
ment,  and  there  is  also  no  history  of  the  Hebrew 
language  sufficiently  minute  to  make  the  language 
a  criterion.    And  the  relation  of  the  religioua  ideas 
of  the  book  afford  no  better  test,  sinoe  the  date 
when  certain  notions  became  dominant  does  not 
exclude  the  possibility  that  such  ideas  were  held 
at  other  times.    The  supposed  datum,  given  by  the 
connection  of  the  idea  of  Satan  with  the  same  ide& 
in  two  other  passages  of  Scripture,  loses  sight  of  the 
fact  that  Biblical  literature  is  the  remains  of  a  larger 
literature  which,  if  extant,  might  give  a  different 
basis.    The  only  means  which  might  enable  one  to 
fix  the  date  of  the  book  would  be  its  literary  rela- 
tionship to  other  dated  books.    Undated  Scriptures, 
like  the  introduction  to  Proverbs  or  the  Hexateuch 
or  its  parts,  must  be  left  out  of  account.     To  the 
dated  books  belong  Jeremiah  and  Esekiel.     Between 
the  way  in  which  Jeremiah  curses  his  birth  (xx.  14) 
and  the  expressions  in  Job  iii.  there  is  an  indispu- 
table connection.    But  the  decision  as  to  priority 
may  lie  in  subjective  considerations.   Note,  however, 
that  Esekiel  speaks  of  Job  as  being  as  well  known  to 
his  companions  as  Noah  and  Diuiiel.    Here  again 
some  say  that  not  our  book  but  a  Job  of  folk-lore  is 
referred  to.    It  is  noticeable,  however,  that  Ese- 
kiel is  concerned  with  the  problem  of  the  righteous 
judgment  of  God,  which  is  one  of  the  prdblems  of 
Job.    In  any  case  it  ii  not  forbidden  to  assume 
that  Malachi  had  this  book  in  his  eye  (iii.  16),  that 
Esekiel  knew  it,  and  that  Jeremiah  had  the  bitter 
complaint  of  Job  in  his  mind.    Delitzsch  has  em- 
phasised the  touching  wail  of  the  leper  of  Ps. 
Ixxxviii.  (cf.  Job  vi.  8)  ascribed  to  Heman  of  whom 
I  Chron.  xxv.  5  says  that  he  was  seer  to  the  king  and 
that  God  gave  him  fourteen  sons  and  five  daughters. 
It  has  seemed  strange  that  those  who  aigue  for  an 
old  folk-book  have  not  connected  the  two,  espe- 
cially since  the  doubling  of  Job's  possessions  implied 
fourteen  and  not  seven  sons.    But  the  Chronicler 
has  made  no  such  connection,  and  the  fact  that 
Heman  wrote  a  poem  which  strikes  the  same  note  as 
the  book  of  Job  does  not  warrant  the  assumption 
that  our  book  is  the  expansion  of  it.    It  may  be 
said,  however,  that  the  origin  of  the  book  of  Job  lies 
on  this  side  of  Heman  and  in  dose  relationship 
with  that  which  is  said  of  him;  nothing  further  can 
be  affirmed  respecting  the  author  nor  can  the  time 
of  its  origin  be  closely  defined. 

(AuQUBT  Elobtbrmann.) 

Bibuoobapht:  Tezta  of  value  are  by  A.  Ken.  Jena,  1S71: 
8.  Baer,  Leipse,  1875;    O.  Biokell.  in  Canmna  v^^ 


198 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


'ob.  Book  of 


itSi 


J  pp.  160-187.  Innsbruck.  1882  (soea  into  met- 
rody  and  strophieal  struoture);  G.  Hoffmann,  Kiel.  1891 ; 
C.  Sesfried,  in  SBOT,  1893;  G.  Beer.  2  Tola..  Marburs. 
189S-4n  (critioal  and  of  great  yalue);  B.  Duhm,  GOttingen. 
1887;  Wienftr  Zeitachrift  for  dU  KumUdet  MargenlandM, 
▼ola.  Ti.-Tii.  (eritieal  unpointed  text,  with  directions  for 
reading  in  Latin);  and  in  the  new  Biblia  Htbrmea  of  R. 
Kittel.  Leipsio.  1905-06.  The  Sahidic  version  was  edited 
by  CSasca  in  Saerarum  bibliorumfragmgnia  CoptoSahidiea, 
Bome,  1889  (has  a  rich  introduction;  cf.  Am^ineau  in 
TSBA,  iz.  2.  1893.  6  sqq.).  A  Greek  edition  is  by  P.  de 
Lasarde  in  his  MUtkeilungen,  u.  189  sqq..  GOttingen.  1887. 
Elarlier  oommentaries  are  by  Brentius,  Halle.  1546; 
Johannee  de  Spineda.  Madrid.  1597;  A.  Schultens,  Leyden. 
1737;  C.  F.  Houbigant.  Notae  erUieae  in  univeraoa  veteria 
Umiimmnii  libroa,  Frankfort.  1777;  I.  J.  Reiske.  Leipsic 
1779;  M.  H.  Stuhhnann.  Hamburg,  1804;  J.  W.  C.  Um- 
breit,  Heidelberg,  1824;  E.  B.  Kteter.  Schleswig.  1831. 
More  modem  ones  are  by  H.  Ewald.  DidUer  dm  alien 
BundM,  Tol.  iiL.  G6ttingen.  1836.  Eng.  transl..  London. 
1897;  8.  Lee.  London.  1837;  J.  G.  SUckel.  Leipsic.  1842; 
K.  Sehlottmann.  Berlin.  1851;  L.  Hinel.  ed.  Olshausen. 
Leipsic  1852;  J.  G.  Vsahinger.  Stuttgart.  1856;  T.  J. 
Conant,  New  York.  1857;  E.  Renan.  Paris,  1850,  Eng. 
trans!.,  London.  1889;  A.  B.  Davidson,  vol.  i..  London. 
1862  (never  oompleted,  philological,  an  excellent  piece  of 
-work);  idem,  in  CJembridge  Bible.  1884  (perhaps  the  best 
in  English);  Frans  Delitssch,  Leipsic,  1876.  Eng.  transl. 
of  1st  ed.,  Edinburgh,  1869  (the  introduction  is  very  valu- 
able, gives  a  history  of  the  exegesis  of  the  book);  F.  C. 
Go<^  fai  Bible  Commentary,  London,  1873;  O.  Zdckler,  in 
Lange's  Commentary,    Eng.    transl..    New   York,    1874; 

E.  W.  Hengstenbeig,  Leipsic,  1875;  C.  P.  Robinson, 
London,  1876;  D.  Thomas,  ib.  1879;  8.  Cox.  ib.  1880; 
G.  H.  B.  Wright,  ib.  1883;  G.  G.  Bradley,  Leciuree  on  the 
Book  cf  Job,  Oxford,  1887;  W.  Volck.  Munich,  1889; 
A.  Dilhnann.  Leipsic.  1891;  R.  A.  Watson,  in  Expoeitor'a 
Bible,  London,  1892;  K.  Budde,  Gdttingen,  1896;  B. 
Duhm,  Freiburg.  1897;  R  C.  8.  Gibson.  London,  1889; 
Friedrich  Delitzsch,  Leipsic,  1902;  M.  Pritchard,  London, 
1903:    D.  Da>'ie8.  vol.  i.,  London.  1909. 

On  the  metrics  consult:  J.  H.  A.  Ebrard.  Dae  Audk 
Biob  ale  poetiechee  Kunetwerk,  Landau,  1858;  P.  Vetter. 
Die  Metrik  dee  Bttekee  Hiob,  in  Bardenhewer's  Biblieehe 
Studien,  ii.  4.  Freiburg,  1897;  J.  Ley,  Die  metrieche 
BeeebaffenheU  dee  Budtee  Hiob,  in  TSK,  1895,  1899;  E. 
Kautssoh,  Die  Poeeie  und  die  poetiechen  BOeher  dee  A.  7*., 
Tabingen,  1902. 

On  critical  and  other  questions  related  to  the  book 
consult:  G.  Bickell,  De  indol$  ac  raHone  vereionie  Al- 
exandrinae,  Marburg,  1862;  J.  A.  Froude,  in  Short 
Studiee  on  Great  SubjeeU,  London,  1867;  W.  H.  Green. 
Arffument  of  the  Book  of  Job,  New  York,  1874;  K. 
Budde,  Beiirll4fe  eur  Kritik  dee  Buchee  Hiob,  Bonn.  1876; 

F.  Gieeebreoht,  Der  Wendepunkt  dee  Bttchee  Hiob,  Greifs- 
wald,  1879;  T.  K.  Cheyne.  Jo6  and  Solomon,  London.  1887; 
E.  Hatch,  Beeaye  in  BibUeal  Greek,  ib.  1889  (on  the  8ep- 
tuagint);  J.  F.  Genung.  The  Epic  of  the  Inner  Life,  the 
Book  of  Job,  Boston,  1891;  W.  T.  Davison,  in  Wiedom 
Literaiure  qf  the  O,  T.,  London.  1893  (a  luminous  treat- 
ment); L.  Laue,  Kompoeitian  dee  Buchee  Hiob,  Halle, 
1895;  G.  Beer,  in  ZATW,  xvi  (1896),  297  sqq.,  xvii  (1897), 
97  sqq.,  xviii  (1898),  257  sqq.  (deals  with  all  the  versions); 
J.  Owen,  l^irs  Great  Skeptical  Dramae,  New  York,  1896; 

G.  V.  Gariand,  Probleme  of  Job,  London,  1898:  R.  G. 
Moolton,  in  Literary  Study  of  the  Bible,  Boeton,  1809;  M. 
Jastrow,  BabyUmian  ParaUete  to  Job,  in  JBL,  xxv.  2  (1906) ; 
DB,  n.  660-671;   EB,  ii.  2464-2491;   JE,  vii.  193-200. 

JOBSON,  FREDERICK  JAMES:  English  Wes- 
leyan;  b.  at  Northwich  (17  m.  e.n.e.  of  Chester), 
Cheshire,  July  6,  1812;  d.  in  London  Jan,  4,  1881. 
He  served  an  apprenticeship  to  an  architect  of  Nor- 
wich, but  in  1834  entered  the  Wesleyan  ministry. 
He  was  located  at  Patrington,  Yorkshire,  in  1834, 
and  at  lianchester  1835-37.  In  the  latter  year  he 
went  to  London  as  assistant  at  the  City  Road 
Chapel.  In  1856  he  was  sent  by  the  British  con- 
ference to  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Conference  at 
Indianapolis,  Ind.,  and  in  1860  to  the  conference 
at  Sydney,  Australia.  As  book  steward  of  the 
VI.— 13 


Wesleyan  Methodist  organisation  1864-79  he  greatly 
extended  the  publishing-business  of  his  denon>- 
ination.  For  twelve  years  he  superintended  the 
Methodiat  Magazine.  In  1869  he  was  elected  presi- 
dent of  the  Wesleyan  Methodist  conference.  His 
principal  works  are,  Chapel  and  School  ArchUedwre 
(London,  1850);  A  Mother's  Portrait  (1855); 
America  and  American  Methodiam  (1857);  Auatra- 
lia;  with  Notes  by  the  Way  on  Egypt,  Ceylon,  Bom- 
hay,  and  the  Holy  Land  (1862);  Perfect  Love  for 
Christian  Believers  (1864);  Seriotis  Truths  /or  Con- 
sideration  (1864);  and  Visible  Union  with  the  Church 
of  Christ  (1864).  A  number  of  his  sermons  were 
printed  in  B.  Gregory's  Life  of  F.  J,  Jchson  (Lon- 
don, 1884). 
Bibuooeapht:  Besides  the  Life  by  Qxecory,  at  sop.,  oonstilt 

the  Wealeyan  Methodiet  Magaeine,  Sept.  1844.  June  1871. 

and  1881.  pp.  160-167,  176-186.  286-294,  307;    DNB, 

xxix.396. 

JOCELIN,  jes'e-lin:  A  Cistercian  monk  of  Fumees 
Abbey  (in  northwestern  Lancashire,  west  of  More- 
cambe  Bay)  and  later  of  Down  in  North  Ireland. 
He  flourished  about  1200  and  is  noteworthy  for  his 
lives  of  saints,  especially  his  Life  of  St,  Kentigem 
(ed.  A.  P.  Forbes,  Edinburgh,  1874)  and  the  Life 
and  Mirades  of  St.  Patrick  (published  by  Colgan 
in  the  Trias  thaumaturga,  Louvain,  1647,  64-116, 
and  in  the  ASB,  Biar.,  ii.  540-580;  Eng.  transl.  by 
E.  L.  Swift,  Dublin,  1809). 

JOCH,  y6H,  JOHANR  6E0R6:  German  Protes- 
tant theologian;  b.  at  Rothenburg  (31  m.  8Ui.e.  of 
Wttrzbuig)  Dec.  27,  1677;  d.  at  Wittenberg  Oct. 
1,  1731.  He  is  noted  in  the  ecclesiastical  history 
of  his  time  as  an  ardent  champion  of  pietistic  teach- 
ings in  the  two  strongholds  of  orthodox  Lutheran 
theology,  Dortmund  and  Wittenberg.  At  Jena, 
where  he  studied  from  1697  to  1709,  he  became  an 
enthusiastic  follower  of  Spener,  and  when  he  was 
made  superintendent  and  gsrmnasiarch  at  Dort- 
mund in  the  latter  year,  he  applied  himself  to  the 
performance  of  his  duties  in  the  spirit  of  pietism. 
He  found  a  demoralised  and  materialistic  clergy, 
devoted  solely  to  dogmatism  and  polemics,  and  at 
once  began  a  struggle  for  regeneration  by  means 
of  pietistic  assemblies  and  the  institution  of  cate- 
chism classes.  This  brought  him  into  conflict  with 
his  clerical  colleagues,  but  he  enjoyed  the  support 
of  the  municipal  authorities  until  he  alienated  them 
by  his  attacks  upon  them.  In  1722  he  became  head 
preacher  at  Erfurt,  and  in  1726  was  appointed  pro- 
fessor of  theology  at  Wittenberg,  where  his  advent 
was  the  signal  for  the  outbreak  of  a  long  contro- 
versy in  which  the  cause  of  Pietism  miule  little 
headway.  Joch  was  a  prolific  writer  in  various 
fields,  but  his  productions,  almost  without  excep- 
tion, were  pamphlets  of  little  permanent  value. 

(E.  Ideler.) 
Bibuograprt:  C.  W.   F.  Waloh.  Hietorie  der  Ketaereien, 

▼i.  236.  473  iqq..   11  yols..  Leipaio.  1762-«6;    J.  C.  W. 

Auguflti,   Beilrioe  eur  GeediidUe  und  Statietik  der  eean- 

geUedien  Kirche.  i.  164-231,  Jena.  1837. 

JOEL:  The  second  of  the  Minor  Prophets  in  the 
arrangement  of  the  English  version.  Little  is 
known  of  the  prophet;  he  was  the  son  of  Pethuel, 
probably  a  Judahite,  and  prophesied  in  Jerusalem; 
but  that  he  was  a  Levite  does  not  follow  from  i.  9, 


Joel 
Johann«i 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


194 


13,  ii.  17.  By  most  scholan  hu  date  ia  placed  in 
the  reign  of  Joash  between  875  and  845  B.C.  on  the 
ground  that  Amos  used  his  book,  that  the  descent 
of  the  Edomites  upon  Judah  under  Joash  was  fresh 
in  his  memory,  and  that  his  mention  of  temple, 
priests,  and  ritual  necessitates  that  early  date. 
Others  place  him  in  the  times  of  Jeroboam  II.  and 

Uzziah,  others  under  Ahaz  and  Heze- 
Date.       kiah,  still  others  in  the  last  years  of 

Josiah,  while  several  recent  critics  put 
him  in  Persian  or  Greek  times.  Against  a  post- 
exilic  dating  are  the  following  considerations:  The 
position  of  the  book  in  the  Hebrew  and  Greek 
canon  is  among  the  early  prophets  and  before  those 
of  the  Chaldean  period.  Among  the  peoples  named 
in  the  book  there  appear  neither  Syrians,  Greeks, 
Persians,  Babylonians,  nor  Assyrians,  not  even 
Moabites  or  Ammonites,  but  only  Philistines,  Phe- 
nidans,  Egyptians,  and  Edomites.  Nothing  fol- 
lows from  silence  respecting  a  king  and  the  northern 
kingdom.  Against  the  assertion  that  iii.  2  and  6 
imply  the  Babylonian  or  an  Assyrian  captivity,  it 
is  to  be  noted  that  neither  Babylonians  nor  Assyr- 
ians are  mentioned;  Philistines  and  Phenidans 
are  the  chief  foes  in  iii.  4  (cf.  II  Chron.  xxi.  16-17, 
where  Philistines  and  Arabians  are  said  to  have 
aided  Jerusalem  in  the  time  of  Jehoram,  and 
II  Kings  viii.  22).  Characteristic  are  the  ''part- 
ing of  the  land  "  and  the  selling  of  Judean  prison- 
ers of  war  to  foreign  peoples,  a  practise  of  the 
Phenidans  (F.  C.  Movers,  Die  Phdnizier,  ii.  3,  70 
sqq.,  Bonn,  1845),  who,  by  the  ninth  century,  were 
in  conmierdal  contact  with  the  Greeks.  The  men- 
tion of  Egypt  in  iii.  19  may  be  connected  with  the 
expedition  of  Shishak  of  I  Kings  xiv.  25  imder  Re- 
hoboam.  Against  this  the  "  bring  again  the  cap- 
tivity "  of  iii.  1  can  not  be  urged,  since  in  post- 
exilic  times  this  phrase  means  to  restore  and  not 
to  return  captives;  and  that  Judah  and  Jerusalem 
needed  restoration  when  the  northern  tribes  had 
revolted,  had  assailed  the  capital,  annexed  Judean 
territory,  and  sold  captives  into  slavery  no  one  will 
deny.  The  conception  of  the  book  that  Jerusalem 
was  the  legitimate  sanctuary  is  no  proof  of  late 
origin,  since  Isaiah  and  Micah  have  the  same  idea 
(Isa.  ii.  2;  Mic.  i.  2).  Similarly,  JoePs  attitude  to 
the  priesthood  finds  analogies  in  early  prophetic 
books.  The  linguistic  test  can  not  be  emplo3red, 
since  it  gives  no  sure  results.  But  more  dedsive 
is  the  imquestionable  dependence  of  Amos  on  Joel 
(cf.  Amos  i.  2,  9,  13  with  Joel  iii.  16,  18),  while  the 
qcaam  of  Amos  iv.  9  is  repeated  only  in  Joel  i.  4, 
ii.  25,  and  is  not  dependent  in  Joel  upon  Amos.  If 
Joel  is  placed  in  the  early  years  of  Joash  when 
Jehoiada  was  influential,  the  attitude  toward  the 
priests  is  fully  explained. 

The  occasion  of  the  book  was  a  dire  plague  of 
locusts,  accompanied  by  a  severe  drought,  the  re- 
sults and  course  of  which  are  described  i.  2-ii.  17, 
resulting  in  the  prophet's  call  to  fasting  and  re- 
pentance.   This   fast   must   have   been   observed, 

since  in  the  second  and  remaining  part 
Contents,    of  the  book  promises  of  good  abound, 

relating  to  the  immediate  and  the  dis- 
tant future.  The  immediate  outlook  is  the  defeat 
pf  the  foe,  healing  and  good  fortune,  so  that  Zion 


rejoices  in  its  God;  in  the  distant  future  (ii.  28) 
Yahweh's  spirit  is  to  come  on  all  flesh,  nuJdng  all 
prophecy  superfluous,  while  Zion  is  to  dwell  in  se- 
curity. Its  foes  are  to  be  gathered,  a  hostile  army, 
for  judgment,  and  amid  terrifying  upheavals  of 
nature  are  to  be  reaped  like  a  ripe  harvest.  The 
book  doses  (iii.  18-21)  with  blessing  upon  Judah 
and  Jerusalem  and  promise  of  destruction  for  thdr 
foes.  The  articulation  of  the  book  is  good  and  its 
parts  are  well  related.  The  Day  of  Yahweh,  which 
in  the  first  part  appears  as  one  of  terror  unless  re- 
pentance supervenes,  is  in  the  second  part  a  day 
of  grace  because  that  repentance  has  come.  Against 
Merx,  the  hostile  peoples  are  not  all  mankind,  but 
the  immediate  neighbors  of  Judah,  those  who,  in 
accordance  with  the  law  of  prophecy,  were  in  the 
ken  of  the  prophet,  viz..  Tyre,  Sidon,  and  Philistia. 
This  issues,  however,  in  chap.  iii.  in  the  distinction 
between  Israel  as  God's  people  and  the  people  of 
the  world  who  are  foes  of  God,  a  representation 
which  is  repeated  in  Zech.  xiv.  2.  The  place  of 
judgment  of  the  world  is  the  Valley  of  Jehoshaphat, 
made  memorable  by  the  event  narrated  in  II  Chron. 
XX.  22-26,  a  place  which  recalled  not  only  Jehosh- 
aphat but  a  noted  judgment  upon  Judah's  foes. 

The  plague  of  locusts  is  to  bie  taken  literally,  not 
metaphoricaDy.  The  metaphoric  interpretation  de- 
pends largely  upon  the  fact  that  one  of  the  names 
for  locusts  in  the  Masoretic  pointing  means  "  north- 
ern," and  Judah's  enemies  were  northern,  while  the 
locusts  usually  came  from  the  south.  But  swarms 
are  sometimes  brought  from  the  northern  Syrian 
desert  by  a  northeast  wind.  Moreover,  the  predic- 
tion in  ii.  20  is  applicable  to  a  swarm  of  locusts 
driveni  nto  the  Dead  Sea  and  the  Mediterranean, 
not  to  a  human  enemy.  There  is  no  ground  for 
denying  to  the  prophet  the  composition  of  the  book 
as  a  whole;  the  unity  becomes  dear  when  it  is  seen 
that  the  phenomena  of  the  first  part  are  the  basis 
of  the  rest  (ii.  28-iii.  21).  (W.  VoiiCxf.) 

It  is  now  no  longer  possible  to  say,  with  the  late 
writer  of  the  above  article,  that  most  scholars  place 
the  date  of  Joel  "  in  the  reign  of  Joash  between 
875  and  845  B.C."  [Joash  of  Judah  really  reigned 
from  836  to  797  B.C.]  It  has  been  well  said  that 
"  the  book  is  either  very  early  or  very  late,"  and 
recent  critics  almost  unanimously  place  it  in  the 
fourth  century  b.c,  though  a  few  still  regard  it  as  the 
earliest  of  the  prophetical  writings.  In  answer  to  the 
argumentsfor  the  older  view  it  may  be  said:  (1)  It 
is  more  likely  that  Joel,  e.g.  in  iii.  16, 18,  borrowed 
from  Amos  than  that  Amos,  e.g.,  in  i.  2,  ix.  13, 
borrowed  from  Joel,  for  the  former  passages  are 
brought  close  together  as  would  naturally  be  done 
in  a  reproduction  of  earlier  thoughts.  (2)  The  at- 
tacks of  the  Edomites  upon  Judsdi  (cf.  iii.  19),  duN 
ing  the  helplessness  of  the  latter  just  before  and 
for  centuries  after  the  exile,  finally  resulted  in  their 
actual  annexation  of  the  country  even  to  the  north 
of  Hebron;  and  it  is  these  relations  with  Edom 
which  form  the  chief  subject  of  prophetic  references 
(see  Ob.  i.  8;  Jer.  xlix.  7,  17,  20;  Esek.  xzv. 
12,  14,  xxxii.  29;  Mai.  i.  4)  to  that  inveterate 
enemy  of  Judah.  (3)  There  is  no  allusion  to  the 
kingdom  of  northern  Israel.  (4)  The  detailed  ref- 
erences to  the  priesthood  and  the  temple  offerings 


196 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


JJ 


fojH 


and  servioes  (i.  9,  13,  14,  ii.  14-17)  suggest  the 
later  period  of  Jewish  church  influence  rather  than 
the  days  of  prophetic  independence.  (5)  The  exile 
and  dispersion  and  foreign  occupation  seem  to  be 
presupposed  in  iii.  2,  17.  (6)  The  allusion  to  the 
'*  Grecians  "  (iii.  6)  is  best  accounted  for  by  the 
effects  of  the  Macedonian  regime  in  Asia.  (7)  The 
strongest  argument  for  a  late  date  is  the  apocalyp- 
tic character  of  the  book  from  ii.  28  to  the  end, 
the  general  indefiniteness  of  the  historical  back- 
ground, and  lack  of  specific  allusion  to  contem- 
porary events  and  situations  which  forms  such  a 
striking  feature  of  the  earlier  prophets. 

J.  F.  McOuRDT. 

BimuoaBAPHT:  The  two  best  eommentaries  are  by  S.  R. 
I>river.  in  Cambridoe  BibU,  1897.  and  Q.  A.  Smith,  The 
Book  o/  the  Ttptlve,  London,  1808.  Other  oommentariesare 
by:  A.  F.  Holahauaen,  Hanover,  1829;  C.  A.  Credner, 
Halle.  1831;  E.  Meier.  TQbingen,  1841;  A.  Wanache, 
Leipac,  1872  (giveB  bibliography  of  Joel  to  1872);  E. 
Montet,  Geneva.  1877;  A.  Merx.  Halle.  1879  (gives  history 
of  interpretation  down  to  Galvin);  F.  Hitsig.  ed.  J.  Steiner. 
Leipac,  1881;  A.  Sohols.  WOrxburg.  1886;  C.  F.  Keil. 
Leipeic  1888;  E.  le  Savoureux,  Paris,  1888;  G.  Preuss, 
HaUe,  1889;  J.  Wellhausen,  Die  kUinen  Propheten,  pp.  66 
aqq..  207  aqq.,  Berlin.  1892;  C.  von  Orelli,  in  Kunoefaaeter 
Kommentar,  3d  ed.,  Munich.  1908.  Eng.  tranal.  of  earlier 
ed^  The  Twelve  Minor  PropheU,  Edinbuigh.  1893;  W. 
Nowack,  G6ttingen.  1897;  I.  T.  Beck.  ed.  J.  Lindenmeyer. 
GOterstoh.  1898;  J.  Hyde.  London.  1898;  E.  B.  Pusey.  Minor 
PropheU,  reissue,  London.  1906;  A.  C.  Gaeberlin.  ib.,  1909. 
Questions  of  date,  unity,  genuineness,  etc,  are  treated 
in  the  works  on  Biblical  Introduction,  such  as  Driver's, 
and  in  the  commentaries.  Special  treatises  are:  H.  Gr&ts, 
Der  einheiUiehe  Charakter  der  PropheUe  Joele,  Breslau, 
1873;  W.  L.  Pearson.  The  Prophecy  of  Joel :  ite  Unity, 
He  Aim,  and  the  Age  cf  ite  CompoMon,  New  York, 
1885;  G.  Kessner,  Dae  ZeitaUer  dee  Propheten  Joel,  Leipeic, 
1888;  H.  Holsinger,  in  ZATW,  1889,  pp.  89-131;  F.  W. 
Farrar.  The  Minor  Prophete,  London.  1890;  G.  B.  Gray, 
in  Bxpoeitor.  Sept..  1893;  G.  G.  Findlay,  Booke  of  the 
PropheU,  Ix>ndon.  1896;  DB,  ii.  672-676;  SB,  ii  2492- 
2497;  JE,  vu.  204-208. 

JOHANR ,  yOOian,  JOHANNES,  yOnian-n6z.  See 
John. 

JOHANNES  m.  SCHOLASnCUS:  Patriarch  of 
Constantinople;  b.  at  Sirimis  (near  Antioch);  d. 
probably  Aug.  31,  577. 

The  Patriarch  Eutychius  (q.v.)  having  been  ban- 
ished on  account  of  his  firm  attitude  against  Aph- 
thartodooetism  (see  Justinian),  Justinian  appointed 
to  succeed  him,  in  Jan.,  565,  Johannes,  deputy  of 
the  Patriarch  Anastasius  of  Antioch.  Before  be- 
coming a  cleric,  Johannes  had  been  a  lawyer.  Ac- 
cording to  John  of  Ephesus  (Hist.  Ecd.,  i.  and  ii.), 
he  was  an  unsparing  oppressor  of  the  Monophysites 
of  the  capital  After  severe  illness,  he  died  in  the 
twelfth  year  of  the  Emperor  Justin  II.,  whose  favor 
be  had  enjoyed.  Johannes  was  the  author  of 
(1)  a  *'  collection  of  canons,"  and  this  while  still  a 
presbyter  of  Antioch;  also  (2)  a  legal  canon  (Jus- 
tellus,  BibUolheca  Juris  canonici  veteris,  2  vols., 
Paris,  1661,  ii.  499-672).  The  former  treatise  con- 
tains the  canons  of  church  councils  down  to  Chal- 
oedon;  the  latter,  the  ecclesiastical  legislation  of 
the  emperors;  and  both  collections  are  treated 
systematically.  According  to  Photius  {Bibliotheca, 
cod.  Ixxv.,  p.  52,  ed.  Bekker,  2  vols.,  Berlin,  1824), 
Johannes  wrote  a  "  catechetical  discourse  **  against 
the  tritheism  of  Johannes  Philoponus  (q.v.);    ac- 


cording to  John  of  Nikiou  (ed.  by  Zotenberg  in  J  A 
1878,  ii.  344),  also  an  ''  initiation.''    G.  KbOgsr. 
Bibuoorapht:  ASB,    Aug.    1.    *67:     DCB,    iii.   366-367; 

Fabrieiiw-Harlea.  Bibliatheea  Oraeea,  xL  101.  zii.  146.  193. 

201,  209.  Hambuis.  1808-09. 

JOHANNES  IV.  JEJUNATOR:  Patriarch  of  Con- 
stantinople; b.  in  Constantinople;  d.  Sept.  2,  595. 
He  was  a  deacon  at  St.  Sophia  under  the  Patriarch 
Johannes  III.  Scholasticus  (q.v.).  While  not  a 
learned  man,  he  was  distinguished  for  devout  works 
and  for  his  extended  fasts,  whence  his  name  Jejuna- 
tor.  On  April  12,  582,  he  succeeded  Eutychius 
(q.v.)  as  patriarch  of  Constantinople,  and  stood  in 
h^h  esteem  with  the  Emperors  Tiberius  and  Mauri- 
tius. He  is  commemorated  as  a  saint  by  the  Greek 
Church  on  September  2. 

He  is  known  in  ecclesiastical  history  for  his  con- 
troversy with  Popes  Pelagius  II.  and  Gregory  I. 
In  the  proceedings  of  a  synod  held  at  Constantinople 
in  588,  under  his  presidency,  He  is  called  archbishop 
and  ecumenical  patriarch.  The  first  protest  against 
this  title  was  urged  by  Pelagius  (cf.  Gregory,  Epiti, 
V.  41  and  v.  44).  Some  years  later  Gregory  took 
occasion  to  rebuke  the  patriarch's  insolence  and 
haughtiness  because,  by  usurping  that  title,  which 
nobody,  not  even  the  Roman  pontiff,  had  ever  as- 
sumed, he  exalted  himself  above  the  other  bishops. 
The  remonstrance  passed  unheeded,  even  when 
Gregory  also  addressed  the  Emperor  Mauritius  in 
the  matter  (Gregory,  Epist,,  v.  37;  cf.  v.  39).  At 
all  events,  Gregory's  strict  decision  continued  bind- 
ing for  the  Church  of  Rome,  which  denied  to  the 
devout  faster  the  veneration  due  to  a  saint. 

Gregory  was  in  error  if  he  supposed  that  Johannes 
undertook  an  innovation,  for  the  title  was  used  in 
the  time  of  Johannes  II.  the  Cappadocian  in  518. 
Still  again,  Gregory  erred  in  the  assumption  that 
his  own  predecessors  had  refused  the  title  (A  uni- 
versal bishop  or  patriarch;  for  the  contrary  is  true 
in  respect  to  Leo  I.,  Hormisdas,  Boniface  II.,  and 
Agapetus  I.  Gregory  was  also  probably  wrong  in 
construing  the  title  to  mean  an  exaltation  of  the 
Byiantine  patriarch  over  all  other  bishops,  includ- 
ing the  bishop  of  Rome,  for  there  are  still  good 
reasons  for  the  hypothesis  that  "ecumenical  patri- 
arch "  meant  "  imperial  patriarch." 

The  following  writings  are  extant  imder  the  name 
of  Johannes,  although  none  of  them  date  back  to 
him:  (1)  '*  Rules  and  guide  in  the  case  of  those 
who  make  confession"  (AfPG,  bcxxviii.,  1889- 
1918;  cf.  1931-36);  (2)  ''  On  repentance,  self- 
control,  and  virginity"  (MPO,  boExviii.  1937-78), 
also  ascribed  to  Chrysostom;  (3)  "  On  false  proph- 
ets," (among  Chrysostom's  works,  MPO,  Uv.,  553- 
568);  (4)  "Instruction  for  nuns  and  reproof  of 
every  kind  of  sin  "  (J.  B.  Pitra,  SpidUgium  SoUa- 
menae,  4  vols.,  iv.,  416-435,  Paris,  1858).  Accord- 
ing to  K.  Holl  (ErUhiuiasmus  und  BusagewaU  beim 
griechischen  M&nchtum,  pp.  289  sqq.,  Leipsic,  1898) 
the  first  one  was  composed  by  a  Cappadocian  monk, 
Johannes,  who  lived  in  the  Petra  cloister  at  Con- 
stantinople about  1100.  G.  KrOoer. 
Bibuoorapht:  ASB,  Auc.  1.  *e9-*74;    Fftbrieiiu-HarlM. 

BibUotheca  Oraeea,  xi.  108-112.  HamburB.  1806;    A.  J. 

Binterim,  DenkwOrdiokeiten,   v.  3.   pp.  383-390.  Kains. 

1829;     A.    Pichler,    Oeechit^  der  kirehUehen   TVennunff 

Kwieehen  Orient  und  Occident,  ti.  647-686.  Munioh,  1865; 


Joluumea 
John 


THE  NEW  SCHAFP-HERZOG 


106 


J.  Heivenroiher.  PhoUut,  i.  178-190,  Regouiburg,  1867; 
J.  TAnjtn,  Ch§dtiehi»  dsr  rtfrniaeAcn  Kirehs,  iL  446  Kiq., 
Bonn,  1885;  F.  Katt«nbuMh,  Lthrbueh  <Ur  vrnvleiekenden 
KonfMmonakuntU,  i.  111-117,  262,  Freibuis.  1892;  K.  HoU, 
Bnthunatmut  und  BMBaa^wali  beim  ffritehitchen  MOnehium, 
pp.  28^-298,  Leipuc,  1898;  DCB,  iiL  367-368;  And  Utenir 
lure  undttr  Fvlaoiub  IL,  and  Obboort  I. 

JOHANNES  ASKUSNA6ES,  Oa-kuB'na-jts:  Greek 
theologian  of  the  sixth  century.  He  was  a  pupil 
of  the  Syrian  Peter  of  Rhesina,  whom  he  succeeded 
as  teacher  of  philosophy  at  Constantinople  during 
the  reign  of  Justinian  I.  In  a  conference  held  in  the 
presence  of  the  emperor,  Johannes  declared  him- 
self not  only  a  monophysite,  but  a  tritheist,  and  he 
was  accordingly  banished  as  a  heretic.  Abulfaraj 
makes  Johannes  Askusnages  the  founder  of  trithe- 
ism,  but  the  Greek  sources,  which  ignore  this  the- 
ologian, assign  this  place  to  Johannes  Philoponos 
(q.y.),  the  discrepancy  being  apparently  due  to  the 
fact  that  the  latter  was  the  most  distinguished 
representative  of  the  tritheistic  doctrine. 

(Phiupp  Metxr.) 
Bibuoobapby:  C.  W.  F.  Waloh,  UiatariB  dsr  Kttmnim,  viii. 

684,    11    vols..    Leipdo,    1762-86;     Neandar,    Chriatian 

Chwrdi,  u.  613. 

JOHANNES  BEKKOS:  Patriarch  of  Constanti- 
nople; b.  at  Constantinople  in  the  early  part  of  the 
thirteenth  century;  d.  in  the  castle  of  St.  Gregory 
in  Bithynia  1293.  He  first  became  important  in 
the  unionistic  synod  of  1274,  when  the  Emperor 
Michael  Palieologus,  a  sealous  advocate  of  union, 
sought  his  aid  as  a  scholar  and  orator.  Johannes, 
however,  after  some  hesitation  declared  the  Latins 
heretics,  and  was  accordingly  imprisoned.  During 
his  confinement  he  read  the  older  Greek  literature 
on  the  controverted  points  and  became  convinced  of 
the  truth  of  what  he  had  hitherto  rejected.  The 
consequence  was  his  elevation  to  the  patriarchal 
throne,  but  the  change  in  ecclesiastical  policy  re- 
sulted in  his  deposition  in  1282  and  his  banishment 
in  the  following  year.  His  final  years  were  spent  in 
prison.  The  Greek  Church  has  stricken  the  name 
of  Bekkos  from  the  list  of  the  orthodox,  but  his 
polemical  writings  were  included  in  the  Graecia 
orthodoxa  of  Leo  Allatius  (Rome,  1652-59).  His 
theological  works  were  chiefly  in  defense  of  the 
union,  the  most  important  being  "  On  the  Union 
and  Peace  of  the  Old  and  New  Churches  of  Rome." 

(Philipp  Meyer.) 

Bibuoorapht:  Krumbacher,  OMehiehU,  pp.  9d-07  (where 
the  literature  is  indicated);  FabriduB-Harles.  Bihliothsca 
OroMo,  id,  344-340,  Hamburg.  1806. 

JOHANNES  CLIMACUS  (SCHOLASTICUS,  SI- 
NAITA):  Monk  of  Moimt  Sinai.  From  the  "Nar- 
ratives "  of  Anastasius,  a  monk  of  Mount  Sinai  (cf. 
F.  Nau,  Lea  r6cits  inidita  du  moine  Anaatase,  Paris, 
1902;  and  Oriena  Chrtatianua,  ii.,  1902,  58-89),  it 
appears  that  Johannes  Climacus  died  about  649. 
He  was  presumably  bom  before  579,  and  became 
a  monk  in  the  Sinai  cloister  about  000,  being  abbot 
of  the  same  before  639.  If  these  data  be  correct, 
then  this  Johannes  can  not  be  identical  with  Johan- 
nes, the  abbot  of  Mount  Sinai  to  whom  Gregory 
I.  addressed  a  letter  dated  Sept.  1,  600  (Epist.  xi. 
1;  NPNFt  xiii.  52).  Johannes  was  called  Climacus 
on  account  of  his  book,  "  The  Ladder  to  Paradise," 
»o  termed  with  reference  to  Jacob's  ladder.    In  this 


book  the  spiritual  oonditiona  by  which  men  are 
purified  in  preparation  for  the  divine  life  are  de- 
scribed in  thirty  steps.  The  process  begins  with 
renunciation  of  the  world.  The  spirit  turns  to 
penance.  JSalutary  tribulation  softens  the  heart, 
and  removes  the  dross.  Presently  the  penitent 
finds  words  only  for  prayer,  song,  and  the  manifes- 
tation of  love.  Blessed  humility  leads  to  the  imi- 
tation of  Christ,  and  unlocks  the  gates  of  heaven. 
The  highest  estate  is  that  of  a  divinely  patterned 
apathy  and  rest  where  one  beholds,  in  an  undimmed 
mirror,  the  excellences  of  Paradise.  However, 
only  he  who  has  first  endured  and  overcome  the 
storms  of  this  world,  wiU  attain  to  that  stage  of 
bKssful  calm.  Among  the  Greek  monks,  this  tract, 
reinforced  with  notes,  was  for  centuries  in  use  as  a 
guide  to  perfection  (cf.  the  Scholia  of  Abbot  John 
of  Ralthu;  MPO,  htxxviii.  1211-48). 

G.  KrOgeb. 

Bibuoobapbt:  The  editio  prinoeps  of  the  *'  Ladder  "  was 
by  M.  Rader.  FtfiB,  1833.  reproduced  in  MPO,  Ixxxviii. 
&83-1248;  the  Vita  by  Daniel  is  in  the  latter,  oolumns 
606-608.  A  later  edition  of  the  work  is  by  8.  Eremitea, 
Constantinople.  1883.  A  very  full  bibliographical  ap- 
paratus is  to  be  found  in  Krumbacher.  CfMehidUe,  pp.  143- 
144.  Consult  further:  J.  Fessler.  IntHluHonM  patrolooiae, 
ed.  B.  Jungmann.  iL  800-897.  Innsbruck,  1806;  DCB. 
iii.  406;  KL,  vi  1640-1641;  P.  Labbe  in  MPO,  IzxxviiL 
670-682. 

JOHANNES  ELSEMOlf:  Patriarch  of  Alexandria; 
b.  at  AmathuB  (on  s.  shore  of  Cypnu);  d.  there 
probably  Nov.  11,  619.  He  was  installed  as  pa- 
triarch by  the  Emperor  HeracUus,  in  deference  to 
the  Alexandrians,  at  the  close  of  610  or  beginning  of 
611.  His  administration  meant  a  powerful  rein- 
forcement of  the  orthodox  cause  in  Alexandria. 
The  policy  of  uniting  the  orthodox  party  with  the 
Monophysites,  as  fomented  by  Heraclius  and  by 
Sergius  of  Constantinople,  encoimtered  in  Johannes 
an  outspoken  opponent.  He  was  famed  for  his 
great  charity,  whence  his  name,  EHeemon,  and  his 
good  deeds  won  for  him  the  hearts  of  the  people. 
When  the  Persians  approached  Alexandria  in  619(7), 
Johannes  fled  to  Cyprus,  where  he  died.  His  anni- 
versary day  is  November  12.  G.  KrOqeb. 

Bibuoobapht:  The  life  by  Leontius  is  in  MPO,  xoiiL  1613 
sqq..  in  Lat.  transl..  with  notes  in  MPL,  Ixnii.  337-884; 
the  Lat.  transl.  of  Leontius  and  of  the  life  by  Simeon 
Metaphrastee,  with  comment,  is  In  A8B,  Jan.,  ii.  405-636. 
H.  Gelser  edited  the  life  by  Leontius.  Freibuiv*  1803. 
Consult:  H.  Gelser.  Bin  ffrMcfciscAsr  Volk»9ehrifiateaer 
dM  7.  JahrhundertB,  Munich.  1880;  F.  P6sl,  Dts  reins  .  .  . 
Liebe  darowtelU  in  dem  Ltben  des  .  .  .  Johannet  det 
AlmMenotbertt  RegensburE*  1862;  A.  von  Gntschmid, 
Kkine  8<Mften,  ii.  471-476.  Leipno.  1800;  H.  T.  F.  Daok- 
worth.  8t.  John  the  Alnugiver,  Painiarth  of  Alexandria, 
London.  1001;  DCB,  iii.  348. 

JOHARRBS  PHILOPONOS:  Greek  philosopher, 
philologist,  and  theologian  of  the  sixth  century.  Of 
his  life  few  details  are  known,  except  that  he  was 
bom  at  Alexandria  and  was  a  pupil  of  the  Aristo- 
telian exegete  Ammonius  and  the  grammarian  Ro- 
manes. He  was  a  man  of  learning,  versatility,  and 
restless  energy,  but,  adhering  fully  neither  to  tradi- 
tion nor  to  dogma,  his  fondness  for  a  philosophical 
treatment  of  Christian  dogma,  to  which  he  subscribed 
in  general,  frequently  placed  him  in  a  dubious 
position.  He  won  disapproval,  moreover,  by  his 
interpretation  ol  the  Trinity  in  his  ''Arbitrator,"  a 


107 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jahanmw 
John 


dialqg;ue  in  ten  books  but  now  extant  only  in  frag- 
ooents,  since  be  aaaerted  that  hypoatasis  and  nature 
are  the  same,  so  that  Christ  could  have  but  one 
nature,  unless  two  hypostases  were  to  be  assumed. 
In  the  Trinity  he  postulated  three  independent  hy- 
postases comprised  under  a  unity,  which  was  such 
merely  in  virtue  of  being  a  generic  concept.  There 
was,  therefore,  no  unity  in  the  Trinity  except  that 
which  presupposed  the  triad  of  hypostases  and  was 
inferred  from  their  common  predicates.  The  teach- 
ing here  smnmarized  brought  upon  Johannes  the 
charge  of  tritheism,  and  with  some  show  of  rea- 
son, although  he  was  not,  as  Leontius  alleged,  the 
founder  of  tritheism,  but  merely  one  of  its  chief 
representatives. 

The  chief  work  of  this  author  still  extant  is  his 
De  aetemUate  mundi  (ed.  V.  TrincaveDus,  Venice, 
1535),  assailing  Produs,  Aristotle,  and  Plato,  and 
seeking  to  explain  the  creation  rationally  without 
the  aid  of  the  Bible.  In  his  *' On  the  Resurrection/' 
known  only  from  excerpts  in  Photius,  Nicephorus, 
and  Timotheus,  he  again  made  a  concession  to 
philosophy  by  his  distinction  between  a  sensuous 
and  supersensuous  creation.  The  second  work 
still  preserved  is  his  CommerUariorum  in  Mosaicam 
mundi  creationem  libri  aeptem  (ed.  B.  Corder,  Vienna, 
1630),  based  on  older  writers  on  the  hexameron,  es- 
pecially Basil,  but  enriched  with  a  noiass  of  theories 
of  nature  and  philosophy  developed  by  the  author. 
Mention  should  also  be  made  of  his  Diaputalio  de 
poKhale,  printed  together  with  the  foregoing  work, 
in  defense  of  the  thesis  that  on  the  thirteenth  day 
of  the  month  and  on  the  day  before  the  legal  Pass- 
over Christ  celebrated  a  mystic  meal  with  his  dis- 
ciples, but  did  not  actually  eat  a  Passover-lamb. 

(Phiupp  Meter.) 

fiiBUOOBAPBT:  Fabridus-Harles,  BU>Uoih«ca  Oraeea,  z.  639 
aqq..  Hambuqc,  1807;  F.  Treohael.  in  TSK,  viii  (1836). 
05-118;  J.  M.  SchOnf elder,  Die  Kirehen{fetehuJUe  dea 
Johannet  von  EphuuM,  pp.  286-297,  Munich.  1892;  By- 
wam&nutXe  Zeitaehnft,  viii  (1809),  444  sqq.;  Krumbacher, 
GetdkithU,  p.  63  et  paesim;   KL,  vi  1748-1764. 

johahhes  scholasticits  of  SCYTHOPOLIS: 

Bishop  of  Scythopolis.  According  to  Photius  (Bib- 
UaOteca,  cod.  xcv.,  p.  78,  ed.  Bekker,  2  vols.,  Berlin, 
1824),  a  certain  Johannes  Scholasticus  of  Scytho- 
polis wrote  twelve  books  against  the  separatists  of 
the  Church;  that  is,  the  Eutychian  party.  Photius 
(cod.  cvii.,  p.  187)  doubtless  correctly  identified 
bim  with  that  Johiumes  Scholasticus  against  whom 
Basil  the  Cilidan  wrote  an  apology  in  the  time  of 
the  Emperor  Anastasius  (491-518).  The  same 
author  dso  wrote  a  commentary  on  the  pseudo- 
Dionysian  writings,  about  532.  According  to  Loofs 
{LeonJtius  of  ByzanHuniy  pp.  269  sqq.,  Leipsic,  1887) 
he  is  also  identical  with  Bishop  Johannes  of  Scy- 
thopolis, who  was  in  office  about  540,  and  wrote 
against  Severus  of  Antioch  (cf.  Dodrina  patrum, 
ed.  Diekamp,  p.  85,  MOnster,  1907;  and  Photius 
cod.  ccxxxi.,  p.  287).  Possibly,  too,  the  Johannes 
Scholasticus  whom  St.  Sabas  encountered  at  Scy- 
thopolis about  520  (Cotelerius,  EccUnae  Graecae 
monumenta,  iii.  327,  4  vols.,  Paris,  1677-92)  is  the 
same  man.  G.  Kroger. 

Bibuogeapht:  Krumbacher,  OeachidUe,  p.  60;    F.  Loofs, 

LeonHua  von  Bytang,  pp.  209-272.  Leipeio,  1887;    DCB, 

iii.  304,  427  (noe.  368,  666,  666). 


JOHANIIES  SCOTUS  BRIGENA.  See  Scorns 
Erioena,  Johannes. 

JOHANNES,  ADOLF:  German  Roman  Catholic; 
b.  at  Brendlorenzen  (a  village  near  Neustadt-an- 
der-Saale,  40  m.  n.e.  of  WQrzburg),  Bavaria,  Nov. 
21,  1855.  He  was  educated  at  the  universities  of 
WQnbuig,  Vienna,  Innsbruck,  and  Munich,  and 
was  ordained  to  the  priesthood  in  1881.  After 
being  curate  at  Heidingsfeld  and  Hassfurt,  as  well 
as  prefect  of  the  Julianiun  at  WUrzburg,  he  was  ap- 
pointed professor  in  the  Lyceum  of  Dillingen  in 
1886.  Since  1900  he  has  been  professor  of  Old- 
Testament  exegesis,  Biblical  introduction,  and 
Oriental  languages.  He  has  written  Commentar 
tu  den  Weisaagungen  dea  Prapheten  Obadja  (WUrs- 
buig,  1885);  Commentar  zum  ersten  Brief  dea  Apoa- 
tele  Paulua  an  die  Theaaalomcher  (Dillingen,  1808); 
and  minor  contributions. 

JOHN:  The  name  of  twenty-two  popes.  The 
inconsistency  in  the  numbers  of  the  later  ones  is 
due  to  the  fact  that  after  Boniface  VII.  a  John  XV. 
is  described  in  some  lists  as  having  occupied  the  see 
for  four  months.  According  to  some  early  writers 
he  was  only  elected,  not  consecrated,  while  others 
say  that  he  was  put  forward  as  a  candidate  by  the 
party  of  Boniface;  but  modem  investigation  shows 
that  he  has  no  claim  even  to  the  name  of  antipope. 

John  L:  Pope  523-526.  He  was  consecrated 
Aug.  16  (or  13),  523.  When  in  that  year  the  Em- 
peror Justin  I.  ordered  a  general  persecution  of 
heretics,  the  Arian  Goths  of  the  Danube  province 
appealed  for  help  to  Theodoric,  who  conceived  the 
idea  of  sending  to  Justin  an  embassy  of  prominent 
Romans,  and  John  was  forced  to  take  part  in  it. 
Arriving  in  Constantinople  at  the  end  of  525,  he 
achieved  the  purpose  of  his  mission,  but  was  thrown 
into  prison  on  his  return  by  Theodoric,  who  appar- 
ently considered  him  a  supporter  of  the  Byzantine 
party,  and  died  there  May  18,  526. 

(H.  BOBHMER.) 
Bibuogbapht:  lAber  ponHJlealutt  ed.  Ifommaen,  in  MOH; 
Out.  pont.  Rom,,  i  (1808),  133-137;  T.  Hodskin,  Italy 
and  Her  Invadera,  iii  610-620,  Oxford,  1886;  F.  Gregoro- 
viuB,  HUt  cf  the  City  of  Rome,  i.  322,  328-^29,  London, 
1894;  G.  Pfeilflchifter,  in  KirchenoeeehidMiehe  Studien, 
iii.  166-202,  IfOnster,  1806;  H.  Griflar,  Qeeehichte  Rome 
und  d»  PApete,  I  481-493,  Freibuis.  1898;  Bower,  Popee, 
1.  324-327;  Mihnan,  LaHn  ChrietianUy,  I  440-442;  B. 
Platina,  Livee  cf  the  Popee,  i.  120-122,  London,  n.d.; 
DCB,  iii.  389-390. 

John  n.:  Pope  533-535.  He  was  elected  by  the 
influence  of  the  Ostrogothic  court,  and  consecrated 
Jan.  2,  533.  The  most  important  event  of  his 
pontificate  was  the  settlement  ef  the  Theopaschite 
controversy  (see  Theopabchites).  On  June  6, 
533,  the  Emperor  Justinian  laid  before  him  a  con- 
fession containing  the  disputed  formula  for  con- 
firmation. He  hesitated  a  long  time,  but  finally, 
on  Mar.  24,  534,  issued  an  approving  document 
which,  with  the  emperor's  letter,  was  included  in 
the  Code  of  Justinian.  He  deposed  the  adulterous 
Bishop  Contumeliosus  of  Riez,  and  named  Ceesarius 
of  Aries  administrator  of  the  diocese — ^the  first  act 
of  jurisdiction  of  this  kind  recorded  of  a  pope. 

(H.  BOEHMER.) 
Bxbuoorapht:  Liber  ponHJleaUe,  ed.  Duoheene,  i.  286-286, 
Paris.  1886^  ed.  Mommeen,  in  MOH,  Gtet.  pont,  Rom,, 


JohnXXX-XZI 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


108 


i  (1808),  141;  OBMiodorna.  Foriof,  ed.  Mommsen.  in  MOH, 
Auel.  Ant,  xii  (1804),  270  aqq..  331-382,  ud  pp.  sdx.- 
XXX.;  T.  Hodcidn,  liaiy  attd  Htr  Itwaden,  ir.  87  Miq., 
Oxford.  1885;  J.  Lucen.  GMckiehie  dsr  ritmiuehen  Kirehs, 
ii.  313^24,  Bonn,  1885;  F.  (Incorovius,  Hiai,  qf  the  City 
^Rom^  U.  104-10«.  London,  1804;  H.  OriMr.  OfckiddB 
Romt  und  dar  PAptfa.  i.  407-408,  Fmburg,  1808;  Boww, 
PopM,  I.  333-336:  MUnmn.  LaHn  ChnatianUy,  i.  458; 
B.  PUtinA.  IA9M  ^  As  Popet,  i.  124-125,  London.  n.d. 

John  nL:  Pope  561-574.  He  was  the  son  of 
Amutasius,  a  prominent  Roman,  and  was  elected 
after  a  long  interregnum  July  17,  561.  He  suc- 
ceeded in  bringing  about  the  return  to  the  Roman 
obedience  of  the  revolting  provinces  of  Italy.  Ra- 
venna submitted  Sept.  15,  568,  and  in  571  Arch- 
bishop Laurence  II.  of  Milan  entered  into  negotia- 
tions with  Rome.  His  influence  was  also  felt  in 
the  Franldsh  kingdom  in  the  restoration  of  the  de- 
posed bishops  of  Embrun  and  Gap,  who  had  ap- 
pealed to  him.  (H.  BoBHMER.) 

BiBUOOBArBT:  Libir  ponHfteatia,  ed.  Duebeane,  i.  305-306, 
FviB,  1886,  ed.  Mommeen,  in  MOH,  OuL  pont.  Rom.,  i 
(1808).  157-158;  Jaff4,  A^^Mto,  i.  136-137;  J.  Langen. 
OMcMdkte  dflr  rOmitdi^  Kink*,  U.  401-403,  Bonn,  1885; 
T.  HodcUn,  IkOy  and  lur  Iwvadtrt,  ▼.  65,  Oxford,  1805; 
DCS,  iU.  801;  Bower.  PopM.  i.  374-880;  Milman,  LaHn 
Cknttianiiy,  I  475;  B.  Platina,  I/tvet  qf  A«  PopM,  i.  132- 
184,  London,  n.d. 

John  IV.:  Pope  640-642.  The  son  of  Venantius, 
a  Dahnatian  teacher,  he  was  elected  Aug.  2,  640, 
and  consecrated  September  22.  Soon  after  he  held 
a  synod  at  which  he  condemned  Monothelitism; 
and  when  Pyrrhus,  patriarch  of  Constantinople,  de- 
fended this  heresy  by  appealing  to  the  decisions  of 
Honorius,  John  addressed  a  strong  letter  to  the 
sons  of  the  Emperor  Heradius  in  which  he  asserted 
the  coinplete  orthodoxy  of  Honorius  and  demanded 
the  condemnation  of  I^rrrhus'  teaching.  He  died 
Oct.  12,  642.  (H.  BoEHBiXR.) 

Buuoobapht:  Libor  ponHfioaU§,   ed.   Dueheane,   i.    330. 

Fferia.  1886.  ed.  Monunaen,  in  MOH,  Oeai.  pont  Rom.,  i 

(1808),  177;    Jaff4,  Rogtla,  i.  227-228;    J.  Lnngen.  Oo- 

tthidiU  dor  rdmiochM  Kireho,  ii.  517-520,  Bonn.  1885; 

R.  BnTmnnn,  Die  PoUHk  dor  PUptlo,  i.  171  Kiq..  Elberfeld. 

1868;    T.  Hodsldn.  lUdy  and  hor  Invadoro,  vi.  18,  172. 

Oxford,   1805;    Mnnn.  PopM,  i.  351.  354.  367;    Bower. 

Popet,  i.  438-441;    Kilnuui.  LaHn  ChnoHanHy,  iL  272; 

B.  PUtinn.  Uvoo  qf  A«  PopM,  L  150-152,  London.  n.d.; 

DCB,  iii.  301-302. 

John  v.:  Pope  685-686.  He  was  a  Syrian  by 
birth,  who,  in  accordance  with  the  constitution  of 
Gonstantine  VI.,  was  consecrated  inunediately  after 
his  election  (July  23,  685)  without  waiting  for  im- 
perial confirmation.  His  only  known  official  act 
was  the  bringing  of  the  Sardinian  church  once  more 
into  subjection  to  Rome.    He  died  Aug.  2,  686. 

(H.  BOBHMER.) 
BnuoGRAPHT:  lAhor  vonHfiealio,  ed.  Ducheene,  i.  366-367, 
Fluii,  1886,  ed.  Momnuen.  in  MOH,  OooL  pont.  Rom.,  i 
(1808),  205-206;  Jaff^,  Rootola,  i.  242;  Mann,  PopM.  i., 
2,  pp.  64-67;  Bower,  PopM.  i.  480-400;  Milman,  LaHn 
Chriatianity,  ii.  287;  B.  Platina.  Li«M  of  tho  Popoo,  i.  166- 
167,  London,  n.d.;   DCB,  iii.  302. 

John  VL:  Pope  701-705.  A  Greek  by  birth,  he 
was  consecrated  October  30.  The  Emperor  Apsimar- 
Tiberius,  disapproving  his  election,  sent  the  exarch 
Theophylact  to  Rome  to  procure  his  deposition; 
but  the  military  force  of  all  Italy  is  said  to  have 
assembled  aroimd  Rome  in  his  defense.  He  was 
in  greater  danger  from  the  Lombard  Duke  Gisulf  of 


Benevento,  but  by  means  of  gifts  warded  off  this 
attack  also.    He  died  Jan.  11,  705. 

(H.  BOEHMER.) 
Bibuoobaphy:  Liher  pontifleaiio,  ed.  Ducheene,  L  383. 
Peris.  1886.  ed.  Monuneen.  in  MQH,  Oeot.  ponL  Bam.,  i 
(1808).  217-218:  Jaff4,  Rogoata,  i.  242;  Mann,  PopM. 
i.  2,  pp.  105-108;  Bower.  PopM,  ii.  0-12;  B.  Platina. 
LtvM  of  Iho  Popeo,  i.  172-173,  London,  n.d.;  DCB,  iU. 
302-303. 

John  Vn.:  Pope  705-707.    He  was  a  Greek,  re- 
nowned, according  to  the  Liber  pontificdUSf  for  his 
eloquence,  education,  and  taste  for  art.    He  showed 
little  firmness  in  his  dealings  with  Justinian  II.  in 
regard  to  the  confirmation  of  the  Quinisext  Council. 
He  maintained  friendly  relations  with  the  Lom- 
bards. (H.  BOEHICER.) 
Bxbuoobaprt:  Liber  pontiflealiB,  ed.  Duchesne,  i.  384,  Paris, 
1806,  ed.  MommMn,  in  MOH,  Oeet.  pont.  Rom.,  i  (1808). 
210-220:    Jaff«.  Reoeeia,  u  246-247;    Mann.  PopM,  i.  2, 
pp.  100-123:   J.  Lancen.  Oe$ehieht$  dor  rOmiet^en  Kirdu, 
iL  605-506.  Bonn,  1885;    F.  Orecoroviue,  Hiei.  of  iShe  City 
of  Rome,  ii.  104-106,  London,  1804;    Bower.  Popee,  ii. 
12-13;   B.  PUtina,  Livee  of  the  Popee,  i.  173-175,  London. 
n.d.:  DCB,  iu.  303. 

JohnVm.:  Pope  872-882.  He  was  a  Roman  by 
birth.  On  being  elected  pope  Dec.  14,  872,  he 
took  up  with  alacrity  the  task  of  ruling  in  the  spirit 
of  Nicholas  I.  He  had  many  qualities  necessary 
for  success,  including  a  genius  for  financial  and 
military  organization  and  for  promptly  turning  to 
advantage  each  change  in  the  political  situation. 
His  whole  force  was  devoted  to  two  purely  political 
aims,  the  liberation  of  Italy  from  the  Saracens  and 
its  subjection,  together  with  that  of  the  empire,  to 
the  over-lordship  of  the  papacy.  The  first,  a  neces- 
sary preliminary  to  the  second,  he  pursued  in  alli- 
ance with  the  Emperor  Louis  II.,  but  on  his  own 
account  he  built  a  fleet,  organized  a  standing  mili- 
tia and  completed  the  fortification  of  Rome.  The 
greatest  obstacle  to  the  success  of  his  plans  was  the 
impossibility  of  detaching  the  princes  of  Palermo, 
Naples,  and  Capua,  and  the  maritime  power  of 
Amalfi,  from  their  alliance  with  the  Saracens,  to 
whom  he  was  himself  forced  toward  the  end  of  his 
reign  to  pay  a  yearly  tribute.  His  natural  unfriend- 
liness to  the  Germans  and  the  Carolingian  dynasty 
showed  itself  on  the  death  of  Louis  (Oct.  12,  875), 
when  he  invited  not  Louis  the  German  but  Charles 
the  Bald  to  Rome  to  receive  the  imperial  crown, 
which  he  placed  on  his  head  at  Christmas.  When 
Charles  the  Bald  died  in  the  next  year,  John  had 
to  reckon  with  the  claims  to  the  empire  of  his 
nephew  Carloman,  whose  adherents  appeared  in 
Rome  in  the  spring  of  878,  imprisoned  John,  and 
took  an  oath  of  the  leading  citizens  to  support 
Carloman  as  emperor.  As  soon  as  the  pope  was 
released,  he  went  by  sea  to  France  and  held  a 
council  at  Troyes,  where  he  crowned  Louis  the 
Stammerer  (Sept.  7,  878);  but  as  Louis  showed 
little  inclination  to  be  mixed  up  in  the  Italian 
troubles,  John  had  another  candidate.  Count  Boso 
of  Provence,  who  followed  him  back  to  Italy  and 
was  to  have  been  crowned  king  in  Rome.  The  plan 
failed  because  the  German  Carolingians  had  gained 
too  much  ground  in  northern  Itfdy.  In  August, 
879,  John  was  forced  to  acknowledge  Charles  the 
Fat  at  Ravenna  as  king  of  Italy,  and  some  time 
before  Feb.  9,  881,  to  crown  him  as  emperor,  and 


199 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


John  ZXZ-XXI 


thus  bid  farewell  to  any  hope  of  realizing  his  Italian 
plans.  In  the  controversy  between  Methodius  and 
the  Bavarian  episcopate,  he  took  the  side  of  the 
former,  although  in  879  he  summoned  him  to  Rome 
to  answer  a  chaige  of  heresy.  But  John's  attempts 
to  please  both  parties  sowed  the  seeds  of  future  dis- 
cord in  the  jroung  Moravian  church.  He  carried 
on  his  predecessors'  policy  more  consistently  in 
the  Bulgarian  question,  but  gained  nothing  except 
vague  promises,  while  the  Greek  clergy  and  Utuigy 
remained  in  possession.  This  question  had  troubled 
the  relations  of  Rome  with  Ignatius,  patriarch  of 
Constantinople.  After  his  death  in  877,  Photius 
(who  had  been  deposed  by  the  fourth  ooimcil  of 
Constantinople  in  869)  was  reinstated.  In  879,  in 
order  to  win  the  Emperor  Basil's  support  against 
the  Saracens,  John  expressed  his  readiness  to  recog- 
nize him  on  certain  conditions,  and  though  Photius 
grossly  falsified  the  terms  when  he  recited  them  in 
the  council  of  879,  John  disavowed  the  action  of 
his  protesting  legates  and  still  sought  for  union. 
The  assertion  of  later  historians  that  he  reversed 
this  policy  before  his  death  (Dec.  15,  882)  and  once 
more  deposed  Photius  finds  no  support  in  his  letters. 

(H.  BOBHlfER.) 
Bibuoobatht:  The  letters  of  this  pope  may  be  found  in 
Manai,  ConeiUa,  xvii.  1  aqq.;  8.  L&wenfeld,  EpUtolas 
Romanonan  ponUfieum  intditM,  pp.  24-34,  Leipnc,  1885; 
and  JbS6,  A^petla,  L  376-422.  oonault:  Hinemar,  AntutUat 
ed.  Q.  H.  Parts,  in  MOH,  Saripi,,  i  (1826),  406  sqq.;  Liber 
ponHjfleedxB,  ed.  Duchesne,  ii.  121-122,  Paris,  1892:  Mann, 
Popes,  iii.  231-363;  J.  Her«enr6ther,  PkoHtu,  8  vols.,  Reg- 
ensburc,  1867-60;  B.  Jungmann,  Di$9erUUiane9  tUdat, 
iii.  410-435,  Recensbuis,  1882;  A.  Gasquet.  L*Empirt 
byianiin  sf  la  monorcAis  franqiu,  pp.  432-482,  Paris.  1888; 
J.  Langen,  OescAuAis  dor  rihniuhtn  KircKe,  iii.  170-275, 
Bonn,  1802;  A.  Lapdtre,  UBwopt  ei  le  SaintSiige  a 
Vipoque  earolingitnnt,  vol.  L,  Paris,  1805  (Ultramontane); 
F.  Gregorovius,  Hi$L  qf  the  City  cf  Rome,  iii.  171-203, 
London.  1805;  Hauok,  KD,  ii.  558  sqq.,  702  sqq.;  Hefele, 
CaneilienoeeehiAle^  it.  447  sqq.,  514  sqq.;  Bower,  Pofwt, 
283-202;  Mifanan,  LaHn  ChnetianUv.  iii.  37,  81-100; 
B.  Flatina,  Livee  ef  ^  Pop^*  i  232-233,  London,  n.d. 

John  IX.:  Pope  808-9(X).  He  was  a  Benedictine, 
and  was  elevated  to  the  papacy  after  the  expulsion 
of  Sergius  III.  At  a  synod  in  St.  Peter's  he  re- 
versed the  proceedings  of  the  synod  of  Stephen  VI. 
(q.v.)  whidi  had  condemned  Formosus  (q.v.),  and 
reaffirmed  the  validity  of  the  orders  conferred  by  the 
latter.  He  revised  the  provisions  for  papal  eleo- 
tions,  recognised  Lambert  of  Spoleto  as  emperor, 
and  declared  the  coronation  of  Arnulf  null  and  void. 
At  first  he  confirmed  the  decrees  of  his  predecessors 
in  regard  to  Photius,  but  just  before  his  death  he 
seems  to  have  succeeded  in  reaching  some  imder- 
standing  with  the  Greeks  at  a  synod. 

(H.  BOEHICER.) 
Bibuooraprt:  Liber  poniiJloaHe,  ed.  Duchesne,  ii.  232,  Paris, 
1802;  J.  M.  Watterich.  Ramanarum  ponH/leum  vitae,  i.  650 
eqq..  Leipsie,  1862;  Jalf^.  Regeela,  I  442-443;  J.  Langen, 
Oeeekiehte  der  rOmieAen  Kirehe,  iii.  307-311,  Bonn,  1802; 
F.  Qregorovius,  HiH,  cf  the  City  <4  Rome,  iii.  231-238, 
London,  1805;  Mann,  Popes,  iii.  245,  370.  384, 304;  Bower, 
Popes,  u.  302-304;  Milman,  LalUn  ChriatianUy,  iU.  112; 
B.  Flatina.  Lives  qf  the  Popee,  i.  240-241,  London,  n.d. 

John  X. :  Pope  914-028.  He  is  said  to  have  been 
bom  at  Toffignano  in  Romagna,  to  have  been  first 
a  deacon  in  Bologna,  and  then  to  have  risen  to  the 
bishopric  of  that  see,  which  he  inunediately  ex- 
changed in  some  uncanonical  manner  for  that  of 
Ravenna,  whence  he  was  called,  again  uncanoni- 


cally,  by  the  primates  of  Rome — ^meaning  notably 
Theodora,  to  whom  he  seems  to  have  been  related 
— to  the  papacy  about  March,  914.  He  displayed 
some  zeal  and  ability  in  ecclesiastical  affairs,  main- 
taining close  relations  with  Germany  and  France; 
the  instructions  sent  to  the  archbishop  of  Reims 
for  dealing  with  the  newly  converted  Normans  are 
notable.  He  was,  however,  more  important  as  a 
politician  and  military  conmiander,  succeeding  in 
uniting  the  principal  Italian  princes  and  the  eastern 
emperor  against  the  Saracens,  and  personally  win- 
ning a  bxilliant  victory  over  them  on  the  lower 
Garigliano  In  August,  916.  But  the  league  soon  fell 
a  prey  to  the  spirit  of  faction,  the  Emperor  Berengar 
was  murdered  at  Ravenna  in  924,  and  John  had  a 
powerful  foe  in  Rome  in  the  person  of  the  intrigu- 
ing Marozia.  In  June,  928,  his  brother  Peter,  pre- 
fect of  the  city,  was  murdered  and  he  himself  was 
thrown  into  prison,  where  he  soon  died. 

(H.  BOEHMXB.) 
BauoGRArBT:  Sources  are:  liudprand,  Aniapodosts,  ed. 
E.  DOmmler,  pp.  44^7,  61,  73,  Hanover,  1877;  Benedio- 
tus,  Chronieon,  ed.  G.  Waits,  in  MOH,  SenpL  ziii  (1881), 
714-715.  Consult  further:  Libsr  ponl^/leolw.  ed.  Duchesne, 
ii.  240-241,  Paris,  1802;  Jaff«,  Reoeeta,  I  447-453;  J.  M. 
Watterich,  Ramanorum  pontifleum  vitae,  i.  35^6,  661  sqq., 
Leipsio,  1862;  B.  Jungmann,  DieeertaHonee  eeleetae,  iv. 
46-62.  Refcensbuiv,  1884;  J.  Langen,  OeeehiehU  der 
r&mieehen  Kirdte,  iiL  310-328,  Bonn,  1802;  F.  Qrsco- 
roTius,  Uiet,  of  the  City  cf  Rome,  iU.  240-270,  London, 
1805;  Bower,  Popee,  U.  306-311;  Mihnan,  Lolin  Chris- 
tianity, iii.  160-166;  B.  Flatina,  Lives  cf  the  Popee,  L  245- 
247,  London,  n.d. 

John  XL:  Pope  931-936.  A  natural  son  of 
Sergius  III.  by  Marozia,  he  was  elevated  to  the 
papacy  about  931  by  his  mother's  influence,  and 
was  involved  in  her  fall  when  his  half-brother  Al- 
beric  gained  power  a  year  later.  It  is  not  known 
whether  he  ever  regained  his  freedom,  but  it  was 
undoubtedly  Alberic  who  decided  all  the  more  imr 
portant  acts  of  jurisdiction.    John  died  in  January, 

936.  (H.  BOBHMBR.) 

Bibuooraprt:  lAber  pontiflcaUe,  ed.  Duchesne,  ii.  243,  Paris. 
1802;  Jaffd,  Regotta,  i.  454-455;  J.  M.  Watterich,  Roma^ 
norum  pontifleum  vitae,  i  38,  660  sqq..  Leipsie.  1862; 
J.  Lancen,  Oeednehie  der  rdmiedten  Kirehe,  iii.  320-^1, 
Bonn,  1802;  Grsgoroyius,  HieL  of  the  City  cf  Rome,  iii. 
283-305,  London,  1805;  Bower,  Popee,  ii.  311-312;  B. 
Flatina,  Lives  qf  the  Popee,  i.  248-240.  London,  n.d. 

John  Xn.  (Octavian):  Pope  955-964.  He  was 
the  illegitimate  son  of  Albc»ic,  and  was  elected 
Dec.  16,  955.  The  most  shocking  moral  scandals 
were  rife;  but  with  all  his  vices  he  combined  the 
soaring  ambition  of  his  house.  First  he  tried  to 
extend  his  power  in  the  south,  and  then  to  deal 
with  King  Berengar,  both  without  success.  Ber- 
engar's  son  Adalbert  was  occupying  Roman  terri- 
tory when  John  decided  to  appeal  to  Otto  I.,  pos- 
sibly under  pressure  from  the  reforming  party 
among  the  Roman  clergy.  After  exacting  guar- 
anties for  his  own  position,  he  admitted  Otto  into 
the  city  and  crowned  him  emperor  (Feb.  2,  962); 
but  hardly  had  Otto  left  Rome  when  John  entered 
into  relations  with  Adalbert  and  attempted  to  do 
so  with  the  Byzantine  empire.  Becoming  aware 
of  his  treachery,  Otto  marched  back  to  Rome. 
John  and  Adalbert  fled  to  Tivoli.  A  synod  met  in 
St.  Peter's  under  the  emperor's  presidency,  which 
after  nearly  a  month's  debate  declared  John  guilty 


Jo'hn  ZXZI— ZJCU 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOQ 


300 


of  perjury,  murder,  sacrilege,  and  incest,  deposed 
him,  tLDd  elected  the  protoacnniarius  Leo,  who  was 
then  only  a  layman,  in  his  place.  After  the  em- 
peror had  left  Rome,  John's  friends  rose  and  ex- 
pelled Leo.  John  returned  to  the  Lateran,  and 
held  a  council  of  his  own  (Feb.  26)  at  which  he 
annulled  the  acts  of  the  previous  one  and  declared 
Leo  deposed.  Stem  vengeance  was  taken  upon  the 
reforming  leaders,  but  before  Otto  could  return 
John  was  struck  down  either  by  a  stroke  of  apo- 
plexy or  by  an  injured  husband,  and  died  May  14, 
064.  (H.  BosHMXR.) 

BnuooaAPHT:  The  .Bpuloku  «l  privUeffia  are  in  MPL, 
ODDdiL  Souroes  are:  Liudprand,  D€  rebu9  gutU  OttonU, 
ed.  E.  DOmmler,  pp.  124-136,  Hanover,  1877;  lAUr 
ponHftcalu,  ed.  Duchesne,  iL  246  aqq.,  Parie,  1802.  Con- 
■ult  further:  Jaff«.  Rsguta,  i.  463-467;  J.  M.  Watterieh, 
Bomanamm  ponOJIatm  viloe,  i.  41-63;  F.  GresoroviuB, 
HiBt,  oi  Oe  Ci»if  cf  Roms,  iii.  32&-361,  London,  1805;  B. 
Juncmann,  DiBMrtaiiant&  aeUetai$,  W.  449  sqq..  Refcene- 
burs.  1884:  Hauek,  KD,  iL  222-236;  Bower.  Pope9,  U. 
816-310:  Ifilman,  LaHn  CkriaiianUy,  iu.  176-184;  B. 
Platina,  IAvm  qf  ths  PopM.  i  262-264,  London.  n.d. 

John  Xm.:  Pope  065-072.  Formerly  bishop  of 
Nami,  and  apparently  a  son  of  the  younger  Theo- 
dora, he  was  elected  under  the  influence  of  Otto  I. 
and  consecrated  Oct.  1.  In  December  the  citizens 
rose  and  imprisoned  him.  He  escaped,  but  was 
unable  to  reenter  Rome  except  with  the  help  of  the 
emperor,  to  whom  he  remained  in  absolute  subjec- 
tion. Tills  relation,  however,  increased  his  con- 
sideration in  the  West,  and  from  countries  as  dis- 
tant as  Spain,  England,  and  Scotland  questions 
were  referred  to  him  for  decision.    He  died  Sept. 

6,  072.  (H.  BOBHMER.) 

BiBUoaBAPBT:  The  BpUMM  et  privUegia  are  in  JfPL, 
ooDpnr.  Consult:  Liber  poniiJleali»,  ed.  Ducheme,  ii.  262, 
Fteis,  1802;  Jaff<,  lUaula,  i.  470-477;  J.  M.  Watterich, 
Romanarum  ponH/leum  vita»,  i.  44,  66.  685-686,  Leipaic, 
1862;  B.  Jungmann,  DiBMrtatiantB  eeledae,  iv.  403  Kiq., 
Befensburg,  1884;  J.  Langen,  GMchichU  dtr  rOmi§€hen 
Kir€h$,  iii.  364^63,  Bonn,  1802;  Hauok,  KD,  iti.  passim; 
F.  Qracorovius.  HUL  of  fht  City  of  Ronm,  iiL  367-377. 
London,  1806;  Bower,  Popes.  U.  321-323;  B.  Platina. 
Lives  qf  ths  Popm,  I  266-256,  London.  n.d. 

John  nv.:  Pope  083-084.  Formerly  known  as 
Peter,  bishop  of  Pavia  and  chancellor  of  Italy, 
he  was  elected  in  Nov.  083,  by  the  influence  of 
Otto  n.  After  Otto's  death  the  rival  claimant, 
Boniface  VII.,  returned  from  Constantinople  and 
imprisoned  John  in  the  Castle  of  Sant'Angelo,  where 
he  died  Aug.  20,  084.  (H.  Boehmkr.) 

BnuoaBAPHT:  Jaff4,   As0«ste,    i.   484;    J.   H.   Watterich, 

Bomanomm  ponHfieum  vilae,  I  66,  685-687.  Leipeic,  1862; 

Bower,  Popss,  ii.  326;  B.  Platina,  lAvet  ofthePopM,  I  260. 
'  London,  n.d.;   F.  Orsgorovius,  HiaL  qf  As  City  qf  Rome, 

UL  303,  307,  London,  1806. 

JohnZV.:  Pope  085-086.  During  his  pontificate 
the  political  power  in  Rome  was  in  the  hands  of 
John  Crescentius  II.,  and  the  papacy  enjoyed  little 
consideration  abroad,  as  is  shown  by  the  history 
of  the  Reims  contest  (see  Stlvkstbr  II.).  His 
relations  with  Germany,  however,  were  relatively 
dose,  and  he  acted  (through  hiis  legate  Leo  of 
TrevO  as  mediator  between  Ethelred  of  England 
and  Richard  of  Normandy,  sanctioning  the  peace 
of  Rouen  (Mar.  1,  001).    He  died  early  in  April, 

006.  (H.  BOEHMBR.) 

BiBUOoaArsT:  Li^sr  ponl^/lsaJis,  ed.  Duohesne,  it  260, 
Pteis,  1802;  J.  M.  Watterieh,  Romanarum  ponHfleum  vOob, 
i.  66-67,  687-688,  Leipeic,  1862;    J.  Langen,  GsscftidUs 


der  riimUchen  Kirehe,  iii.  360-380,  Bonn,  1802;  F.  Grego- 
rovius.  HiML  of  the  dty  of  Boms,  iii.  306r-f08,  London, 
1805;   Bower,  Popss,  iL  326-320. 

John  XVL:  Pope  007-008.  A  Greek  of  low  ex- 
traction from  Rossano  in  Calabria,  he  was  made 
abbot  of  Nonantula  by  the  favor  of  the  Empress 
Theophanu,  who,  as  regent  after  Otto  II.'s  death, 
procured  his  elevation  to  the  bishopric  of  Piaoenxa. 
When  John  Crescentius  expelled  Gregory  V.  from 
Rome,  he  assumed  the  papacy;  but  Otto  III.  re- 
stored Gr^ory,  and  John  was  captured  in  March, 
008,  deposed,  mutilated,  and  imprisoned  in  a  Roman 
monastery,  where  he  lived  apparently  until  April 

2,  1013.  (H.  BOEHMBR.) 

Bibuoobapht:  Jaff6.  RooeHa,  i.  405-406;  J.  H.  Watterich. 
Romanorum  ponH/leum  vitae,  i  68,  680  sqq.,  Leipsic,  1862: 
J.  Langen.  OotehiehU  der  rtfmtscAsn  Kirdis,  iii  385-^87, 
Bonn,  1802;  F.  Qregorovius,  HUl,  of  fhs  City  of  Rome, 
iii.  422-427,  London,  1805:  Bower.  Popss,  u.  330;  B. 
Platina,  Liess  cf  the  Popee,  i.  263-264,  London,  n.d. 

John  XVn.:  Pope  1003.  He  was  a  Roman 
named  Sicco,  who  was  elected  June  13  by  the  wiU 
of  Crescentius,  and  died  Dec.  7.  The  only  thing 
known  of  him  is  that  he  was  married  before  his 
elevation.  (H.  Boehmbb.) 

Bkbuooeapht:  Liber  pontiflooUie,  ed.  Duefaeene,  ii.  265,  Paris, 

1802;    Jaff«.  Reoeela,  i.  501;    Bower,  Popss,  ti.  333;    B. 

Platina,  Livss  of  the  Popee,  i.  265. 

John  XVm.:  Pope  1003-00.  He  was  another 
creature  of  Crescentius,  named  Fasanus  or  Phasi- 
anus,  son  of  a  Roman  presbyter  Leo.  That  he  was 
not  lacking  in  eneiigy  is  shown  by  his  vigorous 
proceedings  against  the  bishops  of  Sens  and  Orleans, 
who  had  required  Abbot  Gauzlin  of  Fleury  to  bum 
the  papal  privileges  of  exemption;  and  he  seems 
to  have  had  some  success  against  his  Byzantine 
opponents.    He  died  in  June,  1000. 

(H.  BOBHICKR.) 
BauooEAniT:  Li5sr  Ponli/loaits.  ed.  Duehesne,  ii.  266, 
Paris,  1802;  Jaff«.  Regeeta,  i.  501-^603;  J.  M.  Watterich, 
Romanorum  pontijieum  vitae,  i.  60,  600-700,  Leipeic,  1862; 
Mary  Bateson,  in  Hietorioal  Review,  1805.  pp.  728-720; 
F.  Grscorovius.  Hiet.  cfthe  City  cfRome,  vr.  7-10,  London, 
1806;  Bower.  Popee,  ii.  334;  B.  Platina,  Uvee  <^  the  Pope; 
i.  266.  London,  n.d. 

John  ZIZ.:  Pope  1024-^32.  He  was  the  brother 
of  Benedict  VIII.,  Romanus  by  name,  and  was 
elected  by  the  Tusculan  party  between  April  12 
and  May  10.  The  eastern  Emperor  Basil  II.  re- 
quested him  to  acknowledge  the  patriarch  Eusta- 
thius  of  Constantinople  as  ''  ecumenical  bishop," 
or  practically  as  an  eastern  pope.  John  was  dis- 
posed to  accede,  but  the  monastic  reformers  raised 
such  a  storm  of  protest  that  the  negotiations  were 
broken  off.  After  crowning  Conrad  II.  (Mar.  26, 
1027),  John  was  completely  imder  his  power,  and 
his  decrees  were  treated  with  contempt  by  the  em- 
peror in  Germany.  In  France,  however,  his  au- 
thority seems  to  have  been  respected,  emd  King 
Canute  of  England  paid  him  a  visit  in  1027.  Ap- 
parently without  much  protest,  he  conducted  a 
simoniacal  traffic;  the  only  objection  raised  by 
Canute  to  the  demand  of  money  for  conferring  the 
pallium  was  to  the  largeness  c^  the  amount.  He 
seems  to  have  died  Nov.  0,  1032. 

(H.  BOERMSB.) 
BmLiooRArar:  Jafff  Regeeta,  i,  514-610;   J.  M.  Watterich, 
Romanorum  porUijiaim  vitae,  i.  70.  706-711,  Leipsie,  1862; 
J.  Lanfen,  OeeehidUe  dor  rUmieehen  Kirehe,  iii.  418-428, 


901 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


JohnXlll- 


Bcnm.  1892;  F.  QracoroTiiiB,  Hitl.  cf  ihs  City  cS  Rome, 
IT.  81-30,  London,  1806;  Bower.  Popct,  U.  337-^30;  B. 
iiatina»  Lmms  qf  Ihs  Popet,  i.  200-270,  London,  n.d.: 
Hauek,  KD,  iii.  40«.  656-066.  650.  661. 

John  XXL  (Pedro  Juliani):  Pope  1276-77.    A 
natiTe  of  Lisbon,  he  became  caidinal-bishop  of 
Tuflculum  in  1273,  and  was  elected  pope  at  Viterbo 
Sept.  15  or  16,  1276,  taking  the  title  of  John  XXI., 
though  he  was  in  mlity  the  twentieth  pope  of  this 
name.    He  waa  a  man  of  great  learning,  though 
f4>parently  of  equal  eccentricity;  since  the  four- 
teenth century  it  has  been  usually  believed  that  he 
was  identical  with  "  Petrus  Hispanus,"  the  author 
of  a  number  of  medical  works  and  a  popular  com- 
pendium of  logic.    His  pontificate  was  without  in- 
fluence on  the  development  of  the  church.    He  was 
injured  by  the  fall  of  aceilingin  the  papal  palace  at 
Viterbo,  and  died  May  20,  1277.       (A.  Hauck.) 
Bibuoobapht:  J.  Giurnnd  and  E.  Gadier.  Lm  RtffUtrf  de 
Qrtoakn  X.  «l  Jmn  XXI.,  Paris.  1808;   R.  Stapfer,  Papai 
JcitamnM  XXI.,  MQnster,  1808;   Bower,  Popn,  iii.  26-26; 
F.  GnsoroviiM,  HuL  ofA*  Cityt^Ranm,  ▼.  476^77.  Lon- 
don.  1807;   B.  PIntina,  Lmms  qf  the  PopM.  U.  106-108.  ib. 
n.d.:  ICfanan.  Latin  Chritkamty,  vi.  134-136. 

John  XXEL  (Jacques  Duesa):  Pope  1316-34. 
He  was  bom  at  Gahors,  France,  about  1244,  be- 
came bishc^  of  Avignon  in  1310  and  cardinal- 
bishop  of  Porto  in  1312,  and  was  elected  pope  at 
Lyons,  after  an  interregnum  of  more  than  two 
years,  on  Aug.  7,  1316,  taking  up  his  residence  at 
Avignon.  The  main  object  of  his  policy  was  to 
get  rid  of  the  remains  of  imperial  power  in  Italy, 
in  the  interests  of  the  papacy.  He  took  advantage 
of  the  contested  election  to  the  empire  in  1314  to 
declare  on  Mar.  31,  1317,  that  upon  a  vacancy  in 
the  imperial  office  its  juriadictiOf  regimen,  el  di^ 
positio  passed  to  the  pope;  and  on  this  ground  he 
forbade  the  imperial  vicars  and  other  officials 
named  by  Henry  VII.  to  retain  their  offices,  him- 
self appointing  Robert  of  Naples,  as  his  predecessor 
had  done,  imperial  vicar  for  Italy.  He  maintained 
a  more  or  lees  neutral  position  between  the  rival 
claimants  in  Germany.  The  case  was  altered  when 
Louis  the  Bavarian's  victory  over  his  competitor 
at  the  battle  of  MUhldorf  (Sept.  18,  1322)  made  it 
possible  for  him  to  take  hold  of  Italian  affairs,  and 
his  nomination  of  Berthold  of  Neiffen  as  imperial 
vicar  showed  that  he  was  disposed  to  do  so.  In  a 
public  consistory  (Oct.  8,  1323)  he  brought  charges 
against  Louis  (the  so-called  "  first  process  ")i  his 
action  being  based  on  the  claim  first  made  by 
Gregory  VII.  and  renewed  by  Innocent  III.  that 
to  the  pope  belonged  the  right  of  examining  and 
approving  or  rejecting  the  candidate  elected  to  the 
imperial  throne.  Louis  was  accused  of  disregard- 
ing papal  rights  by  taking  the  title  of  emperor 
without  confirmation  and  assuming  to  administer 
the  empire  before  he  had  received  it,  as  well  as  of 
favoring  and  protecting  the  Visconti,  who  had  been 
condemned  for  heresy.  He  was  summoned,  on 
pain  of  ezcommimication,  to  lay  down  the  reins  of 
government  and  annul  his  previous  acts,  and  his 
subjects  were  released  from  their  allegiance.  John 
probably  did  not  expect  Louis  to  yield  obedience; 
what  he  hoped  to  gain  was  a  renewal  of  the  conffict 
in  Germany.  After  a  momentary  hesitation  (sec- 
ond process,  Jan.  7, 1324),  the  sentence  of  excom- 


munication was  pronounced  against  Louis  Mar.  23, 
and  a  like  penalty  threatened  against  all  who  should 
continue  to  render  obedience  to  him  (third  proc- 
ess). On  July  11  he  was  declared  deprived  of  all 
rights  supposed  to  follow  from  his  election,  and 
once  more  summoned  to  answer  at  the  bar  of  Rome 
before  Oct.  1,  while  his  adherents  were  exconmiu- 
nicated  (fourth  process). 

In  reply  to  the  first  process,  Louis  had  made  a 
declaration  which  asserted  the  validity  of  an  elec- 
tion independent  of  papal  confirmation,  raised  the 
charge  of  heresy  against  John  himself,  and  appealed 
to  a  general  coundl.  This  declaration  appears  not 
to  have  been  published;  but  on  May  22,  1324,  he 
came  out  publicly  with  a  renewed  appeal  to  a  coun- 
cil. The  attempt  to  set  up  a  rival  emperor  failed, 
and  the  menace  of  exconmiunication  and  interdict 
had  but  little  effect  in  Germany,  flarly  in  1327 
Louis  came  down  to  Italy  with  unexpected  success, 
had  himself  crowned  in  Rome  (Jan.  17,  1328)  by 
four  syndics  elected  by  the  people,  and  brought 
about  the  election  (May  12)  of  an  antipope,  known 
as  Nicholas  V.  John  met  these  proceedings  by 
declaring  that  Louis  had  forfeited  all  fiefs  which  he 
held  from  either  Church  or  empire,  especially  the 
duchy  of  Bavaria  (fifth  process,  Apr.  3,  1327);  by 
condemning  him  as  a  heretic  (Oct.  23);  by  pro- 
claiming a  crusader's  indulgence  for  all  who  should 
bear  arms  against  him  for  a  year  (Jan.  21,  1328); 
and  by  ordering  a  new  election  to  the  empire  later 
in  the  spring.  Louis  was  not  strong  enough  to 
keep  the  control  of  Italy,  and  was  obliged  to  leave 
it  in  the  winter  of  1329-30,  after  which  his  anti- 
pope  made  his  submission.  In  a  sermon  on  All 
Saints'  Day,  1331,  the  pope  declared  that  the  bea- 
tffic  vision  of  God  was  not  granted  to  the  saints  un- 
til after  the  resurrection.  Doubts  had  already  been 
expressed  as  to  his  orthodoxy,  and  this  statement 
gave  fresh  offense,  all  the  more  that  the  Italian 
cardinals  were  unfriendly  to  the  Gascon  pope. 
Taking  advantage  of  this  situation  Louis,  in  con- 
cert with  Cardinal  Napoleone  Orsini,  addressed  a 
formal  request  to  the  sacred  college  in  1334  for  the 
summoning  of  a  general  coimcil;  but  before  any 
result  could  follow  this  new  attack,  John  died  on 
December  3  of  that  year. 

John  is  described  as  a  small,  thin,  ugly,  bald- 
headed  man.  He  was  incessantly  busy  without 
accomplishing  anything  worth  while.  Germany 
was  injured,  Italy  distracted,  and  the  Church  and 
papacy  lowered  in  the  general  esteem  by  his  pon- 
tificate, which  earned  a  bad  name  also  by  the  finan- 
cial methods  developed  by  him.  He  needed  money 
to  enrich  his  relatives,  and  he  delighted  in  amass- 
ing it  for  its  own  sake.  Giovanni  Villani  estimated 
his  fortune  to  be  25,000,000  florins  (over  16,000,- 
000);  but  about  800,000  florins  is  probably  much 
nearer  the  mark.  As  a  means  of  money-getting 
he  made  wide  use  of  reservations  (see  Rssbbva- 
TiONS,  Papal).  Inmiediately  after  his  election  he 
reserved  all  benefices  whose  previous  holders  had 
received  another  position  from  the  pope,  and  a 
year  later,  by  declaring  that  no  one  might  hold 
more  than  two  benefices,  he  created  a  large  num- 
ber of  other  vacancies,  which  he  likewise  reserved 
to  himself.    In  1322  he  reserved  all  the  benefices 


John  "^r^gTft 
John  the  Apoatle 


THiS  NEW  SCHAFf-HEftZOG 


dOd 


in  the  patriarchate  of  Aquileia  and  the  archbishop- 

rioB  of  Ravenna,  Milan,  and  Genoa.    The  same 

purpose  was  served  by  the  foundation  of  a  large 

number  of  new  dioceses  by  division  of  the  older  ones. 

For  John's  relation  to  the  Franciscans,  see  Francis, 

Saint,  of  Absisi,  III.,  {{  5-7;  for  his  activity  in 

the  field  of  canon  law,  see  Canon  Law,  II.,  6,  §  3. 

See  also  Bbqharos,  BaouiNES,  §  6.    (A.  Hauck.) 

Bxbuographt:  The  weichtie«t  documents  of  John's  reign 

are  published  in  the  AnnaUt  ecelenoBtici  of  O.  Raynaldus 

ed.  A.  Theiner,  toI.  xxiv..  Bar  le  Duo,  1872;    in  AM  A, 

XT.  2,  61  sqq..  xri.  2.  166  sqq.,  xvii.  1.  160  sqq.,  1880-86; 

in  Vaiikaniaehe  Studien,  Innsbruck,  1890;    W.  H.  Bliss, 

Caleniar  .  .  .  Papal  Letters,  ii.  123  sqq.,  in  RolU  3cri«s, 

London,  1806;   the  bull  Licet  juxta  doctrinam  is  quoted  in 

Mirbt,  QvMUen,  pp.  162-163;    important  also  are  LtUrf 

du  pape  Jean  XXII.,  tSie-SA,  relativea  6  la  France,  Athens, 

1900  sqq.    The  earlier  lives  are  collected  in  8.  Baluse, 

VitoB  paparum  Avenioneneiutn,  i.  113  sqq..  Paris,   1693, 

and  in  G.  Villani,  Cronica,  books  ix.-xi..  Florence,  1823. 

Gonmilt:    Pastor.  PopeB,  i.  68-83;    C.  MQller,  Der  Kampf 

Ludwiga  .  .  .  mit  der  rOmiMchen  Kurie,  vol.  i.,  Tabingen, 

1879;    8.  Riesler.  OMdiiehU  Baiem»,  ii.  348  sqq.,  Qotha, 

1880;  W.  Felten,  Die  BuiU  Ne  pretermit  2  vols..  Treves, 

1886-87;    B.  Juncmann,   Dieeertaiionee  eelectae,   vi.   166 

sqq.,  Recensburg,  1886;  M.  Faucon,  La  Librairie  dee  papee 

d*Avi(fnon,  2  vols.,  Paris,  1886-87;    Reffulae  eancellariae 

apoeiolioae,   Innsbruck,    1888;    L.   KAnig,  Die  pApeUidte 

Kamnur  unUr  .  .  .  Johann  XXII.,  Vienna,  1894;    Nean- 

dar,  Chrietian  Church,  iv.  368  et  passim;  Hefele,  Coneilien^ 

geediidUe,   vi.   676  sqq.;     Bower,   Popee,   iii.  73-78;    B. 

Platina,   lAvea  cf  the  Popee,  ii.   140-147,  London,  n.d.; 

Ifilman.  Latin  ChrieHaniiu,  vii.  18-120. 

John  ZZm.  (Baltasare  Cossa):  Pope   1410-15. 
He  came  of  a  noble  Neapolitan  family.    At  first 


he  took  up  the  profession  of  arms,  but  later  he 
studied  at  the  University  of  Bologna  and  became 
cardinal  in  1402  and  legate  of  Bologna  in  1403. 
In  this  position  he  rendered  distinguished  services 
for  the  restitution  and  protection  of  the  Papal  States 
(q.v.)  and  for  the  increase  of  the  papal  finances. 
He  fell  out  with  Gregory  XII.  and  became  the 
leading  spirit  of  the  Council  of  Pisa  (q.v.);  the 
newly  elected  pope,  Alexander  V.,  was  only  an  in- 
strument in  his  hands.  After  the  death  of  Alex- 
ander, John  himself  was  elected  pope  May  17,  1410. 
He  carried  on  a  successful  war  against  Ladislaus  of 
Naples  (battle  of  Roccasicca,  Apr.  29,  1411),  but 
was  forced  to  flee  and  throw  himself  into  the  arms 
of  the  Roman  King  Siegmimd.  By  his  ignominious 
flight  from  the  Council  of  (Constance  (Mar.  20  to 
21,  1415),  John  incurred  the  hatred  of  the  whole 
assembly.  On  May  29,  1415,  the  council  deposed 
him  and  delivered  him  into  the  hands  of  Count 
Palatine  Louis  of  Bavaria.  He  was  then  impris- 
oned in  Radolfszell,  Gottlieben,  Heidelberg,  and 
Mannheim  till  1418,  when  he  was  released  by  Martin 
V.  and  made  cardinal  bishop  of  Tusculum.  He  died 
Dec.  22,  1419.  (B.  Bess.) 

Biblioobaprt:  Pastor,  Popes,  i.  101-109;  Creishton.  Pap- 
acy, i.  267-344;  C.  Hunger.  Zsr  Geechiehte  Papet  Johan- 
nee  XX III.,  Bonn.  1876;  J.  Schwerdfeger.  Papet  Johann 
XXni.  unddie  Wahl  Sieomunde,  1410,  Vienna,  1896;  H. 
Blumenthal,  in  ZKO,  xxi.  1000;  Neandar,  Ckrietian 
Churdi,  ▼.  00  sqq.;  Bower,  Popes,  iii.  171-201:  E.  J. 
Kitts,  In  Ac  Daue  of  the  CouneOe;  a  Sketch  qf  the  Life  and 
Timee  of  Baldaeeare  Coeea,  Edinburgh.  lOOO. 


t  Hie  Han. 

His  Positbn  Among  the  Apostles 

(I  1). 
His  FamUy  (f  2). 
His  Character  (f  3). 
It  The     Writings      Attributed     to 

John. 
1.  The  Apocalypse. 


JOHN  THE  APOSTLE. 

Preliminary  Considerations  (f  1). 
External  Testimony  (|  2). 
John  the  Presbyter  (f  3). 
The  Date  of  Composition  (i  4). 

2.  The  Epistles. 
IJohnd  1). 

II  and  III  John  (f  2). 

3.  The  Gospel. 


Its  Character  (i  1). 

Internal  Testimony  to  Authorship 

(§2). 
Objections  to  Johannine  Author- 

Bhip  (i  3). 
John's     Residence     at    Ephesus 

(§4). 
Conclusion  (f  5). 


L  The  Man:  The  picture  which  the  name  of 
John  calk  up  in  the  mind  of  every  educated  Chris- 
tian is  a  reflection  of  the  traits  apparent  in  the 
writings  transmitted  under  his  name;  but  whether 
he  was  the  author  of  those  writings  has  been  for  a 
hundred  years  a  question  to  which  diverse  answers 
have  been  given,  many  denying  his  authorship  ab- 
solutely, while  others  regard  it  as  uncertain.  The 
attempt  must  be  made  to  arrive  at  the  historical 
position  of  the  apostle  from  these  writings  and 
from  the  traditions  as  to  his  later  life  which  are  so 
closely  connected  with  them. 

In  nearly  all  the  lists  of  the  apostles,  after  the 

names  of  Peter  and  Andrew  come  those  of  James 

and  John,  the  sons  of  Zebedee.    That  in  Acts  i.  13 

John  comes  before  James,  and  both 

I.  His      before  Andrew  may  be  explained  by 

Position  the  fact  that  in  this  book  John  was  to 
Among  the  be  frequently  named  as  a  prominent 

Apostles,  man  in  the  apostolic  circle,  while  James 
appears  only  once,  in  the  mention  of 
his  martyrdom  (xii.  2).  On  the  other  hand,  it  may 
be  concluded  from  the  almost  constant  precedence 
given  to  James  in  the  Gospels  that  he  was  the  elder 
brother,  for  the  greater  historical  importance  of 
John  was  well  known  by  the  time  the  Gospels  were 


written.  According  to  an  old  and  wide-spread  tra- 
dition, John  was  the  youngest  of  all  the  apostles. 
If  this  is  accepted,  it  adds  to  the  probability  of  the 
assertion  that  he  died  a  very  old  man  after  the 
accession  of  Trajan,  98  a.d. 

The  father  of  James  and  John  pursued  with  them 
and  with  several  hired  men  (Mark  i.  20)  the  trade 

of  a  fisherman  at  Capernaum.     More 

3.  His      is  known  of  the  mother;    she  accom- 

Famtly.     panied  Christ  on  his  last  journey  to 

Jerusalem,  and  by  her  request  for 
places  of  honor  in  the  Messianic  kingdom  for  her 
sons  showed  not  only  her  own  ambition  but  her 
firm  belief  in  the  coming  of  that  kingdom;  she  was 
seen  again  at  the  cross,  and  appears  as  one  of  the 
women  who  had  helped  to  support  the  Savior  in 
Galilee  and  on  this  last  journey,  and  cared  for  the 
proper  burial  of  his  body  after  the  crucifixion. 
Her  name,  Salome,  is  preserved  by  Mark  (xv.  40, 
xvi.  1;  cf.  Matt,  xxvii.  56).  The  comparison  of 
John  xix.  25  with  this  last  passage  and  Mark  xv.  40 
leads  to  a  tempting  hypothesis  that  she  was  the  sis- 
ter of  Mary,  the  mother  of  Jesus,  which  would  tend 
to  explain  more  than  one  traditional  statement 
about  the  boldness  of  her  demand  for  her  sons. 
Their  call,  as  well  as  that  of  Peter  and  Andrew,  is 


SOS 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


John  y^^iVT 
John  the  ApoBtlA 


placed  by  the  Evangelists  among  the  first  acts  of 
the  niinistry  of  Jesus  in  Galilee  after  the  imprison- 
ment of  John  the  Baptist,  whose  disciples  they  had 
apparently  been,  therefore  being  fully  acquainted 
with  the  personidity  and  teaching  of  Jesus. 

With  Peter  the  two  brothers  formed  the  inner 
cirde  of  his  associates,  whom  he  took  with  him  to 
the  ho\ise  of  Jalrus,  to  the  mount  of  the  transfig- 
uration, and  to  Getbsemane.  A  comparison  of 
Mark  x.  35  with  Matt.  zx.  20  shows  that  they 
shared   their  mother's  ambitions  for 

3.  His  their  future;  though  it  must  not  be 
Character,  forgotten  that  in  reply  to  the  search- 
ing question  of  Jesus,  they  declared 
their  readiness  to  go  through  all  the  trials  and  suf- 
ferings which  must  precede  his  glorification.  It  is 
they,  with  Peter,  who  come  to  the  mind  in  reading 
of  strife  as  to  precedence  among  the  apostles  (Matt, 
xviii.  1;  Mark  ix.  33;  Luke  xxii.  24).  In  connec- 
tion with  one  of  the  admonitions  of  Jesus  on  these 
occasions  occurs  the  accoimt  of  John's  complaint 
of  the  man  who  worked  wonders  in  his  name  with- 
out being  his  avowed  disciple  (Luke  ix.  49).  It 
was  not  their  own  honor,  however,  that  they  wished 
to  see  avenged  by  a  divine  judgment  upon  the 
Samaritan  village  in  the  following  passage  (ib. 
verses  51-56).  It  can  scarcely  be  doubted  that  it 
was  such  expressions  of  an  imchastened  spirit  that 
caused  Christ  to  give  them  the  name  of  Boanerges 
(Mark  iii.  17).  That  both  the  brothers  afterward 
learned  to  master  their  impetuous  wrath  and  their 
jealous  ambition  is  amply  attested.  A  story  of 
James  preserved  by  Eusebius  (Hist,  ecd.,  II.,  ix. 
2,  3)  gives  a  touching  evidence  of  it;  and  the  whole 
history  of  John  speaks  for  it,  though  his  natural 
disposition  appears  not  extirpated  but  purified  and 
regulated  in  the  words  and  actions  of  his  old  age. 
It  must  have  been  his  natural  gifts  and  fiery  zeal 
which  procured  for  him,  even  in  the  lifetime  of  his 
elder  brother,  so  commanding  a  position  among  the 
apostles  and  in  the  chiurch  of  Palestine  (Acts  iii. 
1-11,  iv.  13,  19,  viii.  14).  In  Acts  xv.,  indeed,  he 
does  not  appear  so  prominently  as  Peter  and  James 
in  the  discussions  of  the  council  at  Jerusalem;  but 
Paul  names  him  with  them  as  a  pillar  of  the  Church 
(Gal.  ii.  9).  Paul  refutes  the  assertions  of  his  Gala- 
tian  opponents  by  facts  which  he  could  not  have 
invented  and  would  not  have  adduced  if  they  were 
not  demonstrable;  all  that  those  assertions  prove 
is  that  John,  like  Peter  and  James,  continued  to 
live,  with  the  churches  immediately  subject  to  their 
guidance  in  Palestine,  according  to  the  forms  of  the 
Jewish  law,  while  they  soleinnly  declared  them- 
selves satisfied  with  the  missionary  vocation  of 
Paul  and  the  independence  of  his  non-Jewish  con- 
verts. The  position  of  John  in  regard  to  these 
burning  questions  of  the  middle  of  the  first  century 
is  the  last  historical  notice  of  him  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament, outside  of  the  Johannine  writings  them- 
selves. 

n.  The  Writings  Attributed  to  John:  The  works 
to  be  discussed  under  this  heading  are  five  books 
of  the  New  Testament,  viz.,  the  Fourth  Gospel, 
three  Epistles,  and  the  Book  of  Revelation  or 
Apocalypse. 

1.  The  Apocalypse:  This    comes  first  in  order 


because  it  is  the  only  one  which  bears  John's  name 
upon  its  face.  If  the  author  of  such  a  pastoral 
letter  to  the  seven  churches  of  Asia 
1.  Frelim-  did  not  think  it  necessary  to  identify 
inaxy  Oon-  himself  any  further  than  by  the  bare 
stderations.  mention  of  his  name  and  his  designa- 
tion as  a  servant  of  God,  it  follows  that 
his  personality  must  have  been  weU  known  to  all 
these  churches,  somewhat  widely  scattered  through- 
out Asia  Minor,  and  that  at  the  time  of  its  composi- 
tion there  was  no  other  John  in  those  parts  with 
whom  he  could  be  confused.  It  follows,  again, 
from  the  addresses  to  the  individual  churches  that 
the  writer  was  as  well  acquainted  with  the  circum- 
stances of  these  churches  as  the  churches  were  with 
him.  A  third  fact  to  be  borne  in  mind  is  that  the 
book  was  not  only  destined  originally  to  be  read 
in  their  gatherings,  but  that  in  these  very  churches 
it  was  actually  received  from  the  beginning  of  the 
second  century  as  a  divine  revelation. 

Papias,  bishop  of  Hierapolis  near  Laodicea,  at- 
tests its  credibility  about  125;  Justin  includes  in  his 
''Dialogue  with  Trypho"  (written  about  155  a.d.) 
a  report  of  a  discussion  held  at  Ephesus 
2.  External  to  prove  that  the  gift  of  prophecy  had 
Testimony,  passed  over  from  the  synagogue  to  the 
Church;  the  "  presbjrters  in  Asia," 
whom  Irenaeus  reveres  as  disciples  of  John,  taught 
by  his  own  lips,  occupied  themselves  with  a  dis- 
cussion of  the  number  of  the  beast  (Rev.  xiii.  18); 
the  "  Acts  of  John,"  composed  in  the  same  prov- 
ince hardly  later  than  160-170  by  one  "  Leucius  " 
of  the  school  of  Valentinus,  attributes  the  order  of 
the  seven  churches  to  the  successive  migrations  of 
the  apostle.  About  the  same  time  the  Alogi  (q.v.), 
who,  in  their  opposition  to  Montanism,  wished  to 
see  all  prophecy,  and  thus  the  Apocalypse  with  the 
other  Johannine  writings,  banished  from  the  Church, 
could  press  this  demand  only  by  the  assertion  that 
the  heretic  Cerinthus,  Jolm's  contemporary  at 
Ephesus,  had  foisted  the  Apocalypse  on  the  Church 
under  John's  name.  Baur  and  his  school  held  to 
Johannine  authorship,  and,  in  fact,  considered  the 
Apocalypse  the  only  authentic  work  of  the  apostle. 
Those  who  could  not  accept  the  book  as  written 
by  the  brother  of  James,  and  yet  shrank  from  the 
pseudonymous  theory,  at  least  in  the 
8.  John  the  startling  form  in  which  it  was  held  by 
Presbyter,  the  Alpgi  and  Caius  of  Rome,  cast 
about  to  find  another  John  who  woidd 
serve  the  purpose.  Thus  Dionysius  of  Alexandria 
(c.  260)  attempted  to  support  the  possibility  of 
there  having  been  such  a  man,  at  the  time  and  place, 
by  the  fact  of  the  existence  of  a  twofold  tradition 
as  to  the  burial-place  of  John  at  Ephesus.  Euse- 
bius followed  him,  and  discovered  the  other  John 
in  the  prologue  of  Papias  (Hist  ecd,y  III.,  xxsix. 
5,  6),  callii^  him  ''John  the  Presbyter."  This 
view  has  been  taken  by  LUcke,  Bleek,  Ewald,  and 
others  in  modem  times;  and  recently  a  strong 
tendency  has  shown  itself  to  make  this  "  John  the 
Presbyter"  responsible  for  all  that  bears  the  name 
of  John  (Meyer-Bousset,  Hamack).  Even  John 
Mark,  who  was  set  aside  by  Dionysius  as  out  of  the 
question,  has  been  taken  up  by  Hitzig  as  the  author 
of  the  whole  Apocalypse,  and  by  Spitta  as  the 


John  the  Apoatle 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


204 


author  of  what  he  considers  the  original  nudeus 
(i.  4-vii.  17,  xxii.  8-21). 

Space  forbids  going  into  the  long  history  of  the 

hypotheses  whi<£  have  been  set  forth  as  to  the 

growth  of  the  book,  which  is  frequently  held  to 

have  been  a  lengthy  process.    The  fol- 

4.  The  Date  lowing  conclusions,  however,  seem  safe. 

of  Oom-    The  assertion  of  Irenaeus  {Haer.,  V., 

position.  XXX.  3)  that  the  visions  were  seen  and 
the  book  written  toward  the  end  of 
the  reign  of  Domitian,  or  about  95,  finds  support 
in  the  numerous  historical  data  of  the  opening 
chapters.  The  designed  and  inmiediately  accom- 
plished introduction  of  the  book  into  public  litur- 
f^ical  use  precludes  the  possibility  of  any  notable 
alterations  in  it  between  100  and  150.  The  author, 
as  his  name  and  idiom  show,  is  of  Hebrew  birth, 
and  about  95  had  a  recognised  position  of  authority 
over  the  church  of  the  province,  without  having  any 
contemporary  rival  of  the  same  name.  He  is  the 
only  John  of  Ephesus  of  whom  anjrthing  is  known 
from  a  tradition  reaching  back  into  his  lifetime  and 
in  decisive  points  independent  of  his  own  writings. 
That  he  does  not  caU  himself  an  apostle  is  no  proof 
that  he  was  not  one;  his  apostleship  had  no  imme- 
diate connection  with  his  apocalyptic  purpose,  and 
he  does  not  describe  himse^  at  alL 

2.  The  EpUtles:  Of  the  Epistles,  the  first,  which 

Papias  cites  and  Polycarp  obviously  imitates,  is 

not  in  form  a  letter.    Not  only  is  the  introduction 

(i.  1-4)  unlike  the  ordinary  beginning 

1.  Z  John,  of  a  letter,  but  it  lacks  at  its  dose,  too, 
what  would  be  expected.  There  is 
almost  no  allusion  to  any  local  conditions  of  the 
readers.  From  v.  21  it  nuiy  be  inferred  that  the 
readers  lived  amid  pagan  surroundings;  the  re- 
peated "  I  write  unto  you  "  shows  that  it  was  not 
a  homily  delivered  before  an  assembled  community, 
but  rather  a  treatise  addressed  from  a  distance  to 
a  number  of  local  churches  of  non-Jewish  origin. 
The  tone  is  that  of  an  aged  man  who  enjoyed  high 
consideration  as  a  teacher,  and  who  spoke  not  oidy 
in  his  own  name  but  in  that  of  others  who  have 
likewise  seen  and  heard  Christ  on  earth,  and  stood 
as  witnesses  to  a  great  fact  (i.  1  sqq.,  iv.  14).  A 
personal  follower  of  Christ  (named  John,  accord- 
ing to  all  tradition  except  that  of  the  Alogi),  who, 
with  his  colleagues  of  similar  qualifications,  had 
been  occupied  in  other  fields,  in  his  old  age  ad- 
dressed himself  to  some  communities  of  Gentile 
converts  as  a  teacher  possessing  great  authority, 
presumably  superior  to  that  of  others  laboring 
among  them.  History  knows  of  no  one  who  ful- 
fils all  these  conditions  except  the  John  who  at  the 
end  of  the  first  century  ruled  the  Church  of  Asia 
Minor  from  Ephesus.  That  the  writer  was  an  apos- 
tle, as  in  the  second  century  not  only  his  disciples 
but  (in  their  way)  his  opponents  admitted,  is  ren- 
dered extremely  probable  by  the  strong  expres- 
sions of  the  opening  verses. 

The  second  and  third  Epistles  are  intimately 
connected  with  the  first  by  their  language  and  line 
of  thought,  by  the  combating  of  the  same  errors 
(I  John  ii.  18-26,  iv.  1-3,  v.  5-12;  II  John  7-11), 
and  by  the  position  of  the  writer,  which  stands  out 
even  more  clearly  from  them  than  it  does  from  the 


first  Epistle  and  the  Apocalypse.   That  this  position 
was  not  unquestioned  appears  from  I  John  iv.  6; 
and    in    II   John   8-11    the    author 
2.  n  and    charges  the  churches  to  have  nothing 
ZHJobn.    to  do  with  those  who  refused  to  re- 
ceive his  teaching.    From  III  John  9, 
10  it  appears  that  a  leader  of  the  Church  has  not 
only  employed  **  malidous  words  "  against  John 
but  has  renounced  communion  with  John's  asso- 
ciates and  attempted  to  cut  off  those  who  received 
them.    Asserting  his  authority,  John   writes  not 
to  the  insubordinate  Diotrephes,  but  to  one  Gains 
who  is  in  close  relation  with  himself,  sending  a 
letter  at  the  same  time  to  the  whole  Church  of  the 
region — for  there  should  be  no  doubt  that  the  refer- 
ence in  III  John  7  is  to  II  John.    In  II  John  12 
and  III  Johji  13,  14,  the  intention  is  expressed  of 
coming  to  call  Diotrephes  to  account.    John's  con- 
fidence in  his  own  position  is  noteworthy,  especially 
in  connection  with  the  question  why  and  in  what 
sense  he  designates  himself  (II  John  1;    III  Jolm 
1)  as  ''  the  elder."    Since  in  the  province  there 
were  certainly  far  more  than  the  seven  chiurbes 
of  Rev.  i.,  each  with  its  own  local  presbyter,  he 
could  hardly,  writing  to  another  church  (II  John 
13)  as  one  of  the  elders  of  his  own  conununity,  have 
called   himself   simply  ''  the   elder,"  even  if   (as 
III  John  and  Rev.  i.-iii.  seem  to  show)  the  monar- 
chical episcopate  had  already  developed  in  that 
region.    It  is  more  probably  a  title  of  honor,  not 
chosen  by  himself  but  open  to  him  to  use  after  it 
had  become  customary  in  the  churches  to  call  him 
by  it  in  the  sense  of  the  venerable  teacher  of  the 
whole  region,  the  father  who  calls  all  the  Chnstiaos 
in  it  his  children.    That  there  was  such  a  vener- 
able old  man  in  Asia  Minor  at  that  time,  who 
would  be  designated  with  quite  sufficient  clearness 
by  the  title  ''  the  elder,"  and  that  his  name  was 
John,  is  known  from  Papias,  who  was  a  disciple  ol 
his  (Eusebius,  Hiti,  ecd.,  III.,  xxxix.  15),  and  so 
return  is  made  to  John  of  Ephesus  as  the  assumed 
or  actual  author  of  the  two  short  letters.    That 
elsewhere,  in  places  where  this  designation  was  not 
familiar,  doubts  were  raised  as  to  the  identity  of 
authorship  with  I  John  precisely  on  the  ground  of 
this  peculiar  designation,  can  be  readily  understood, 
as  also  that  after  the  discovery  of  a  **  John  the 
Presbyter  "  these  epistles  were  ascribed  to  him,  as 
by  Jerome  (De  vir,  iU.,  ix.,  xviii.)  after  the  sug- 
gestion of  Eusebius  (Hist,  ecd..  III.,  xxv.  3). 

8.  The  Oospel:    This  resembles  the  works  al- 
ready discussed  in  being  directed  not  to  a  general 
public,  but  to  a  definite  circle  of  read- 
1.  Its      ers,  whom  the  author  twice  addresses 
Oharaoter.  (xix.  35,  xx.  31)  as  a  preacher  might 
his  hearers.    By  this  fact  and  by  tra- 
dition the  view  is  supported  that  the  author  of  the 
Apocalypse  and  the  Epistles  is  here  addressing  the 
same  churches;  and  it  is  confirmed  by  the  undeni- 
able likeness  of  both  language  and  religious  views, 
to  say  nothing  of  the  obvious  fact  that  the  Gospel 
is  destined  for  readers  unfamiliar  with  the  speech 
and  customs  of  the  Jews.    In  i.  14,  16,  as  well  as  in 
xix.  35,  he  reckons  himself,  precisely  as  in  the 
Epistles,  among  the  eye-witnesses  of  the  facts  which 
he  relates. 


805 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


John  the  Apostle 


Note  must  be  taken,  however,  of  the  theory  of 

Weixa&ckier,  that   the  book   is  a  product  of  the 

school  of  John  the  apostle,  written  in 

8.  Internal  the  spirit  and  the  name  of  the  master, 

Testimony  and  that  of  Renan  (from  the  thirteenth 

to  An-     edition  of  his  Vie  de  Jisus  on;    fol- 

thoTship.  lowed,  thou^  a  little  less  definitely,  by 
Hamack)  that  "John  the  Presbyter," 
a  disciple  of  the  apostle  and  depending  on  his  narra- 
tive, wrote  it.  If  it  be  noticed  that  throughout  the 
whole  Gospel  the  two  apostles  who  with  Peter  stood 
next  to  Jesus  are  never  once  named,  it  appears 
that  this  is  too  constant  an  attitude  to  be  fortui- 
tous, and  that  it  can  be  explained  only  by  the 
author's  feeling  that  it  was  imfitting  to  introduce 
into  the  sacred  history  his  own  and  his  parents' 
names.  The  '*  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved  "  of  the 
last  supper  (xiii.  21-25)  must  have  been  an  apos- 
tle, and  one  of  the  inner  circle  even  among  the 
apostles.  That  he  was  the  author  of  the  book  is 
expressly  stated  in  the  supplementary  chapter 
xxi.  The  solemn  close  of  chapter  xx.,  looking  back 
upon  a  completed  work,  shows  that  this  was  not 
written  at  the  same  time  with  the  rest;  but  the 
fact  that  neither  in  the  Fathers  nor  in  the  oldest 
versions  and  the  extant  Greek  manuscripts  is  there 
any  trace  of  an  existence  of  the  book  without  this 
cluster  shows  that  it  must  have  been  added  before 
the  Gospel  had  been  widely  circulated,  or  soon 
after  the  composition  of  the  first  twenty  chapters. 
Whoever,  then,  wrote  xxi.  24  testified  in  the  apos- 
tle's lifetime  that  he  was  the  author  of  the  book; 
and  the  internal  evidence  for  its  authenticity  is 
supported  by  a  unanimous  tradition  which  appar- 
ently can  be  traced  up  to  his  very  friends  and  dis- 
ciples. If  the  relation  between  the  writer  and  the 
first  readers  was  as  close  as  it  appears  to  have  been, 
there  is  no  room  for  deliberate  deceit  on  the  part 
of  the  former  or  for  unconscious  error  of  the  latter. 
Those  who  have  upheld  the  opposite  theory  have 
depended  far  too  little  on  poeitivQ  study  of  the 
text  and  positive  information  to  assert  that  the 
book  was  written  by  Cerinthus,  or  by  a  second-cen- 
tury Gentile  Christian  with  Gnostic  tendencies,  or 
by  a  Jewish  Christian  who  had  never  been  outside 
of  Syria,  or  by  a  disciple  or  disciples  of  John  at 
Ephesus,  or  by  a  "  Presbyter  John." 

The  upholders  of  these  various  views  have  agreed 

only  in  the  negative  judgment  that  an  inmiediate 

disciple  of  Christ  can  not  have  written  the  book, 

for  the  reason  that  its  contents  are 

8.  Otdeo-    incredible  on  historical,  psychological, 
tions  to     or  philosophico-dogmatic  grounds.   Of 

Johannine  these    grounds    the    following    brief 
Author-    sketch  will  suffice:   (1)  On  account  of 
Bhlp.       ^he  great  difiFerence  in  language  and 
manner  of  thought  it  seems  impossi- 
ble, they  say,  that  the  same  man  (even  at  different 
periods  of  his  life)  could  have  written  the  Gospel 
and  the  letters  on  one  side  and  the  Apocalypse  on 
the  other.    (2)  If  the  synoptic  Gospels  are  older 
than  the  fourth,  as  both  tradition  and  criticism 
show,  and  are  a  trustworthy  reproduction  of  the 
general  tradition  of  the  years  6Q-100,  then  the  in- 
compatibility of  their  narrative  with  John's  in  the 
whole  plan  of  the  story  and  in  certain  important 


detaOs  (for  example  the  chronology  of  the  Passion) 
will  render  impossible  a  belief  in  the  composition 
of  the  Fourth  Gospel  by  an  ejre-witness.  (3)  Still 
more,  the  picture  given  in  it  of  the  person  of  Jesus, 
his  relation  to  his  disciples,  and  the  tone  of  his  re- 
puted speeches  differ  fimdamentally  from  those 
given  by  the  s3rnoptic8;  and  this  difference  leads 
to  the  belief  that  the  Fourth  Gospel  was  written 
by  a  man  of  the  second  or  third  generation,  under 
the  influence  of  speculative  and  churchly  ideas. 
(4)  One  of  these  ideas  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Logos, 
which  comes  from  Philo  or  the  Alexandrian  phi- 
losophy and  can  not  have  been  known  by  the  Gali- 
lean fisherman.  (5)  The  way  in  which  the  writer 
introduces  himself  with  apparent  unconsciousness, 
at  the  same  time  putting  himself  forward  as  the 
favorite  disciple,  is  morally  more  conceivable  in  a 
later  writer  who  more  or  less  assumed  the  charac- 
ter of  the  apostle  than  in  the  latter  himself.  (6) 
Evidences  of  ignorance  of  the  historical  and  geo- 
graphical .conditions  of  Palestine  in  the  time  of 
Christ  are  adduced,  though  less  confidently  in 
modem  times  than  was  formerly  the  case.  (7)  The 
tradition  as  to  the  residence  of  the  apostle  John  at 
Ephesus  is  partly  uncertain,  because  depending 
on  the  testimony  of  writings  bearing  his  name; 
partly  equivocal  in  that  the  apostolic  character  of 
the  John  who  lived  there  between  70  and  100  is 
not  clearly  shown;  and  partly  unfavorable  to  the 
composition  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  by  this  John,  of 
whom  words  and  acts  are  reported  (e.g.,  in  connec- 
tion with  the  Quartodeciman  controversy)  which 
do  not  harmonize  with  the  thought  of  the  evangel- 
ist. While  a  discussion  of  the  first  six  points  is 
impossible  here,  the  last  must  be  dealt  with  at 
some  length,  because  it  relates  to  the  last  period 
of  the  apostle's  life  and  because  the  whole  histor- 
ical foundation  for  his  literary  activity  is  involved 
in  it. 

Even  if  the  Apocalypse  is  pseudonymous,  which 
few  nowadays  maintain,  it  still  teaches  that  at  the 
date  of  its  composition  (about  95  a.d.)  there  was  a 
well-known  and  revered  Christian  of 
4.  John's    Jewish  birth  named  John,  whose  per- 
Beaidenca  manent  home  was  on  the  mainland 
at         and  his  enforced  habitation  at  that 
Epheans.   time  the  island  of  Patmos.    As  far  as 
tradition  speaks  clearly,  it  constantly 
designates  him  as  an  apostle,  whether  it  mentions 
him  as  the  author  of  the  Johannine  writings,  or  as 
a  teacher  in  the  province  of  Asia,  or  as  an  author^ 
ity  for  the  ecclesiastical  usages  prevalent  there. 
There  has  been  much  discussion  of  the  passage  in 
Eusebius  where  he  dtes  Papias,  and  apparently  in 
part  at  least  misunderstands  him.    Without  dis- 
cussing this  at  length,  it  is  safe  to  say  that  the 
"  Presbyter  John  "  is  a  product  of  the  critical  and 
exegetical  weakness  of  Eusebius;  and  the  question 
becomes  merely  who  was  the  John  who  (according 
to  the  testunony  of  the  Apocalypse  and  of  his  dis- 
ciples Polycarp,  Papias,  and  the  other  "presby- 
ters "  mentioned  by  Irenieus)  lived  at  Ephesus  in 
the  closing  yesrs  of  the  first  century,  exeroised  a 
predominant  influence  on  the  Church  of  the  prov- 
ince, died  after  the  accession  of  Trajan  or  about 
100,  and  (by  the  testimony  of  Polycrates,  bishop 


^: 


'ohn  the  Apostle 
ohn  the  Baptist 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


206 


of  Ephesus,  who  was  baptiaed  about  125-130)  was 
buried  there.  All  clearly  intelligible  tradition  says 
that  he  was  the  son  of  Zebedee  chosen  by  Christ  as 
an  apostle.  There  is  not  a  oountei^statement  to 
be  found  in  the  first  eight  centimes;  an  apparent 
assertion  of  Papias  that  the  apostle  John  was  put 
to  death  by  the  Jews  in  Palestine  is  seen  when  in- 
vestigated to  refer  t^  John  the  Baptist. 

It  is  safe,  then,  to  say  that  the  apostle  John, 
with  other  disciples  of  Christ,  came  from  Palestine 
to  Asia  Minor.  If  Polycarp,  on  the  day  of  his  death 
(Feb.  23,  155),  was  looldng  back  on 
6.  Cton-  eighty-six  years  of  life  as  a  Christian, 
olualoB.  not  as  a  man,  and  was  thus  baptized 
in  69,  and  if  his  conversion  (according 
to  Irensus,  Haer,,  III.,  iii.  4)  was  the  work  of  an 
apostle,  this  migration  to  Asia  Minor  must  have 
occurred  before  that  date,  possibly  as  a  result  of 
the  outbreak  of  the  Jewish  war.  John,  then  per- 
haps not  more  than  sbcty  or  sixty-five,  would  thus 
have  been  able  to  devote  some  thirty  years  to  the 
fostering  of  Christian  life  in  the  province.  His 
image  as  a  priest  in  pontifical  garments  long  lived 
in  the  memory  of  the  Christians  of  Ephesus  (Euse- 
bius.  Hist,  eed,,  V.,  xxiv.  3).  The  whilom  "Son 
of  Tliunder  "  was  not  in  his  old  age  a  subtle  phil- 
osophical disputant  nor  the  soft-hearted  preacher 
of  a  weak  tolerance,  but  stands  out  a  sharply  de- 
fined character,  his  own  position  firmly  taken  and 
earnestly  pressing  others  to  decide  between  light 
and  darkness,  Christ  and  Antichrist.  The  John  of 
the  years  between  27  and  52  pictured  in  the  older 
New-Testament  writings,  stands  out  less  clearly  in 
the  Apocalypse,  in  which  his  task  was  merely  to 
reproduce  what  had  been  given  him,  than  in  the 
Epistles,  in  which  he  exercised  his  office  as  teacher 
and  head  of  the  Church  of  Asia  Minor  with  unex- 
hausted power.  He  is  recognized  again  in  the  story 
left  by  his  disciple  Polycarp  (Irensus,  Haer,,  III., 
iii.  4)  of  his  encounter  with  the  heretic  Cerinthus 
in  the  public  bath  at  Ephesus,  and  in  the  account 
(Eusebius,  Hist,  ecd.,  V.,  xxiv.  3,  16)  of  his  cele- 
bration of  the  Christian  Passover  in  the  form  bor- 
rowed from  the  old  covenant  and  familiar  to  him 
in  Palestine.  (T.  Zahn.) 

BiBUooBArHT:  Varioua  phaaes  of  the  tubjeot  are  discuned 
in  the  treatues  on  the  Church  history  of  the  period,  e.g. 
Schaff,  ChriMtian  Church,  i.  406-431;  in  works  on  the 
theology  of  the  Bible  and  the  N.  T.  (so  particularly  Bey- 
schlag);  and  in  works  on  introduction  to  the  Bible  and 
the  N.  T.  Some  of  the  most  elaborate  introductions  are 
prefixed  to  the  oonunentariee,  e.g.,  to  Westoott's  treatment 
in  the  BibU  Commentary. 

On  the  life  of  St.  John  consult,  besides  Sohaff,  ut  sup., 
and  McGiffert,  as  below:  F.  Trench,  Ths  Life  and  Charao- 
tsr  cf  8L  John,  London,  1850;  M.  Krenkel,  Der  ApoHel 
JohannM,  Leipsic,  1871;  J.  M.  Macdonald,  Ths  Life  and 
Writinge  of  St.  John,  New  York,  1880;  P.  J.  Gloag,  W« 
€f  St,  John,  London,  1892. 

General  commentaries  on  the  Johannine  writings  are 
H.  Ewald,  Die  johanniedten  Schriften,  2  vols..  Gdttingen, 
1861:  J.  T.  Harris.  The  Writinoe  oftheApoetU  John,  2  vols., 
London,  1889;  H.  J.  Holtsmann,  Evan{/elium,  Brief e,  und 
Offenbarung  dee  Johannes,  Tabingen,  1908.  An  excellent 
review  of  recent  Johannean  literature  is  furnished  in  the 
Theoloffieehe  Rundechau,  Sept.-Oct.,  1906.  Apr.-May.  1907 
(all  of  these  very  valuable  to  the  close  student). 

Questions  of  introduction  to  the  Apocalypse  are  dis- 
cussed in:  F.  LOcke.  Einleiiung  in  die  Offenbarung  Jo- 
kannes,  Bonn,  1852;  H.  (Sebhardt.  Der  Lehrbegriff  der 
Apokalypae  und  eein  VerhAUniee  eum  Lehrbeffriff  dee  Evan^ 
geliume  und  der  Epietel  dee  Johannee,  (3otha,  1873,  Eng. 


transl..  Edinburgh,  1878;  D.  Vftlter,  Die  Bntgtehung  der 
Apokalypee,  Freiburg.  1885;  idem,  Dae  Problem  der 
Apokaivpee,  lb.  1893;  E.  Viscfaer,  Offembarumg  JohannU, 
in  TU,  ii.3  (1886);  H.  Schdn,  L'Origine  de  VApoeaiypee, 
Paris,  1887;  P.  Schmidt,  UAer  die  Compoeiiion  der  Offen- 
barung, Freiburg,  1891;  W.  Bousset,  I>er  Antiekriet  in 
der  Udterlieferung  dee  Judentume,  dee  N.  T.,  und  der  alten 
Kirehe,  Gdttingen,  1895;  H.  Gunkel.  SchOpfung  und  Chaoe 
in  Urteit  und  Endeeit,  ib.  1895;  J.  Wellhausen.  Analyse  der 
Offenbarung  Johannie,  Berlin,  1907. 

The  exegetical  literature  on  the  Johannine  writings  is 
exceedingly  voluminous;  the  following  is  a  selection  of 
that  on  the  Apocalypse:  H.  B.  Swete,  London.  1909  (best); 
A.  Ewald,  Leipsio,  1828;  M.  Stuart,  2  vols.,  Andover. 
1845;  E.  W.  Hengstenberg,  2  vols.,  Leipsic.  1861-62. 
Eng.  transl.,  Edinburgh,  1851-62;  J.  H.  A.  Ebranl, 
K6nigsberg.  1853;  F.  Bleek,  Berlin.  1862.  Eng.  transl. 
London,  1875;  E.  B.  Elliott,  4  vols.,  ib.  1862;  G.  Yolk- 
mar.  Zurich,  1862;  H.  Kienlen,  Paris,  1870;  E.  Renan. 
L*Anteehr%et,  Paris*  1873.  Eng.  transl.,  London,  1897; 
T.  Kliefoth,  Leipeic,  1874;  F.  DOsterdieck,  Gdttingen. 
1877;  W.  Lee,  in  Bible  Commentary,  London,  1881;  C.  J. 
Vaughan,  ib.  1882;  J.  T.  Beck,  QOtersloh,  1884;  J.  Waller. 
Freiburg.  1885;  E.  Vischer.  Leipsic,  1886;  A.  Chauffard. 
2  vols.,  Paris.  1888;  G.  Spitta.  Halle,  1889;  W.  H.  Sim- 
cox,  in  Cambridge  Bible,  (Cambridge,  1890;  D.  Brown, 
London.  1891;  B.  Weiss.  Leipsic.  1891;  W.  MUligan. 
London.  1892;  W.  Bousset.  Gdttingen,  1895;  J.  M.  Gib- 
son, Apoealyptie  Skeiehee,  London,  1901;  E.  Huntingford, 
ib.  1901;  jr.  A.  Petit,  Paris.  1901;  L.  Frasen.  2  vols., 
Leipsic,  1901;  A.  Reymond,  Lausanne,  1903;  J.  B.  Knap, 
penberger.  Syracuse,  N.  Y.,  1908;  J.  J.  L.  Ruttow,  Eeeayi 
on  the  Apocalypee,  London,  1908;    J.  L.  Scott,  ib.  1909. 

Commentaries  on  the  Epistles  are:  B.  F.  Westcott. 
London.  1892;  W.  Augusti.  Die  kaiholietken  Brief e,  2  vols.. 
Lemgo.  1801;  J.  W.  Grashof.  Essen.  1830;  J.  H.  A. 
Ebrard,  KOnigsbeig.  1859,  Eng.  transl..  Edinburgh.  1860; 
W.  Alexander,  in  BibU  Commentary,  London,  1881;  idem. 
in  Bxpoeitor'e  BU>U,  ib.  1889;  A.  Plummer.  ib.  1886;  J.  J. 
Lias,  The  Firet  Epistle  of  St.  John,  ib.  1887;  E.  Dryandf>r. 
The  Firet  EpietU  of  St.  John,  ib.  1899;  J.  E.  Belser.  Frei- 
burg. 1906;  R.  Law,  The  Teste  of  Ufe.  A  Study  of  I  John, 
Edinbuiyh.  1909;   G.  G.  Findlay.  London,  1900. 

Critical  discussions  concerning  the  Gospel  may  be  found 
in:  F.  C.  Baur,  KriHeehe  Untereuchungen  Hiber  die  kanon- 
iethsn  Evangelien,  TObingen.  1847;  A.  Hilgenfeld,  Dm 
EvangtHien  nach  ihrer  Bntstehung,  Leipsie,  1854;  A. 
Sabatier.  Bseai  sur  lee  soureee  delaviede  Jieue,  Paris,  1866; 
G.  Volkmar,  Der  Ureprung  unserer  Evangelien,  Zurich. 
1866;  G.  M  Oiler.  Die  Entslehung  der  vier  EvangtUen, 
Berlin,  1877;  C.  Tischendorf,  Wann  tourden  uneere  Evan- 
gelien verfasst  f  Leipeic,  1880;  B.  F.  Westcott^  introduc- 
tion Co  the  Study  of  iks  ChepeU,  London,  1895;  C.  Wei>- 
sftoker,  Uniersu^chungen  fiber  die  evangeUsehe  Oeschithtt, 
ihre  QueOen  und  den  Oang  ihrer  Eniwidclung,  TObingen, 
1901.  Consult  also  the  special  discussions:  B.  Bauer, 
Kriiik  der  evangeUschen  G^diichte  des  Johannes,  Bremen. 
1840;  C.  Wittichen.  Der  geschidUHehe  Charakter  des  Evan. 
OeUume  Johannes,  Elberfeld,  1868;  J.  Orr,  AuthenHeity  cf 
St.  John's  Gospel,  London,  1870;  C.  E.  Luthardt.  Der 
iohannisdte  Ursprung  des  4.  Evangeliums,  Leipeic,  1874. 
Eng.  transl.,  Edinburgh,  1885;  W.  Beyschlag,  Zur  jo- 
hannistken  Frage,  (3otha.  1876;  W.  Sanday,  Authorship 
and  Historical  Character  of  the  FourOi  Ooepel,  London. 
1876;  idem.  CrUieiem  of  ike  Fowrfh  Oospd,  ib.  1905;  E. 
Abbot.  Authorehip  of  the  Fourth  Ooepel,  Boston.  1880; 
A.  Thoma,  Die  Oeneeie  dee  johanniedten  Evangelium* 
Berlin,  1882;  F.  Godet.  Authorehip  cf  the  Fourth  Goepd, 
London.  1884;  H.  H.  Evans,  St.  John  the  Author  of  the 
Fourth  Ooepel,  ib.  1888;  H.  W.  Watkins,  Modem  Critieiem 
in  its  Relation  to  the  Fourth  Ooepel,  ib.  1890;  P.  J.  GkMg. 
Introduction  to  the  Johannine  Writinge,  Edinburgh,  1891: 
G.  W.  Gilmore.  The  Johannean  Problem,  Philadelpbis, 
1895;  A.  C.  McGiffert,  Hiet.  ef  Christianity  in  the  Apostolic 
Age,  pp.  606-635,  New  York,  1897;  J.  Reville.  Le  Qvat- 
rihne  EvangUe,  Paris,  1900;  H.  T.  Purchas,  Johannine 
Problem,  London,  1901;  J.  Grill,  Die  Entstehung  dee  I 
Evangeliume,  TObingen,  1902;  W.  Wrede,  Charakter  und 
Tendens  dee  Johannisevangeliume,  ib.  1903;  J.  Drummond, 
The  Character  and  Authorship  <^  Oie  Fourth  Ooepei,  London, 
1904;  H.  L.  Jackson.  The  Fourth  Gospel  and  Some  Recent 
German  Criticism,  New  York.  1906;  K.  Ifeyer.  Der 
Zeugnisswede  dee  Bvangelisten  Johannes,  Gfltersloh.  1906: 
W.  Richmond.  The  Gospel  of  iks  Rejection:  a  Study  of  the 


d07 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


John  the  Ano&tlo 
John  the  Baptist 


lUiaHon  <4  1^  FourA  QotfpA  to  ths  Thrm,  London.  1006; 
£.  F.  Soott.  Tha  Fourth  Go9pelt  ii»  Purpose  and  Theotom, 
EdinbuTBh.  1907;  E.  A.  Abbott.  Johannine  Vocahulary, 
London,  1005;  idem,  Johannine  Orammar,  ib.  1006;  J. 
d'Ahnji,  La  Contwer^e  du  Quairiime  £vanoUe,  Paris,  1007; 
H.  P.  Forbeii,  Th$  Johannine  LOerature  and  the  AeU  c/ 
Am  ApoeOea,  New  York,  1007;  J.  A.  Robinson.  The  Hi^ 
iorieal  Character  ef  St  John'e  Ooepel,  Ix>ndon.  1006;  J. 
Wellhausen.  Dae  BvartQelium  Johannie,  Berlin.  1008;  F. 
W.  Worsley.  Edinburgh.  1009. 

Commenteries  on  the  Gospel  are:  H.  Klee,  Mains,  1820; 
F.  LQcke.  4  vols.,  Bonn.  1843;  A.  Maier,  2  vols..  Freiburg. 
1843-45;  A.  Tholuck.  Hamburg.  1857.  Eng.  transl.. 
Edinburgh,  1870;  S.  J.  Asti^.  Geneva,  1864;  E.  W. 
Hengvtenberg.  Berlin.  1867,  Eng.  trans!..  Edinburgh.  1865; 
K.  H.  Sears,  Boston,  1874;  C.  E.  Luthardt,  Nuremberg, 
1875,  Eng.  transl..  3  vols..  Edinburgh.  1876-70;  D.  B. 
von  Haneburg.  2  vols..  Mimich.  1880;  A.  Pltmimer,  in 
Cambridge  Bihle,  Cambridge.  1881;  F.  Godet.  8  vols.. 
Paria.  1881-85.  Eng.  transl..  2  vols..  New  York.  1885; 
B.  F.  Westcott.  new  ed.,  London,  1008;  P.  Schans.  TQ- 
bingen.  1885;  A.  Hovey,  Philadelphia,  1886;  R.  Govett. 
London.  1887;  O.  Holtsmann,  Darmstadt.  1887;  G.  F. 
Wahle.  Gotha.  1888;  T.  Whitelaw.  Glai«ow.  1888;  W. 
Bruce,  London.  1801;  M.  Dods,  2  vols..  London.  1800-02; 
W.  MUligan  and  W.  F.  Moulton.  Edinburgh.  1808;  J.  C. 
Geulemana,  Molines.  1001;  A.  E.  Hillard,  London.  1001; 
E.  W.  Rice,  New  York.  1002;  A.  Loisy.  Puis.  1003:  A. 
Plummer,  in  Cambridoo  Oreek  Teatament;  J.  E.  Belinr, 
Freiburg.  1005;  W.  Kelly,  London,  1006;  T.  Zahn.  Leip- 
sic.  1008. 

JOHN  OF  AVILA.    See  Avila,  Juan  de. 

JOHH  the  BAPTIST:  The  forerunner  of  Christ. 
The  date  and  place  of  his  birth  are  uncertain,  pos- 
sibly at  Hebron,  six  months  before  Christ  (cf. 
Luke  i.  36);  d.  c.  29  or  30  a.d.  He  was  the  son 
of  the  priest  Zacharias  and  of  his  wife  Elizabeth, 
of  Aaronic  descent,  bom  in  their  old  age.  His  birth 
was  announced  by  an  angel  (Luke  i. 

Life  and  13).  The  angelic  injunction  that  he 
Preaching,  should  drink  neither  wine  nor  strong 
drink  points  to  his  taking  the  vows  of 
a  Nazarite.  Luke  i.  80  does  not  definitely  indicate 
a  priestly  education,  but  his  familiarity  with  the 
prophets,  especially  with  Isaiah,  must  have  had 
some  basis  in  instruction.  His  early  retirement 
into  the  desert  of  Judah  may  be  connected  with 
the  death  of  his  aged  parents  and  also  indicates  a 
break  with  Pharisaic  conceptions.  His  appearance 
^as  that  of  an  ascetic:  his  clothing  consisted  of  a 
garment  of  camel's  hair  bound  by  a  leathern  girdle; 
his  food,  locusts  and  wild  honey  (Matt.  iii.  4;  Mark 
i.  6);  indeed,^ John  shared  with  the  Essenes  and 
related  spirits  the  ascetic  tendency  which  had  its 
basis  in  the  earnestness  of  the  time.  The  ideals  of 
the  independent  tendency  of  his  spirit  were  the 
prophets  of  Israel,  Elijah,  the  man  of  actions,  and 
Isaiah,  the  man  of  words.'  The  central  theme  of 
his  preaching  was,  in  opposition  to  the  righteous- 
ness of  works,  repentance  because  of  the  near  ap- 
proach of  the  kingdom  of  God;  but  God's  kingdom 
and  God's  judgment  were  in  the  eyes  of  this  great- 
est of  prophets,  as  well  as  in  those  of  his  pre- 
decessors, inseparably  connected.  In  the  coming 
judgmejit  God's  wrath  i^ill  reveal  itself;  whoever 
intends  to  escape  it  must  make  mighty  efforts 
(Matt.  iii.  7,  8);  the  annoimcement  of  the  kingdom 
and  of  the  judgment  involves  the  Baptist's  Messianic 
preaching.  The  Messianic  salvation  is  for  him  so 
near  that  he  considers  himself  the  herald  who  pre- 
cedes the  appearance  of  the  king.  He  was  in  reality 
the  second  Elijah,  although  in  his  humility  he  re- 


jected this  daim.  There  is  an  important  distino- 
tion  between  John's  Messianic  preaching  of  judg- 
ment (as  compared  with  the  earlier  prophets)  and 
the  expectation  of  the  people.  According  to  the 
latter,  the  judgment  spares  the  people  of  Israel; 
according  to  John,  Israel  ia  affected  first  by  it. 
Here  ia  that  break  with  narrow  nationalism  which 
was  developed  more  fully  in  Paul.  The  preaching  by 
John  of  the  kingdom,  the  judgment,  and  repentance 
created  a  sensation  in  the  land.  His  fame  extended 
far  and  wide  and  among  all  classes,  publicans  and 
soldiers,  Pharisees  and  Sadducees  (Matt.  iii.  7,  xi. 
7);  but  these  representatives  of  official  and  pious 
Judaism  he  greeted  as  a  "  generation  of  vipers  " 
(Matt.  iii.  7)  of  whom  the  first  requirement  was  re- 
newal of  the  heart.  John  represented  himself,  in 
accordance  with  Isa.  xl.  3,  as  a  "  voice  crying  in 
the  wUdemess  "  (John  i.  23). 

In  accordance  with  the  words  of  Isa.  i.  16,  "  Wash 
ye,  make  you  clean;  put  away  the  evil  of  your 
doings,"  he  introduced  baptism  as  an  action  sym- 
bolic of  his  spoken  word.  He  bap- 
His        tized  all  who  came  receptively  to  hear 

Baptism,    him  at  Bethabara,  of  the  Jordan  (Matt. 

Teaching,  iii.  6;  Mark  i.  5),  connecting  with  the 
and  Death,  rite  a  confession  of  sins,  and  the  pur- 
pose was  forgiveness  of  sins.  John 
gathered  his  disciples  from  all  sides,  and,  accord- 
ing to  Luke  xi.  1  and  Mark  ii.  18,  taught  a  definite 
form  of  prayer,  inducing  them  not  only  to  adopt 
an  ascetic  mode  of  life,  but  also  to  engage  in  regu- 
lar fasts.  It  was  at  Bethabara  that  the  meeting 
of  Jesus  with  John  and  his  baptism  took  place. 
Josephus  mentions  John  the  Baptist  in  connection 
with  the  war  between  Aretas,  king  of  Petra,  and 
Herod.  The  Jewish  people,  according  to  Josephus 
(Ant.,  XVIII.,  V.  2),  saw  in  the  defeat  of  Herod  a 
just  divine  pimishment  for  having  unjustly  killed 
John  ''  called  the  Baptist."*  Herod,  he  continues, 
killed  him  because  of  fear  that  his  powerful  influ- 
ence upon  the  people  might  lead  to  rebeUion.  John 
was  cast  into  the  prison  of  Machaerus  and  then  be- 
headed. Josephus  describes  John  as  an  excellent 
man,  who  admonished  the  Jews  to  come  to  baptism, 
practising  virtue  and  justice  toward  each  other  and 
piety  toward  God.  To  Josephus  John  was  only  a 
preacher  of  morals;  the  political  historian  could 
not  do  justice  to  John's  religious  and  Messianic 
importance.  The  accounts  of  Josephus  and  of  the 
Gospels,  Matt,  xiv.;  Mark  vi.;  Luke  ix.,  differ  in  re- 
gard to  the  motive  for  the  execution  of  John;  Jo- 
sephus considers  it  merely  political,  while  the  Gospels 
positively  connect  it  with  Herod's  marriage  with  his 
sister-in-law  contrary  to  Levitical  law  (Lev.  xviii.  16). 

The  time  of  the  death  of  John  can  not  be  defi- 
nitely decided.  Herod's  journey  to  Rome  with  the 
following  marriage  of  Herodias  must  have  taken 
place  before  the  overthrow  of  Sejanus,  31  a.d.  If 
John  appeared  publicly  in  the  fifteenth 
Chronology  year  of  Tiberius  and  labored  about  six 

and  Sig-     months,  and  if  there  followed  an  im- 

nificance    prisonment  of  several  months,  his  exe- 

of  John,  cution  may  have  occurred  in  the  fall 
of  29  or  in  30.  Jesus  praised  John  for 
his  indomitable  firmness  (Matt.  xi.  7  sqq.)  and  con- 
ceded to  him  the  highest  rank  in  the  economy  of 


John  of  Basel 
John  of  DamaaonB 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


808 


the  old  coyenant  (Biatt.  zi.  11).  But  at  the  same 
time  be  did  not  fail  to  define  his  limitations  in  that 
the  trend  of  his  teaching  was  Pharisaical,  concerned 
with  the  covenant  of  the  law  and  with  a  legal  jus- 
tice that  could  not  dispense  with  fasting  (litark  IL 
18  sqq.)  and  therefore  did  not  lead  further  than  to 
the  baptism  of  water.  Yet  a  large  number  of  pas- 
sages in  the  Gospels  make  dear  John's  importance 
in  relation  to  the  Messianic  kingdom,  the  immediate 
coming  of  which  he  was  able  to  announce. 

(A.  RXTBGO.) 
Biblioobapbt:  TIm  subject  it  discoand  with  fuhie«  in 
maoy  of  the  works  on  the  life  of  Chritt— this  litemture  is 
often  espeoially  nob— ftnd  in  the  works  on  the  Apostolic 
ace  of  Christianity.  Spednl  treatment  is  to  be  found  in: 
R.  Holmes.  On  Ihs  Proph$eie§  and  TMHmony  cf  John  ths 
BapHU,  London.  1788;  W.  C.  Duncan.  !%•  Lif;  CharaeUr, 
tmd  Ad9  t/John  iki  BapHat,  New  York.  1863;  E.  Haupt. 
JohannM  dtr  Tfhifar,  OQteraloh,  1874;  E.  Breesh,  Johanna 
civ  rOMTsr.Leipaac.  1881;  A.  M.  Rymington,  Vox etononli^* 
lAfaand  Mini$trv  (/  John  As  BapHMi,  London,  1882;  H. 
KOUer.  JohannsB  der  TOuftr,  Halle.  1884;  A.  McCuUach. 
Th$  PoerhM  Prophtt;  or,  Tho  lAfo  and  Tiwtoo  of  John  the 
Aopfisf,  New  York.  1888;  R.  C.  Houghton.  John  As  Bap- 
Hoi,  ...  hio  lAfo  and  Work,  ib.  1889;  R.  H.  Reynolds, 
John  ih§  BapUot,  London,  1890;  E.  Barde,  Joan-Bapiitto, 
Paris*  1892;  A.  C.  MoQiffert,  HioL  <tf  CkriaikMity  in  Che 
ApoiMu;  Aoo,  passhn.  New  York,  1807;  P.  A.  E.  Sillevis 
Smith,  Johamua  de  Doopor,  do  Wogberoidor  dao  Hotron,  Am- 
sterdam, 1906;  T.  Innitaer,  Johannu  dor  Tikufm',  '^enna, 
1908;  SchOier.  (TsstAtdUt.  L  486  sqq..  Eng.  transl..  I.,  U. 
28-29;  DB,'u.  Vn-^OOr,  BB,  iL  2^)8-2604;  JE,  irii.  218- 
219. 

JOHN  OF  BASEL.   See  Hii;rALiNas9.  Johann. 

JOHN    OF    CAPBTRANO.     See    Gapistbano, 
Giovanni  di. 

JOHN  OF  CHUR  (GOISB),  Buraamed  RUBT- 
BBRG.    See  Friendb  or  God.    i 

JOHN  OF  THE  CROSS.    See  CABmLiTBs,  {  3. 

JOHN  OF  DAMASCUS  (called  ChryBorrhoas, 
''streaming  with  gold/'  i.e.y  the  golden  speaker): 
The  last  of  the  Greek  Fathers  and  the  most  author- 
itative theologian  for  the  whole  Eastern  Church;  b. 
presumably  in  Damascus  and  before  700;  d.,  in 
all  probability  at  the  monastery  of  Mar  Saba  (8  m. 
s.e.  of  Jerusalem),  shortly  before  754  (cf.  acts  vi.  and 
vii.  of  the  Second  Council  of  NicsBa,  787,  in  Mimsi, 
Concilia,  xiii.  356,  400).  His  family, 
Life.  though  Christian,  held  a  high  heredi- 
tary public  office  under  the  Moslem 
rulers  of  Damascus,  apparently  that  of  head  of  the 
tax  department  for  Syria.  John's  father  filled  this 
position,  as  did  John  himself  for  a  time.  The  Arabs 
gave  to  the  family  the  surname  Mansur,  which  was 
also  borne  by  John.  Shortly  after  730  he  became 
a  monk  and  went  to  Mar  Saba,  whither  his  brother 
by  adoption,  the  poet  Cosmas,  and  his  teacher 
had  preceded  him.  The  latter  was  an  Italian  monk 
who  had  been  brought  to  Damascus  a  prisoner  of 
war  and  was  freed  by  John's  father.  To  him  John 
owed  his  introduction  into  theology  and  philosophy 
and  his  comprehensive  knowledge  of  secular  science. 
He  was  ordained  priest  by  Patriarch  John  V.  of 
Jerusalem  shortly  liter  entering  the  monastery,  but 
declined  further  advancement  in  hierarchical  rank. 
When  called  to  Jerusalem  as  priest  of  the  Church 
there  he  soon  returned  to  Mar  Saba.    There  he 


wrote  his  chief  works.  Toward  the  end  of  his  life 
he  gave  his  writings  a  careful  revision.  His  grave 
was  shown  at  Mar  Saba  in  the  twelfth  century,  but 
in  the  fourteenth  his  body  is  said  to  have  been 
transferred  to  Constantinople.  He  is  honored  as  a 
saint  by  the  Greek  Church  on  Dec.  4,  by  the  Latin 
on  May  6. 

Probably  the  earliest  of  John's  writings,  at  any 
rate  those  which  made  his  reputation,  are  the  three 
"  Apologetic  Treatises  against  those  Decrying  the 
Holy  Images  "  (Eng.  transl.  by  Mary  H.  Allies,  St. 
John  Damcucene  on  Holy  ImagtB,  FoUawed  by  Three 
Sermons  on  the  AasumpHon,  London,  1899),  called 
forth  by  the  vigorous  measures  of  the 
Writings  Emperor  Leo  III.  (see  Imaoxs  and 
in  Defense  Image-worship,  II.).  The  first  {MPG, 
of  Images,  xciv.  1232  sqq.),  written  while  John 
was  still  in  public  life  in  Damascus,  is 
complete,  learned,  and  skilful,  and  straightway  put 
a  good  literary  defense  in  the  hands  of  the  friends 
of  images.  Since  John  was  out  of  his  power,  Leo 
attempted  to  bring  him  under  suspicion  of  treason 
to  the  caliph  (cf.  "  Life,"  ut  inf.,  chaps,  xv.-xvi.). 
Addressing  himself  to  the  people  and  patriarch  of 
Constantinople,  John  professes  to  write  reluctantly, 
from  a  sense  of  duty,  wishing  only  "  to  reach  a 
helping  hand  to  truth  when  attacked."  His  man- 
ner is  definite  and  inci^ive,  yet  restrained  and  dig- 
nified, that  of  a  man  of  good  breeding,  inflexible 
energy,  and  knowledge  of  ecdesiastioil  matters. 
Images  are  justified  on  the  ground  that  God,  who 
is  "  not  to  be  attained  unto,  without  body,  invis- 
ible, not  circumscribed  in  space,  and  without  form," 
yet  has  become  visible  in  the  Logos,  which  was 
made  flesh.  Therefore  an  image  of  "  the  flesh  of 
God  which  has  been  seen  "  can  be  made,  and  in 
making  it  there  is  nothing  forbidden  or  unchristian. 
The  Mosaic  prohibition  was  directed  against  some- 
thing quite  different.  ''Worship"  {proekunieie)  is 
a  symbol  of  dependence  and  reverence;  it  has  many 
forms,  the  highest  being  hJtreUif  which  is  due  to 
God  alone;  elsewhere  for  Christians  it  is  merely  an 
expression  of  reverence  (sebeia),  and  is  properly 
accorded  to  everything  connected  with  salvation 
— the  cross,  the  Gospels,  the  altar,  etc.  *'  I  wor- 
ship not  the  material  L^v2^,"  he  declares,  "  but  I 
worship  the  fabricator  [dimiaurgon^  of  the  material, 
the  one  who  .  .  .  through  the  material  has  wrought 
my  salvation."  The  image  becomes  for  him  one  of 
the  means  of  salvation,  and  it  and  the  God-man 
approach  so  dose  together  that  there  is  little  prac- 
tical difference  between  them.  Refined  specula- 
tions, like  the  attempt  to  measure  the  extent  di 
the  consonance,  belong  to  a  later  stage  of  the  con- 
troversy. Furthermore,  John  does  not  attempt  to 
brand  the  Christology  of  the  iconodasta  as  heretical. 
Images  of  the  *'  mother  of  God  "  are  to  be  tolerated 
beside  those  of  Christ,  and  also  qH  the  saints. 
Finally,  he  dtes  passages  from  the  Fathers  with 
comments  to  show  that  the  entire  doing  away  with 
images  would  be  a  sad  departure  from  tradition. 
The  second  and  third  treatises  (ilfPG,  zdv.  1284 
sqq.)  contain  nothing  essential  which  is  not  also 
in  the  first.  The  second  is  the  most  popular  and 
vehement,  the  third  the  most  formal  and  theolog- 
ical.   The  second  presupposes  the  situation  of  730 


209 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


John  ot  Ttftiiol 
John  of  Damaaoiui 


when  Leo  had  deposed  the  Patriarch  Gennanus, 
the  third  may  have  been  written  or  revised  after 
John  became  a  monk;  it  is  to  some  extent  a  com- 
pilation of  the  other  two.  The  "  Demonstrative 
Treatise  about  the  Images  "  {MPG,  xcv.  309  sqq.), 
the  "  Letter  to  Theophilns  "  (MPG,  xcv.  345  sqq.), 
and  the  tract  in  MPG,  xcvi.  1348  sqq.,  are  not 
genuine. 

John  was  no  mystic,  and  he  hardly  touched  the 
problems  which  later  agitated  the  mystagogic  the- 
ology (see  Mtbtagooic  Theologt);  but  nearly  all 

fruitful    and    instructive    theological 

Chief       questions  were  treated  by  him,  and  his 

Dogmatic   treatment  is  definitive  for  the  East. 

Work.      In  the  West,  too,  his  influence  has  been 

considerable,  but  here  men  like  Peter 
Lombard  and  Thomas  Aquinas  surpassed  and  dis- 
placed him.  For  the  East  his  great  work,  the 
"  Fount  of  Knowledge  "  {MPG,  xciv.  621  sqq.) 
became  the  standard.  It  is  commended  by  sub- 
stantial merits  in  the  author.  He  is  pious  and 
scientific,  deferential  to  authority  but  learned  and 
acute,  able  to  accept  the  current  body  of  dogmas 
and  3ret  give  it  new  significance  and  spiritual  vi- 
tality. If  he  never  rises  above  the  level  of  a  good 
average  excellence,  he  never  faUs  below  it.  He 
had  no  ideas  of  his  own  and  so  never  disturbed  the 
peace  of  the  Church  or  fell  under  suspicion  as  an 
unsafe  leader.  For  modem  times  he  presents  a 
convenient  and  instructive  summary  of  what  the 
ancient  Greek  Church  accomplished  in  the  field  of 
dogma — a  simi  total  of  holy  concepts  enigmatical 
in  character  and  supematiu^y  perceived.  The 
work  is  dedicated  to  John's  brother  by  adoption, 
Cosmas,  at  one  time  a  monk  of  Mar  Saba,  later 
(743  ?)  bishop  of  Majumas  (the  port  of  Gaza).  John 
explains  this  plan  as  threefold.  First,  he  will  pre- 
sent *'  the  best  things  of  the  wise  among  the  Greeks  " 
and,  like  a  bee,  "  will  gather  salvation  from  the 
enemy"  (i.e.,  the  philosophers,  especially  Aris- 
totle). Then  he  will  set  forth  "  the  vaporings  of 
heresies  hated  by  God."  Thirdly,  he  will  exhibit 
the  truth  in  the  words  of  "  the  €rod-inspired  proph- 
ets and  the  God-taught  fishermen  and  the  €rod-fiUed 
[theopharos]  shepherds  and  teachers  ";  that  is,  by 
quotations  from  the  Bible  and  the  Fathers,  the 
latter  receiving  much  the  greater  consideration. 
The  "Philosophical  Chapters"  (part  L;  68  chapters 
in  Le  Quien  and  Migne;  a  shorter  edition  in  15 
may  be  earlier)  comprise  a  comprehensive  treatise 
on  dialectics  and  are  cited  under  this  title.  In  the 
second  part  John  follows  Epiphanius  for  the  older 
time  (the  first  80  heresies),  then  Theodoret  and 
others,  and  finally  makes  some  independent  re- 
marks, especially  concerning  Mohammedanism. 
Some  codices  give  100  heresies,  others  a  few  more. 
The  third  part  {*'  Exposition  of  the  Orthodox 
Faith  ";  Ei^.  transl.  in  NPNF,  2d  ser.,  ix.)  was 
divided  by  John  himself  into  100  chapters.  Later 
and  in  the  West  it  was  made  up  in  four  books,  of 
which  the  first  treats  of  the  God-head  (the  Trinity), 
the  second  of  the  created  imiverse  (heaven  and 
earth,  angels,  devils,  mankind,  freedom  of  the  will, 
providence),  the  third  chiefly  of  the  person  of  CJhrist, 
then  the  mysteries,  images,  church  festivals  and 
customs,  and  the  like,  finally  of  Antichrist  and  the 
VI.-14 


resurrection.  Manuscripts  often  contain  only  parts 
i.  and  iii.,  part  ii.  being  less  important  and  copied 
separately. 

John  writes  clearly  and  concisely,  speaking  for 
the  most  part  in  the  wonls  of  his  sources,  but  sel- 
dom names  his  authorities,  the  chief 
His  of  whom  are  Gregory  Nazianzen,  Basil, 
Teaching.  Dionysius  the  Areopagite,  and  Leon- 
tius.  As  philosopher  he  is  an  Aris- 
totelian of  the  fifth  and  sixth  centuries,  that  is,  with 
a  strong  infusion  of  Neoplatonism.  Philosophy 
furnishes  the  first  principles,  but  it  is  unable  to  ap- 
prehend and  develop  them  aright  especially  as  con- 
cerns the  true  knowledge  of  God,  being  but  the 
handmaiden  of  faith,  which  is  the  queen.  In  final 
analysis,  philosophy  for  John  is  merely  the  teacher 
of  the  right  terminology,  theology  is  nothing  more 
than  a  working  over  of  the  opinions  of  "  the  holy 
fathers,"  who  have  first  been  able  to  understand 
the  terms  correctly.  It  is  the  juristic  method  ap- 
plied to  dogmatics — in  fact,  scholasticism  in  gen- 
eral is  the  incursion  of  jurisprudence  into  the  field 
of  theology.  John's  conception  of  God  stops  short 
of  making  him  a  person.  It  is  true  he  ascribes 
personal  attributes  to  the  supreme  being  and  here- 
in influenced  appreciably  the  Eastern  Church;  but, 
notwithstanding,  he  attained  to  no  other  idea  of 
fellowship  and  communion  with  God  than  a  phys- 
ical blending  through  the&ria,  "  vision."  Herein 
is  the  religiously  significant  motive  of  the  image 
question.  More  extended  analysis  of  John's  idea 
of  God  will  be  found  in  F.  Kattenbusch,  Vergleich' 
ends  Kofrfetsionakunde,  i.  310  sqq.,  Freibui^,  1892. 
For  his  doctrine  of  the  Trmity  and  Christology  the 
histories  of  dogma  mentioned  in  the  bibliography 
must  be  consulted;  that  by  Bach  (i.  49  sqq.)  is 
particularly  instructive.  John  does  not  aUc^orise 
the  Scriptures,  and  he  propoimds  no  doctrine  of  the 
C!hurch  or  the  hierarchy.  He  refrains  from  discus- 
sion of  the  creed  and  characterizes  the  formula  of 
faith  ("  Orthodox  Faith,"  iv.  11)  as  a  simple  and 
inartistic  composition,  eliowing  that  he  had  the 
creed  before  him.  His  section  on  the  creation  ("  Or- 
thodox Faith,"  ii.)  is  a  whole  treatise  on  astronomy 
and  geography  with  the  science  of  water,  air,  and 
fire.  His  doctrine  of  the  Eucharist  deserves  men- 
tion because  it  is  one  of  the  few  vital  questions  on 
which  he  did  not  speak  the  final  word  for  his 
(Church,  although  he  gave  the  direction  to  later 
thought  (cf.  Steitz,  Die  Ahendmahleliehre  der  griechr 
ischen  Kirche  in  JahrbUcher  fUr  deutaehe  Theologie, 
xii.  275  sqq.,  Gotha,  1867;  Kattenbusch,  Kotrf^ea- 
aionskunde,  ut  sup.,  i.  415  sqq.).  The  chief  points 
are  three:  (1)  that  there  is  a  real  change  (metaboU) 
and  remaking  (metapaUeis) ;  (2)  that  the  eucharis- 
tic  body  which  results  from  the  change  is  that  bom 
of  the  Virgin  Mary;  (3)  that  the  change  is  analogous 
to  that  by  which  food  is  assimilated  and  changed 
into  our  fiesh.  He  disclaims  the  doctrine  that 
Christ's  body  comes  again  to  earth  in  any  manner 
in  the  eucharistic  form,  and  teaches  not  transub- 
stantiation,  but  "  transformation  "  through  "  as- 
sumption." The  "Fount  of  Knowledge."  was 
brought  to  the  West  in  the  twelfth  century  and 
was  translated  into  Latin  by  Burgundio  of  Pisa  in 
the  time  of  Pope  Eugenius  III.  (1144-53).    Neither 


John  of  DanUMOUB 
John  Frederick 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOO 


210 


Buigundio's  translation  nor  another  by  Panetius, 
a  Carmelite,  has  been  printed. 

A  counterpart  to  the  "  Fount  of  Knowledge  "  is 
furnished  in  the  "  Sacred  Parallels  "  (MPG,  xcv. 
1040-xcvi.  544),  ascribed  to  John  of  Damascus,  but 
not  universally  accepted  as  his  work.  As  printed 
in  Le  Quien  and  Migne  it  has  two  prefaces,  of  which 

the   second   outlines   a   collection   of 

The        ethical  and  hortatory  maxims  from  the 

*'  Sacred     Bible  and  the  Fathers  arranged  alpha- 

Paxallels."  betically  imder  titles.    There  are  to 

be  three  books  treating  respectively 
of  God,  himian  things,  and  virtue  and  vice.  The 
title  is  given  simply  as  "  the  Holy  Things  "  (to 
hiera)j  and,  indeed,  it  is  hard  to  see  how  the  matter 
of  books  i.  and  ii.  could  be  arranged  in  parallels. 
The  first  preface,  however,  which  is  much  shorter, 
gives  a  description  for  the  entire  work  applicable 
only  to  the  third  book  of  the  second  preface,  and 
promises  to  set  ''  the  virtues  and  the  correspond- 
ing vices  "  as  **  parallels."  Quotations  from  Philo 
and  Josephus  are  to  be  added  to  those  from  the 
Fathers.  The  work  which  follows  in  Le  Quien  and 
Migne  is  not  in  three  parts,  but  is  a  single  book, 
although  it  contains  material  which  fits  the  plan 
of  the  second  preface  and  ia  alphabetically  arranged. 
It  is  very  evidently  a  revision  of  another  and  more 
extensive  writing,  made,  presumably,  by  combi- 
ning and  compressing  the  three  books  into  one  and 
arranging  the  matter  alphabetically.  The  manu- 
scripts differ  widely.  Loofs  showed  that  the  two 
manuscripts  known  to  Le  Quien  are  both  based 
upon  an  original  work  in  three  parts,  two  of  which 
are  preserved  independently  and  separately  and 
the  third  in  a  revision  by  the  so-called  Antonius 
Melissa  (more  correctly  in  the  Mdiata  of  the  monk 
Antonius)  of  the  eleventh  century.  The  conclu- 
sions of  Holl  are  to  be  accepted  in  the  main  as  cor- 
rect. He  says:  "  The  Hiera  comprised  originally 
three  books.  ...  In  each  the  matter  was  arranged 
in  a  bng  Ust  of  chapters  (ftUot),  some  more  com- 
prehensive, some  more  concise.  .  .  .  The  chapters 
of  the  first  and  second  books  were  arranged  alpha- 
betically according  to  the  catch-words;  in  the  third 
book  the  author  abandoned  this  arrangement  and, 
following  a  favorite  method,  chose  to  set  a  virtue 
and  a  vice  one  against  the  other,  whence  he  named 
this  book  '  the  Parallels.'  ...  In  richness  and 
copiousness  the  work  surpassed  all  similar  collec- 
tions; the  citations  reached  to  the  thousands  and 
included  parts  of  sermons  of  Basil  and  Chrysostom. 
To  this  great  extent  of  the  work  is  it  due  that  it 
has  not  been  preserved  entire.  .  .  .  Neither  of  the 
two  extant  codices  of  books  i.  and  ii.  is  a  faithful 
copy,  but  each  Lb  an  abridgment  of  the  correspond- 
ing book  of  the  original  work."  Concerning  the 
author,  HoU  pronounces  decidedly  for  John  of 
Damascus,  arguing  from  the  very  good  tradition 
which  ascribes  the  work  to  him  and  a  comparison 
of  the  "Sacred  Parallels"  with  the  "Fount  of 
Knowledge."  Loofs,  relying  on  a  scholium  to  the 
manuscript  of  the  second  part,  suggested  Leontius 
of  Byzantium  (d.  543).  Holl  finds  that  John  was 
largely  dependent  on  Maximus  C!onfessor,  from 
whom  he  borrowed  the  idea  of  an  edifying  book 
made  up  of  sentences  from  the  Bible  and  the  Fa- 


thers, even  incorporating  a  work  of  Maximus  in 
his  own.  However,  in  the  number  of  themes  treated 
and  authorities  cited,  as  well  as  in  the  length  of  the 
passages  quoted,  he  greatly  surpassed  Maximus; 
and  he  attempted  to  give  an  orderly  arrangement 
to  his  work  as  Maximus  did  not.  "  It  is  surprising," 
Holl  continues  (p.  392),  "  what  antitheses  are  set 
side  by  side — ^motives  of  the  most  paltry  worldly 
wisdom  by  the  side  of  ideas  of  the  highest  moral 
import;  and  there  is  as  great  lack  of  connection 
between  the  individual  ethical  problems  as  of  effort 
to  solve  them  by  any  principle."  The  explana- 
tion is  not  far  to  seek.  "  There  is  no  close  connec- 
tion between  dogma  and  moral  duty.  Only  two 
dogmas  enter  at  all — ^the  doctrines  of  the  Trinity 
and  of  the  last  judgment  form  the  framework  in 
which  the  whole  is  enclosed."  The  "Parallels" 
are  a  true  picture  of  the  type  of  moral  thought 
which  remains  peculiarly  that  of  the  Greek  Church. 
John  is  not  only  the  most  renowned  theologian 
of  the  Eastern  Church,  but,  with  his  brother  Cos- 
mas,  he  is  also  its  most  esteemed  hynm-writer.  He 
was  formerly  thought  to  be  the  originator  of  the 
oktoichoa  (the  hymn-book  for  the  daily 
Hymns  service),  but  more  probably  he  only 
and  Minor  revised  and  improved  it.  Like  East- 
Writings,  em  hymn-writers  in  general  he  com- 
posed both  words  and  music.  His 
"  canons "  (compositions  of  highly  complicated 
structure  consisting  of  eight  or  nine  hjnnns,  each  of 
three  or  four  strophes  and  each  having  its  own  form 
and  melody)  reached  the  highest  point  of  art  and 
skill.  Those  in  iambic  meter  for  Christmas,  Epiph- 
any, and  Pentecost  are  peculiar  in  that  they  are 
both  quantitative  and  rhythmical;  they  are  also 
very  difficult  acrostics  and  two  have  each  130  lines 
and  the  same  number  of  letters  in  the  distichs. 
Of  minor  writings  ascribed  to  John,  the  early  "  Tract 
on  Right  Thuiking"  (MPO,  xciv.  1421  sqq.)  is 
genuine.  It  is  a  reverent  and  submissive  apology 
for  everjrbody  under  the  metropolitan  of  Damas- 
cus, treating  first  of  the  creed,  then  naming  all 
heresies  which  were  to  be  rejected.  A  dislike,  even 
contempt,  for  Origen,  is  evident  (vi.).  Theolog- 
ically the  tract  has  little  significance.  But  it  sho?ra 
the  regard  felt  for  John  in  Damascus.  Perhaps 
the  same  may  be  said  of  the  "  book  "  which  im- 
mediately follows  in  Migne  (xciv.  1436  sqq.),  said 
to  have  been  written  at  the  request  of  Peter,  met- 
ropolitan of  Damascus,  for  an  exposition  of  the 
faith.  Other  tracts  are  interesting  because  of  their 
form  (some  of  them  diak)gues)  or  because  they  are 
designated  as  "  dictated  "  by  John  and  so  present 
him  answering  questions  propounded  by  disciples 
(e.g.,  the  "  Dialogue  against  Mimicheans,"  MPG, 
xciv.  1505  sqq.;  the  "  Conversation  between  a 
Saracen  and  a  Christian,"  MPG,  xciv.  1585  sqq.; 
the  "  Introduction  to  Elementary  Dogmatics," 
MPGf  xcv.  99).  For  other  dogmatic  tracts,  con- 
sult Langen,  161  sqq.,  173  sqq.  The  contents  of 
John's  ascetic  writings  are  important  for  the  Greek 
Church.  Langen  gives  simmiaries  of  them,  as  of  all 
of  John's  writings  (for  "  On  the  Fasts,"  MPG,  xcv. 
64  sqq.,  cf.  Langen,  166  sqq.;  for  "  On  the  Eight 
Spirits  of  Vice,"  MPG,  xcv.,  80  sqq.,  cf.  Langen, 
169  sqq..  and  O.  ZOckler,  Das  LehrMck  von  den 


211 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDU 


John  of  Dttmasomfl 
John  Frodoriok 


Sieben  HaupMlnden,  pp.  63  sqq.,  Munich,  1893). 
The  "  On  Dragons  "  and  "  On  Witches  "  {MPQ, 
xciv.  1600  sqq.)  are  only  fragments  of  a  larger  work. 
The  two  short  expositions  of  the  Eucharist  (MPG, 
xcv.  401  sqq.)  and  the  tract  "  On  the  Unleavened 
Bread  "  {MPO,  xcv.  388  sqq.)  are  of  doubtful  au- 
thenticity. The  great  commentary  (on  all  the 
Pauline  epistles  and  the  Hebrews)  ascribed  to  John 
iMPGf  xcv.  441  sqq.)  needs  further  investigation. 
For  the  many  homilies  which  go  under  his  name 
{MPG,  xcvi.  545-814;  Eng.  transl.  of  three  on  the 
Assumption  in  Allies,  St.  John  Damascene^  ut  sup.), 
consult  Langen,  213  sqq.  For  the  **  Barlaam  and 
Joeaphat/'  see  the  article  under  that  title.  The 
"  Letter  on  Confession  and  on  Binding  and  Loos- 
ing "  (MPG,  xcv.  284  sqq.)  belongs  to  Symeon  the 
New  Theologian  (cf.  K.  Holl,  EtUhtuiasmua  und 
BuMtgewali  im  griechischen  MdnchJtum,  Leipsic,  1898) . 

(F.  Kattenbubch.) 
Bebuoorapht:  Tbe  indispensable  edition  of  the  works  of 
John  is  by  M.  Le  Quien.  2  vols..  Paris.  1712,  Venice.  1748. 
practioally  reproduoed  in  AfPG,  xdv.-xevi.  The  prole- 
somena  to  Le  Quien  are  excellent.  There  is  an  Eng.  transl. 
of  tbe  D«  fide  orthodoxa  in  NPNF,  2  ser.,  vol.  ix.  His  work 
on  **  Holy  Images  *'  and  three  "  Sermons  on  the  Assump- 
tion "  are  translated  by  Mary  H.  Allies,  in  St.  John  Danuu- 
eene.  ut  sup.  The  early  life,  by  "  John.  Patriarch  of  Jeru- 
salem ''  (possibly  the  one  who  died  c.  970,  cf.  Le  Quien, 
OriciM  CArts<tanus,  iii.  466  sqq..  Paris.  1740)  and  based 
upon  an  older  lost  Arabic  work,  is  in  MPO^  xciv.  429-489. 
It  is  hagiographic  in  style  and  selection  of  facts.  The  best 
modem  treatise  is  J.  Langen.  Johannea  von  DamaakuB, 
Gotha.  1879,  in  which  summaries  of  the  writings  of  John  are 
given.  Other  monographs  are:  F.  A.  Perrier,  Strasburg. 
1861;  J.  D.  Grundlehner,  Utrecht.  1877;  J.  H.  Lupton, 
London,  1883.  On  the  theology  of  John  consult  the  works 
on  the  history  of  doctrine  iDoomengetdiichU)  of  F.  A.  B. 
Nitssch,  Berlin.  1870;  J.  Bach,  Vienna,  1873;  G.  Thoma- 
sius.  ed.  Bonwetsch.  Leipsic.  1886;  F.  Loofs.  Halle.  1893; 
R.  Seeberg,  vol.  i.,  Erlangen.  1895;  A.  Domer,  Berlin. 
1899,  and  Hamack.  Dogma,  vols,  iii.-vii.,  passim.  Further 
references  are  F.  N^ve.  in  Revue  beige  et  Hrangire,  xii 
(1861).  i  sqq..  117  sqq.;  DCB,  iii.  409-423  (an  elaborate 
discussion);  KrumbadiiBr,  OeachidUe,  pp.  68  sqq.,  674  sqq.; 
O.  Bardenhewer.  PaJbrologie,  Freiburg,  1894;  and  especially 
F.  Kattenbusch.  Vergleuhende  Konfeemonekunde,  vol.  i.. 
Freiburg.  1892.  On  the  "  Sacred  Parallels "  consult 
Krumbacher,  ut  sup.,  pp.  216  sqq.,  600  sqq.;  F.  Loofs, 
Studien  Ober  die  dem  Johannee  von  Damaekue  eui/eedirieb- 
enenParattelen,  Halle.  1892;  K.  HoU,  in  TU,  xvi.  1  (1897), 
XX.  2  (1899).  On  John  as  a  hymnologist  and  for  speci- 
mens of  his  hymns  consult:  MPO,  xcvi.  817-866.  1364- 
1408  (the  canons  at  1372-1408  are  for  the  most  part 
erroneously  ascribed  to  John);  Anthologia  Oraeea^  ed.  W. 
Ohrist  and  M.  Paranikas.  pp.  xliv.-xlv.,  117  sqq.,  206 
sqq.,  Leipaic,  1871;  Kattenbusch,  ut  sup.,  i.  484  sqq.; 
Krumbacher,  ut  sup.,  pp.  674 'sqq.,  690  sqq.;  J.  Jakobi, 
in  ZKO,  V  (1882).  177  sqq.;  A.  Nauek,  MHangee  grteo- 
romain,  vi.  2  (1894);  Julian.  Hymndogy,  pp.  603-604;  Eng. 
transl.  of  nineteen  pieces  in  B.  Pick,  Hymne  and  Poetry  cf 
the  Baetem  Church,  pp.  Ill  sqq.,  New  York.  1908.  Con- 
sult also  W.  F.  Adeney.  The  Oreek  and  Baelem  Churchee, 
pp.  211.  284.  New  York.  1908. 

JOHH  OF  DARA:  Jacobite  bishop  of  Dara,  in 
Mesopotamia,  in  the  first  half  of  the  ninth  century. 
He  was  a  contemporary  of  Dionysius  of  Tehnera 
(d.  845),  who  dedicated  to  him  his  great  chronicle. 
Four  of  his  works  are  known:  (1)  "  On  the  Resur- 
rection of  the  Bodies/'  in  four  books:  (2)  "  On  the 
Heavenly  and  Ecclesiastical  Hierarchy,"  two  books, 
based  on  the  pseudo-Dionysius  Areopagita  (cf. 
Frothlngham,  Stephen  bar  Sudaili,  Leyden,  1886, 
p.  66);  (3)  **  On  the  Priesthood,"  four  books  (frag- 
ments in  Overbeck,  Opera  Ephraemi  <Si/ri,  Oxford, 
1865,  pp.  409-413,  and  Monumenta  Syriaca,  i.,  Inns- 


bruck, 1869,  pp.  105-110;  cf.  notice  by  Zingerle  in 
TQ,  1867-68);  (4)  a  book  on  the  soul  (extracts  in 
Codex  VoHcanue  Syriacut  147).  There  is  also  an 
anaphora.  £.  Nbbtlb. 

Bibuooraprt:  J.   S.    Assenmni.    BMiotheea  crieniaUe,   ii. 

118.  219,  347.  Rome.  1719-28;   Q.  Bickell.  Conepectue  rei 

Syrorum  literariae,  p.  42.  MOnster.   1871;    W.  Wright. 

Short  Hiet.  cf  Syriae  lAlerature,  London.  1894;   R.  Duval. 

LiUirature  syriaque,  Paris,  1899;   DCB,  iii.  309. 

JOHN  OF  EPHESUS  JOHN  OF  ASIA):  Mono- 
physite  church  historian  of  the  sixth  century;  b. 
at  Amida  in  Mesopotamia  early  in  the  sixth  cen- 
tury; place  and  date  of  death  unknown.  He  be- 
came deacon  in  Amida  in  529,  was  in  Palestine  at 
the  outbreak  of  the  pla^e  in  534,  and  from  535 
was  in  Constantinople,  where  the  Monophysites 
had  a  monastery  near  the  Golden  Horn.  For  thirty 
years  he  was  a  favorite  of  the  Emperor  Justinian, 
who  from  546  employed  him  to  combat  heathenism 
in  Asia  Minor  and  the  capital.  He  styles  himself 
''  the  teacher  "  or  **  overseer  of  the  heathen  "  and 
"  the  destroyer  of  idols."  He  is  said  to  have  con- 
verted 70,000  and  to  have  built  ninety-six  churches. 
He  was  interested  in  the  missions  to  the  Nubians 
and  Alodes  and  recommended  not  to  trouble  them 
with  the  Christological  controversies.  After  the 
death  of  Justinian,  John  suffered  in  the  persecution 
of  the  Monophysites  and  excused  the  confused  state 
of  his  church  history  by  the  incidents  of  bis  life, 
which  forced  him  to  write  it  in  single  leaves  and  to 
keep  it  concealed  for  several  years.  The  first  two 
parts,  each  in  six  books,  extend  from  Geesar  to  the 
sixth  year  of  Justin  (571);  part  i.  is  entirely  lost; 
a  good  portion  of  part  ii.  is  preserved  in  the  so- 
called  "  Chronicle  "  of  Dionysius  of  Tehnera.  The 
third  part,  containing  biographies  of  men  personally 
known  to  the  writer— Jacobus  Baradsus,  Severus, 
Theodosius,  Anthimus,  and  others — collected  about 
569, 18  a  source  of  first-rate  importance  for  the  time. 

£.  Nestlb. 
Bxblioobapht:  The  third  part  of  the  "  Ecclesiastical  His- 
tory "  was  edited  by  W.  Cureton,  Oxford,  1863.  Eng.  transL 
by  P.  Smith,  ib.  1860;  the  rest  of  his  writings  were  edited 
by  J.  P.  N.  Land,  in  Anecdota  Syriaea,  vol.  ii.,  4  vols., 
Leyden,  1862-76,  and  translated  into  Latin  by  W.  J.  van 
Dowen  and  J.  P.  N.  Land,  Amsterdam.  1880.  An  analysis 
of  the  second  part  of  the  "  History  "  by  F.  Nau  is  in  Revue 
de  Vorient  ehrUien,  U  (1897).  4  sqq.  Consult:  J.  S.  Asse- 
mani,  BibUolheea  orienialie,  i.  350,  ti.  48,  84.  Rome.  1710- 
1728;  Gregory  bar  Hebraeus,  Chronicon  eeeleeiaeHeum, 
i.  106;  J.  P.  N.  Land,  Johannee  von  Bpheeue,  Leyden,  1866; 
idem,  .in  Veretagen  en  Mededeelingen  der  Koninkhjke 
Akademie,  LeUerkunde,  vol.  iii.,  part  v.,  Amsterdam,  1888; 
W.  Wright,  Short  Hiet.  of  Syriae  Literature,  London,  1804; 
R.  Duval,  LittS^Uure  eyriaque,  Pteis,  1800;  DCB,  iiL 
370-373. 

JOHN  FREDERICK,  THE  MAOHANIMOnS:  Son 

of  John  the  Steadfast  and  elector  of  Saxony,  1532- 
1547;  b.  at  Torgau  June  30,  1503;  d.  at  Weimar 
Mar.  3, 1554.  He  received  his  education  from  Spala- 
tin,  whom  he  highly  esteemed  during  his  whole  life. 
His  knowledge  of  history  was  comprehensive,  and 
his  library,  which  extended  over  iJl  sciences,  was 
one  of  the  largest  in  Germany.  He  came  early  into 
personal  relations  with  Luther,  beginning  to  cor- 
respond with  him  in  the  days  when  the  bull  of  ex- 
communication was  hurled  against  the  Reformer, 
and  showing  himself  even  then  a  convinced  adher- 
ent of  the  Gospel.    With  vivid  interest  he  observed 


John  Frodttriok 
John  of  H^pomnk 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


212 


the  deyelopment  of  the  reformatory  movement. 
He  eagerly  read  Luther's  writings,  urged  the  print- 
ing of  the  first  complete  (Wittenbeig)  edition  of  his 
works,  and  in  the  latter  years  of  his  life  promoted 
the  compilation  of  the  Jena  edition.  His  father 
introduced  him  into  the  political  and  diplomatic 
affairs  of  the  time,  and  he  conducted  the  first  nego- 
tiations of  a  treaty  with  Hesse  in  Kreusbui^  and 
Friedewald.  He  took  an  active  part  in  the  dis- 
turbances caused  by  the  Pack  affair  (see  John  the 
Stbaofabt),  and  Luther  was  grateful  to  him  for  his 
exertions,  in  spite  of  his  youth,  for  the  mainte- 
nance of  peace.  During  the  second  diet  of  Speyer 
(1529)  he  temporarily  assumed  the  reins  of  govern- 
ment in  place  of  his  father.  The  intrigues  of  Arch- 
duke Ferdinand  induced  him  after  the  diet  to  draw 
up  a  federal  statute  for  the  Evangelical  estates,  which 
shows  that  he  was  more  decidedly  convinced  of  the 
right  and  duty  of  defense  than  his  father.  He  accom- 
panied the  latter  to  the  diet  of  Augsburg  in  1530, 
signed  with  him  the  Augsbuig  Confession  and  was  ac- 
tive in  the  proceedings.  His  attitude  did  not  remain 
unnoticed,  and  won  him  the  emperor's  dislike. 

At  the  age  of  twenty-one  John  Frederick  suc- 
ceeded his  father.  In  the  beginning  he  reigned 
with  his  stepbrother,  John  Ernest,  but  in  1542 
became  sole  ruler.  Chancellor  BrQck,  who  for 
years  had  guided  the  foreign  relations  of  the  coun- 
try with  ability  and  prudence,  remained  also  his 
councilor,  but  his  open  and  impulsive  nature  often 
led  him  to  disregard  the  propositions  of  his  more 
experienced  adviser,  so  that  the  country  was  in 
frequent  danger,  especially  as  John  Frederick  was 
not  a  far-sighted  politician.  He  consolidated  the 
State  Church  by  the  institution  of  an  electoral  con- 
sistory (1542)  and  renewed  the  chiurch  visitation. 
He  took  a  firmer  and  more  decided  stand  than  his 
father  in  favor  of  the  Evangelical  league,  but  on  ao- 
count  of  his  strictly  Lutheran  convictions  was  in- 
volved in  difficulties  with  the  Landgrave  of  Hesse, 
who  favored  a  union  with  the  Swiss  and  Strasburg 
Evangelicals.  He  was  averse  to  all  propositions  of 
Popes  Clement  VII.  and  Paul  III.  to  win  him  for  a 
council,  because  he  was  convinced  that  it  would 
only  serve  **  for  the  preservation  of  the  papal  and 
anti-Christian  rule  ";  but  to  be  prepared  for  any 
event,  he  requested  Luther  to  summarise  all  arti- 
cles to  which  he  would  adhere  before  a  council,  and 
Luther  wrote  the  Schmalkald  articles.  At  the  diet 
of  Schmalkald  in  1537  the  coui^il  was  refused,  and 
the  elector  treated  the  papal  legate  with  open  dis- 
regard and  rejected  the  propositions  of  Dr.  Held, 
the  imperial  legate. 

He  followed  the  efforts  at  agreement  at  Regens- 
buig  in  1541  with  suspicion  and  refused  to  accept 
the  article  on  justification  which  had  been  drawn 
up  under  the  supervision  of  Contarini  to  suit  both 
parties,  and  Luther,  his  steady  adviser,  confirmed 
him  in  his  aversion.  The  efforts  at  agreement 
failed,  and  the  elector  contributed  not  a  little  to 
broaden  the  gulf  by  his  interference  in  the  ecclesi- 
astical affairs  of  HaUe  and  by  aiding  the  Reformation 
which  had  been  introduced  there  by  Justus  Jonas. 
His  attitude  became  more  and  more  stubborn  and 
regardless  of  consequences,  not  to  the  advantage 
of  the  Protestant  cause.    In  spite  of  the  warnings 


of  the  emperor,  of  BrQck,  and  of  Luther,  he  arbi- 
trarily set  aside  in  1541  the  election  of  Julius  von 
Pflug  to  the  episcopal  see  of  Naumbuig,  instituted 
Nicolaus  von  Amsdorf  as  bishop,  and  introduced 
the  Reformation.  In  1542  he  expelled  Duke  Henry 
of  Brunswick-WolfenbQttel  from  his  country  to 
protect  the  Evangelical  cities  Goslar  and  Bruns- 
wick and  introduced  the  Reformation  there.  New 
war-like  entanglements  hindered  Charles  V.  from 
interfering  and  by  apparently  yielding  he  succeeded 
in  conceadUng  his  true  intentions.  "Die  elector  ap- 
peared personally  at  the  diet  of  Speyer  in  1544. 
The  harmony  of  the  emperor  with  tl^  Evangelicals 
appeared  never  greater  than  at  that  time.  He 
permitted  the  R^ensbuig  declaration  of  1541  to 
be  embodied  in  the  new  recess  and  acknowledged 
all  innovations  which  the  Evangelicals  had  made 
between  1532  and  1541  because  he  needed  the  aid 
of  the  Protestants  against  France  (see  Spbteb, 
Distbof).  John  Frederick  actually  thought  that 
peace  had  come  and  continued  the  ecclesiastical  re- 
forms in  his  country.  Even  the  growing  discord 
among  the  allies  did  not  disturb  him. 

When  the  Schmalkakl  War  broke  out  (1546)  he 
marched  to  the  south  at  the  head  of  his  troops,  but 
the  unexpected  invasion  of  his  country  by  Duke 
Maurice  compelled  him  to  return.  He  succeeded 
in  reconquering  the  larger  part  of  his  possessions 
and  repelling  Maurice,  but  suddenly  the  emperor 
hastened  north  and  surprised  the  elector.  The 
battle  of  Mahlbeig,  Apr.  24,  1547,  went  against 
him  and  dispersed  his  army;  being  woimded,  he 
fell  into  the  hands  of  the  conqueror.  The  emperor 
condemned  him  to  death  as  a  convicted  rebel;  but, 
not  to  lose  time  in  the  siege  of  Wittenbei^g,  which 
was  defended  by  Sibylla,  the  wife  of  the  elector, 
he  did  not  execute  the  sentence  and  entered  into 
negotiations.  To  save  his  life,  John  Frederick  con- 
ceded the  capitulation  of  Wittenbeig,  and,  after 
having  been  compelled  to  resign  the  government 
of  his  country  in  favor  of  Maurice,  his  condemnation 
was  changed  into  imprisonment  for  life.  He  was 
never  greater  and  more  magnanimous  than  in  the 
days  of  his  captivity,  as  is  evident  from  the  cor- 
respondence with  his  chikiren,  his  wife,  and  his 
councilors.  Friends  and  foes  were  compelled  to 
acknowledge  his  calm  behavior,  his  unwavering 
faith,  and  his  greatness  under  misfortime.  He 
steadfastly  refused  to  renounce  the  Protestant  faith 
or  to  acknowledge  the  Interim,  declaring  that  by 
its  acceptance  he  would  commit  a  sin  against  the 
Holy  Ghost,  because  in  many  articles  it  was  against 
the  Word  of  God.  The  sudden  attack  upon  the 
emperor  by  Elector  Maurice  made  an  end  of  his 
imprisonment,  and  he  was  released  on  Sept.  1, 1552. 
He  firmly  refused  to  bind  himself  to  comply  in  mat- 
ters of  religion  with  the  decisions  of  a  future  coun- 
cil or  diet,  declaring  that  he  was  resolved  to  adhere 
until  his  grave  to  the  doctrine  contained  in  the 
Augsbuig  Confession.  His  homeward  journey  was 
a  triumphal  march.  He  removed  the  seat  of  gov- 
ernment to  Weimar  and  reformed  the  conditions  of 
his  country,  but  died  within  two  years.  A  special 
object  of  his  care  was  the  University  of  Jena,  which 
he  planned  while  a  prisoner  in  place  of  Wittenberg, 
which  he  had  lost  (1547).  (T.  Kolde.) 


213 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDU 


John  Frederick 
John  of  Nepomok 


Bxaljooraphy:  A.  Beck,  Johann  Friedrid^  der  MitUere, 
2  voU.,  Weimar.  1868;  F.  von  Beiold,  Getekidtie  der 
deutBcktn  Reformation,  Berlin.  1886;  and  literature  under 

LtTTBU;    RKfORlfATION. 

JOHHOFGOD.   See  Chabitt,  Bbothsbs  OF. 

JOHN  OF  GORZE:  A  monastic  refonner  of  the 
tenth  century;  b.  at  Vendidre  (near  Pont-&-Mou»- 
son,  18  m.  8.8.W.  of  Mets);  d.  at  Gorze  (9  m.  w.8.w. 
of  Metz)  Mar.  7,  974.  His  tastes  early  led  him  in 
the  direction  of  theological  study  and  asceticism, 
but  when  he  wished  to  retire  from  the  world  he 
could  find  no  monastery  near  him  in  which  strict 
discipline  was  maintained.  After  a  visit  to  Rome 
and  Monte  Cassino,  he  drew  still  closer  the  relations 
which  had  bound  him  to  several  men  of  like  aims, 
especially  Einald,  formerly  archdeacon  of  Toul; 
and  in  933  they  were  chai^ged  by  Bishop  Adelbero 
of  Metz  with  the  restoration  of  the  decayed  monas- 
tery of  Gone,  of  which  Einald  became  abbot,  with 
John  as  his  principal  assistant.  The  number  of 
monks  soon  became  considerable,  and  the  influence 
of  the  movement  wide-spread.  Gorse  became  a 
model  for  the  reform  of  all  the  monasteries  of  the 
diocese,  and  in  950  Pope  Agapetus  11.  sent  thither 
for  monks  to  restore  discipline  in  the  monastery  of 
St.  Paul  in  Rome.  After  many  years  of  sealous 
activity  at  Gorze,  John  was  sent  to  Cordova  by 
Otho  III.  on  a  mission  to  the  Oalif  Abdalrahman 
III.,  and  spent  several  years  in  Spain.  Returning 
to  Gorze,  he  was  elected  abbot  on  Einald's  death  in 
960.  The  life  of  Gorze  by  his  friend  John,  abbot'of 
St.  Amulph  at  Metz  (MQH,  Script,,  iv  (1841),  335- 
377)  takes  a  high  rank  among  historical  documents 
of  the  tenth  century. 
Bxbuoorapht:  The  Vita  by  John,  ut  sup.,  with  oommen- 

tary.  1b  also  in  A8B,  Feb.,  iii  686-716.     Consult:    W. 

Giewbracht,  OemJiicKte  der  deuiathen  KaiaeneU,  i.  74fi. 

785.  Brunswick.  1856;  Wattenbaofa.  DQQ,  i  (1885),  344. 

i  (1893).  370. 

JOHll,  GRIFFITH:  Welsh  Congregational  mis- 
sionary; b.  at  Swansea,  Wales,  Dec.  14,  1831.  At 
the  age  of  fourteen  he  began  to  preach  in  Welsh, 
and  from  1850  to  1854  studied  at  Brecon  College, 
after  which  he  spent  a  few  months  at  the  Mission- 
ary College  at  Bedford,  England.  In  1855  he  was  as- 
signed by  the  London  Missionary  Society  to  China. 
I'ntil  1861  he  lived  in  or  near  Shanghai.  Then  he 
removed  to  Hankow,  being  the  first  Protestant 
missionary  in  Central  China,  and  made  that  city 
his  headquarters  until  1906.  As  at  Shanghai,  he 
made  numerous  joume3rB  into  the  surrounding 
country,  and  established  many  churches  and  mis- 
sions in  neighboring  provinces.  He  was  in  Great 
Britain  on  furlough  in  1870-73  and  again  in  1881- 
1882,  the  latter  time  visiting  the  United  States,  where 
he  has  resided  since  1906,  when  failing  health  ob- 
liged him  to  retire  from  active  missionary  life.  He 
is  the  author  of  a  large  number  of  tracts  in  (Chi- 
nese, and  also  translated  the  New  Testament  and 
a  portion  of  the  Old  into  both  easy  Wen-li  and 
Mandarin  colloquial. 
Biblxooraprt:    R.  W.  Thompson,  ChifflA  John,  the  Story 

of  Fifty  Yeart  in  China,  N«w  York,  1908. 

JOHH  OF  LETDBH:  The  common  designation 
of  Jan  Beukelszoon,  the  leader  of  the  Anabaptists 
in  Monster.    See  ANABAPnarB;  Mt^NsrxB,   Ana- 

BAFTI8T8  IN. 


JOHH  THE  LITTLE  (Johannes  Parvus,  Jean 
Petit):  French  theologian;  b.  in  Normandy;  d. 
1411.  He  became  known  in  1394  by  the  publica- 
tion of  Complainte  de  V^lxae,  a  French  poem  dis- 
cussing the  ecclesiastical  schism  and  the  remedies 
recommended  in  1394  by  the  University  of  Paris. 
He  represented  the  Norman  people  at  the  univer- 
sity and  was  professor  of  theology  there  1400.  He 
treated  of  the  church  politics  of  Buigundy  at  the 
national  ooimcil  of  1406  with  unusual  rigor,  and 
on  Mar.  8,  1408,  defended  the  murder  of  Duke 
Louis  of  Orl^ns,  committed  at  the  instigation  of 
John  the  Fearless  of  Burgundy.  In  this  he  ap- 
pealed to  the  scholastic  doctrine  of  tyrannicide 
regnant  since  John  of  Salisbury;  but  a  council  of 
Paris  condenmed  the  doctrine  (Feb.  23,  1414).  A 
commission  of  cardinals  instituted  by  John  XXIII. 
reversed  the  decision  on  Jan.  15,  1416;  moreover, 
after  the  death  of  John,  the  rising  power  of  Bur- 
gundy so  tied  the  hands  of  Martin  V.  that  there 
followed  a  vindication  of  the  theologian. 

(B.  Bess.) 

Biblioorafht:  J.  B.  Schwab,  Johannu  Oereon,  pp.  420 
sqq.,  608  sqq.,  Wflriburg.  1858;  P.  Tsehackert.  Peter  von 
Ailli,  (3otha,  1877;  M.  D.  C^hapotin,  La  Ouerre  de  cent  ane, 
Paria.  1880;  B.  BesB,  Studien  tur  OeeehidUe  dee  Konetaneer 
KonsHe,  Marburg,  1801;  M.  Loaoen,  Die  Lehre  vom  Tyran^ 
nenmord  in  der  duieUiAen  Zeit,  Munich,  1804;  H.  Denifle 
and  E.  Chatelain,  Chartuiarium  uMvereitoHe  Parieieneie, 
vols.  iti..  iv..  Paris.  1804-07;  XL.  vi.  1745-1748. 

JOHH  OF  MOHTBCORVINO:  Franciscan  mis- 
sionary in  China;  b.  at  Monteoorvino,  Rovella  (14 
m.  e.  of  Salerno),  Italy,  1247;  d.  at  Khanbaligh 
(now  Peking),  Chma,  1330.  In  1272  he  was  sent 
by  the  Byzantine  Emperor  Michael  Palsologus  to 
Gregory  X.  in  the  matter  of  the  union  of  the  Greek 
with  the  Roman  Church.  Subsequently  he  visited 
Mongolia.  On  his  return  in  1288  he  reported  to 
Nicholas  IV.  the  willingness  of  the  Tatar  princes 
to  receive  Christian  teachers,  and  in  1289  he  was 
sent  by  Nicholas  as  a  missionary  to  the  Mongolian 
empire.  After  laboring  for  a  time  in  Persia  and 
India  he  settled  at  Peldng  about  1292.  Until  1303 
he  carried  on  his  work  alone.  He  won  the  friend- 
ship of  the  Great  Khan,  enlisted  his  interest,  and, 
despite  the  determined  opposition  of  the  Nestorians, 
by  1305  he  had  built  two  churohes  and  baptised 
6,000  heathen  adults,  besides  150  boys,  whom  he 
had  bought  of  heathen  parents  and  collected  into 
a  school.  He  taught  them  Greek  and  Latin,  and 
wrote  for  them  pAUteries,  hymnaries,  and  brev- 
iaries. He  also  translated  the  Psaltery  and  the 
whole  of  the  New  Testament  into  Tatar.  On  hear- 
ing of  the  great  work  accomplished  by  him  Clement 
v.,  in  1307,  made  him  arohbishop  of  Khanbaligh 
(Peking)  and  gave  him  a  number  of  suffragans. 
His  work  was  continued  by  his  successors  till 
1368.  His  two  letters  are  in  Wadding,  Annul, 
frai,  min,,  for  jeAT  1305,  one  in  £ng.  transl.  in 
Yule's  ed.  of  Marco  Polo  (London,  1875). 
Bibuoobapht:  KL,  vi.  1710-1721.  ix.  202. 

JOHH  OF  HBPOMUK:  The  most  popular  na- 
ticmal  saint  of  Bohemia,  considered  the  protomar- 
tyr  of  the  seal  of  confession  and  a  patron  against 
(»lunmie8  and  floods.  The  historical  starting- 
point  of  the  Nepomuk-legend  is  the  person  of  John 
of  Pomuk  or  Nepomuk,  a  city  of  Bohemia  (55  m. 


John  of 


Nopomak 
Mlslmry 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


914 


8.W.  of  Prague).  He  was  bom  probably  about 
1340  and  studied  at  the  new  university  in  Prague. 
In  1393  he  was  made  vicar-general  of  Archbishop 
John  oi  Jenstetn.  In  the  same  year,  March  20,  he 
became  a  martyr  to  the  cause  of  clerical  immunity, 
being  thrown  into  the  River  Moldau  at  the  behest 
of  King  Wenceslaus  IV.,  who  was  at  variance  with 
the  cleigy,  as  a  penalty  for  his  confirmation,  against 
the  king's  will,  of  a  new  abbot  for  the  Benedictine 
monastery  at  Kladrau.  Dr.  Johanek,  as  he  was 
called  because  of  his  small  stature,  enjoyed  no 
special  reputation;  he  was  rich,  possessed  houses, 
and  lent  money  to  noblemen  and  priests.  The  de- 
velopment and  transformation  of  the  legend  can 
be  traced  through  successive  stages,  llie  arch- 
bishop, who  hastened  to  Rcmie  soon  after  the  crime, 
in  his  charge  against  Wenceslaus,  called  the  victim 
a  martyr;  in  the  biography  written  a  few  yean 
later  miracles  are  almdy  recorded  by  which  the 
drowned  man  was  discovered.  The  uncritical  Bo- 
hemian annalists  from  the  fourteenth  to  the  six- 
teenth century  fostered  the  fable.  About  the  mid- 
dle of  the  fifteenth  century  the  statement  appears 
for  the  first  time  that  the  refusal  to  violate  the  seal 
of  confession  was  the  cause  of  John's  death.  Two 
decades  later  (1471),  the  dean  of  Prague,  Paul 
Zidek,  makes  Johanek  the  queen's  confessor.  The 
unscrupulous  chronicler  Wenceslaus  Hayek,  the 
"  Bohemian  Livy,"  speaks  in  1541  (probably  owing 
to  carelessness  in  the  use  of  his  sources)  of  two 
Johns  of  Nepomuk  being  drowned;  the  first  as  con- 
fessor, the  second  for  his  confirmation  of  the  ab- 
bot. The  legend  is  especially  indebted  for  its 
growth  to  the  Jesuit  Balbinus,  the  ''Bohemian 
Pliny,"  whose  services  to  the  history  of  his  coun- 
try were  so  conspicuous  that  he  was  persecuted  by 
the  government,  which  preferred  oblivion  and 
silence.  He  was,  however,  as  credulous  as  he  was 
patriotic,  and  even  became  a  forger  to  honor  his 
saint.  Although  the  Prague  metropolitan  chapter 
did  not  accept  the  biography  dedicated  to  it,  "  as 
being  frequently  destitute  of  historical  foundation 
and  erroneous,  a  bungling  work  of  mjrthological 
rhetoric,"  Balbinus  stuck  to  it.  In  1083  the  Prague 
bridge  was  adorned  with  a  statue  of  the  saint,  wl^ch 
has  had  numerous  successors;  in  1708  the  first 
church  was  dedicated  to  him  at  KOniggr&tz. 
Meanwhile,  in  spite  of  the  objection  of  the  Jesuits, 
the  process  was  inaugurated  which  ended  with  his 
canonisation.  On  June  25,  1721,  he  was  beatified, 
and  on  March  19,  1729,  he  was  canonised  under 
Benedict  XIII.  The  acts  of  the  process,  comprising 
500  pages,  which  cost  more  than  180,000  crowns, 
distinguish  two  Johns  of  Nepomuk  and  sanction 
the  cultus  of  the  one  who  was  drowned  in  1383  as 
a  martyr  of  the  sacrament  of  penance. 

The  ingenious  suggestion  has  been  made  that 
the  historical  kernel  of  St.  John  Nepomuk  is  really 
Huss,  who  was  metamorphosed  from  a  Bohemian 
Reformer  into  a  Roman-Catholic  saint;  and  that 
the  Nepomuk-legend  is  a  Jesuit  blending  of  the 
John  who  was  drowned  and  the  John  who  was 
burned.  The  resemblances  are  certainly  striking, 
extending  to  the  manner  of  celebrating  their  com- 
memorations. But  when  the  Jesuits  came  to 
Prague,  the  Nepomuk-worship  had  long  been  wide- 


spread; and  the  idea  of  canonization  originated  in 
opposition  not  to  the  Hussites,  but  to  Protestant- 
ism, as  a  weapon  of  the  C!ounter-Refonnation — 
though  his  cultus  was  also  intended  to  supplant 
Huss  in  the  hearts  of  the  Bohemian  people.  In 
the  image  of  the  saint  which  gradually  arose  the 
religious  history  of  Bohemia  is  reflected.  This 
much  is  historically  certain,  that  the  ^^car-general 
John  of  Pomuk  was  drowned  in  1393  because  of 
the  choice  of  the  abbot,  and  that  Rome,  making 
use  of  a  forged  biography,  has  canonized  a  num 
whose  very  existence  can  not  be  demonstrated. 

Gborg  Lobbche. 

Bibuoobafht:  The  Vila  by  Bohualav  Balbinus  is  in  ASB, 
May,  iii,  668-680.  The  Ada  leading  up  to  the  canonisation 
were  published  at  Verona,  1725.  and  the  Acta  eanoniza- 
tioni»  at  Rome,  1727.  Naturally  a  lance  part  of  the  litera- 
ture on  the  subject  is  in  Bohemian— /or  a  list  consult 
Potihast.  Weoummr,  pp.  1400-1401.  Consult  O.  Abel 
Die  Leo9nd€  vom  heiliQen  Johann  von  Nepomuk^  Berlin, 
1865;  A.  W  drfel,  LeoeniB  dee  heUioen  Johann  van  Nepomuk, 
Pracue.  1862;  A.  Frind,  Der  oeediithUii^  .  .  .  Johannee 
von  Nepomuk,  Prague,  1871;  A.  H.  Wratislaw,  Life, 
Legend  and  CanonitaHon  of  St.  John  Nepomuoen,  London, 
1878;  Die  Frage  aber  .  .  .  Johann  von  Nepomuk,  in  Der 
KathoUk,  i  (1882),  273-300.  390^14;  T.  Sohmude,  in 
ZKT,  vu  (1883),  52-123;   XL,  vi.  1725-1742. 

JOHH  OF  SALISBURY:  English  ecclesiastic,  and 
bishop  of  Chartres;  b.  at  Salisbury  between  1110 
and  1120;  d.  at  Chartres  (54  m.  s.w.  of  Paris)  Oct. 
25,  1180.  He  was  of  humble  Saxon  origin,  but 
in.  11 36  left  his  native  land  to  study  in  France,  es- 
pecially in  Paris.  Among  his  teachers  there  were 
the  famous  Abelard,  Robert  of  Melun,  and  Alberic 
of  Reims.    After  studying  dialectics  at  Paris  for 

two  years,  he  went  to  Chartres,  where 
Life.        for  three  years  he  heard  the  lectures  of 

William  of  Conches,  and  later  studied 
under  Richard  r£vdque,  Hardewin  the  German, 
Theodoric,  Peter  Elias,  and  others.  He  returned 
to  Paris  and  began  the  study  of  theology,  his  teach- 
ers being  Gilbert  de  la  Porr^,  Robert  PuUeyne,  and 
Simon  of  Poissy.  Despite  bitter  poverty,  he  spent 
twelve  years  in  France,  passing  the  latter  portion 
of  the  time  with  his  intimate  friend  Peter,  abbot  of 
the  Cistercian  monastery  of  Moutier  la  Celle  near 
Troyes,  through  whom  he  became  acquainted  with 
Bernard  of  (Hairvaux.  This  powerful  head  of  the 
Cistercians  brought  John  to  the  attention  of  Theo- 
bald, archbishop  of  Canterbury,  who  had  fled  from 
England  to  escape  Stephen.  When  the  archbishop 
was  able  to  return  to  his  see,  John  was  invited,  in 
1148  or  the  beginning  of  1149,  to  act  as  his  chan- 
cellor or  secretary.  He  was  a  firm  defender  of  the 
spiritual  and  secular  supremacy  of  the  pope  and 
of  the  independence  of  the  clergy,  regarding  these 
principles  as  the  means  of  protecting  mankind 
against  the  injustice  of  the  secular  arm  and  the  con- 
sequences of  sin.  He  sought  to  carry  out  his  doc- 
trine in  practical  ecclesiastical  life,  even  though 
his  views  that  only  the  Roman  Catholic  hierarchy 
could  unfold  the  blessings  of  Christianity  aroused 
the  opposition  of  the  court  and  of  the  bishops,  the 
latter  regarding  themselves  as  peers  of  the  realm 
rather  than  as  subject  to  a  distant  pope.  The  in- 
creasing age  and  infirmity  of  the  archbishop  brought 
additional  ecclesiastical  responsibilities  upon  John, 
while  he  was  able  to  render  many  important  polit- 


215 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDU 


John  of 


Kepomuk 
Sauslmry 


ical  services  to  Henry  U.  after  the  death  of  Stephen 
in  1154.  Sent  on  repeated  missions  for  both  prel- 
ate ajid  king,  he  crossed  the  Alps,  according  to  his 
own  stAtement,  ten  times,  visiting  the  Curia  dur- 
ing the  reign  of  Pope  Eugenius  III.  and  living  for 
three  months  at  Benevento  with  Adrian  IV.,  with 
whom  he  was  on  terms  of  personal  friendship.  His 
position  became  difficult,  however,  after  the  death 
of  Adrian  in  II50,  when  he  took  sides  with  Alexan- 
der in.  against  the  antipope  Victor  IV.  He  se- 
cured the  recognition  of  Alexander  in  England,  but 
came  in  conflict  with  the  king  and  the  royalist 
bishops  as  the  exponent  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
hierarchy.  He  was  deprived  of  his  preferments 
and  emoluments,  and  was  even  in  peril  of  his  life, 
so  that  he  contemplated  flight  from  England, 
but  was  rehabilitated  at  the  petition  of  the  pope, 
the  archbishop,  and  Thomas  Becket.  His  power 
^eached  its  climax  when  the  latter,  his  close  per- 
sonal friend,  succeeded  Theobald  as  archbishop  of 
Canterbury  in  1162.  Throughout  the  struggle  be- 
tween the  archbishop  and  the  king,  John  remained 
the  faithful  friend  of  the  former,  whom  he  pre- 
ceded into  exile  in  1163.  When  a  nominal  peace 
was  patched  up  between  the  archbishop  and  Henry 
in  1170,  John  returned  to  England,  and,  though  he 
was  not  present  at  the  actual  scene  of  the  arch- 
bishop's murder,  he  hastened  there  soon  enough 
to  receive  some  of  the  martyr's  blood  as  a  relic.  A 
time  of  peril  followed  imtil  the  papal  influence  and 
popular  opinion  forced  the  king  to  change  his 
course.  John,  who  had  fled  from  Canterbury,  again 
received  his  preferments,  and  cooperated  zealously 
with  Richard  of  Dover,  the  successor  of  Thomas. 
He  was  likewise  active  in  the  canonization  of  the 
murdered  prelate.  In  1176  he  was  unanimously 
chosen  bishop  of  Chartres,  and  was  consecrated  in 
August  of  the  same  year.  There,  however,  he  was 
obliged  to  struggle  against  all  manner  of  opposi- 
tion, although  he  enjoyed  the  support  of  the  pope, 
and  in  1179  attended  the  third  Lateran  Council, 
where  he  uttered  a  solemn  warning  against  unjusti- 
fiable innovations  and  urged  the  clergy  to  conform 
to  the  Gospel. 

The  most  important  and  comprehensive  work  of 
John  of  Salisbury  was  his  PoUcratieua  give  de  nugis 
curaltutn  et  vesiigiia  phUosapharum,  written  in  1159 
and  dedicated  to  Thomas  Becket.    It  is  a  system 

of  ecclesiastical  and  political  econom- 
Writings.    ics  and  ethics  based  on  Christianity 

and  the  wisdom  of  the  ancients,  and 
designed  to  lead  from  the  triviality  of  secular  and 
court  life  to  a  true  knowledge  and  government  of 
the  world.  In  his  book  the  author  wove  from  his 
wealth  of  experience  both  a  picture  of  actual  life 
and  the  ideal  of  true  Christian  living,  in  which  the 
Church  should  rule  and  lead  all  mankind  as  the 
guardian  and  representative  of  divine  law  and 
true  human  justice.  The  PolicraticuSf  the  first 
great  theory  of  the  State  in  the  Middle  Ages,  exer- 
cised an  influence  on  Thomas  Aquinas  and  Vin- 
cent of  Beauvais.  It  was  first  edited,  apparently 
by  the  Brethren  of  the  Conunon  Life,  at  Brussels 
about  1480.  Immediately  after  the  PolicraHcus 
John  wrote  the  Mdalogicua,  which  may  be  regarded 
as    its  continuation;  this  was  also  dedicated  to 


Thomas  Becket.  This  work,  which  is  in  four  books 
and  which  was  first  edited  at  Paris  in  1610,  is  a 
presentment  of  true  and  false  science,  in  which 
the  author  castigates  not  only  contempt  of  science, 
especially  of  logic,  but  also  false  and  sophistic 
scholasticism.  These  aberrations  of  his  contem- 
poraries were  compared  with  the  soimd  views  of 
Plato  and  the  academic  school,  and  especially  with 
Aristotle,  whose  Organon  John  of  Salisbury  was  the 
first  in  western  Europe  to  know  and  use.  His 
earliest  work  was  his  EntheHcus  (EiUheticu8f  Nvr- 
theticua),  sive  de  dogmate  philoiophoTum,  written 
about  1155,  and  consisting  of  a  philosophical  and 
satirical  poem  in  926  distichs,  dedicated  to  Thomas 
Becket.  The  first  part  contains  a  critical  presen- 
tation of  the  basal  concepts  of  the  Greek  and  Ro- 
man philosophers,  who  are  unfavorably  contrasted 
with  the  higher  truth  of  Christianity.  The  second 
part  exhorts  Thomas  to  consider  the  plight  of  the 
threatened  and  afflicted  Church,  and  describes  the 
lamentable  condition  of  England.  The  poem  is 
extant  in  only  two  manuscripts,  and  was  first  edited 
by  C.  Petersen  at  Hamburg  in  1843.  John  was 
likewise  the  author  of  a  Histcria  pontificalia,  em- 
bracing the  years  1148-52  and  written  about  1165 
as  a  supplement  to  the  chronicle  of  Sigibert  and  his 
immediate  successors.  The  fragment  begins  with 
the  Council  of  Reims,  which  John  attended,  and 
breaks  off  abruptly  in  the  middle  of  a  sentence  dis- 
cussing the  events  of  1152.  The  only  edition  is 
that  by  W.  Amdt  in  MGH,  Script.,  xx  (1868),  515- 
545. 

The  minor  ^orks  of  John  of  Salisbury  were  his 
Vita  SancH  Ansdmi,  written  in  1163  as  a  supple- 
ment to  Eadmer's  larger  biography  of  Anselm  and 
designed  as  an  aid  in  the  projected  canonization  of 
the  saint  at  the  Council  of  Tours,  and  his  Vita  et 
passio  SancU  Thomae,  composed  shortly  after  1170 
as  an  argument  for  the  canonization  of  Thomas 
Becket.  His  letters,  collected  by  him  in  four  books, 
although  the  present  collection  of  327  is  contained 
in  two  parts,  are  of  great  importance  both  for  his 
biography  and  for  the  ecclesiastical  history  of  his 
time,  since  they  are  addressed  to  popes  (Adrian 
and  Alexander  III.),  to  princes,  and  to  many  eccle- 
siastical and  secular  potentates.  The  first  edition 
of  J.  Masson  (Paris,  1611)  contained  only  302 
letters,  but  others  have  since  been  discovert.  A 
number  of  additional  works  have  been  ascribed  to 
this  author.  Some  titles  may  refer  to  treatises 
now  lost,  while  certain  others  may  represent  indi- 
vidual chapters  of  the  Pclicraticus.  A  complete 
edition  of  the  works  of  John  of  Salisbury  (not  with- 
out flaws)  was  published  by  J.  A.  Giles  (5  vols. 
PEA,  Oxford,  1848)  and  reprinted  in  MPL,  xcix. 

(K.  SCHAABSCHMIDT.) 

Bxbuographt:  Tbe  be^t  aouroes  of  knowledge  are  hia  own 
works,  xwrtioularly  hiiB  letters  in  vol.  i  of  OUes'  edition, 
ut  sup.  Two  Uvea  are  those  by  H.  Reuter,  JohannM  van 
SaUubury,  Berlin,  1842;  K.  Schaarsohmidt,  Johannea 
SareabarienaU  naeh  Leben  und  Siudien,  Scfurifien  und 
PhUo9ophie,  Leipsic,  1862.  Consult  further:  K.  Pauli, 
in  Zeittdirift  fUr  KinMnneht,  1881,  pp.  206  eqq.;  R.  L. 
Poole,  IlhuttraHofU  cf  ths  Hittory  if  Mediaeval  Thought, 
chaps,  iv.-yii.,  London,  1884;  W.  Stubbs,  Seventeen 
Leeturee  on  the  Study  cf  .  ,  ,  Hietory,  lects.  vi.-rii..  ib. 
1886;  P.  Gennrioh.  in  ZKO,  ziii  (1803).  644-651;  J.  H. 
Overton,  The  Chvrdi  in  England,  i.  207,  217,  218,  lA>ndon, 


^ohn,  Saint 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


dl6 


1807;  Hitioire  lUUndn  ds  la  France,  xiv.  80-161;  Geillier, 
iittteur*  aaeriB,  zir.  075-680;  Neander.  ChritHan  Churck, 
!▼.  104-105.  357-^58,  415  et  pMrim;  DNB,  xxix.  430--I46. 

JOHH,   SAIHT,   CHRISTIAHS   OF.     See   Man- 

DJDANB. 

JOHH,  SAINT,  FIRB  OF  (SAIH T  JOHN'S  FIRE) : 
A  fire  lighted  in  accord  with  ancient  custom  in  va- 
rious countries,  especially  in  southern  Germany, 
on  the  evening  or  eve  of  the  day  of  St.  John  the 
Baptist  (June  24)  in  the  open  air  on  hiUs  and  moun- 
tains, or  in  the  streets  and  villages.  It  must  be 
needfire,  and  the  ceremonies  attending  it  are  the 
dancing  of  the  young  around  it,  the  throwing  of  all 
sorts  of  flowers,  herbs,  and  garlands  into  it,  the 
priestly  blessing  of  the  fire,  the  kindling  and  rolling 
of  a  wheel  wrapped  with  straw  ("  St.  John's  wheel  ") 
the  erection  of  a  tree,  the  driving  of  cattle  through 
the  fire,  the  carrying  of  torches  and  fire-brands,  and 
the  like.  All  manner  of  healing  and  beneficent 
properties  are  ascribed  to  the  fire,  such  as  protection 
against  sickness,  cure  of  all  diseases  (especially 
epilepsy),  fertility,  exemption  from  fire  and  storm, 
and  safety  against  witchcraft.  Although  the  origin, 
extension,  and  significance  of  these  customs  are  un- 
certain, it  is  at  least  clear  that  they  are  survivals 
of  a  primitive  cult  of  the  light,  fire,  and  sun,  cur- 
rent throughout  the  Indo-Germanic  peoples.  Pai^ 
allels  are  accordingly  found  not  only  in  the  Greco- 
Roman  world,  as  in  the  Vestarcult  and  the  Palilia, 
but  also  among  the  Celts,  Germans,  and  Slavs, 
though  there  is  no  evidence  that  one  people  bor- 
rowed from  another.  The  festival  was  obviously  a 
celebration  of  the  summer  solstice.  The  garlands, 
like  the  rolling  of  the  wheel  and  the  dancing  round 
the  fire,  symbolise  the  sun,  but  the  so-called  ''  sol- 
stice-girdle," as  the  ironwort  and  wormwood  hal- 
lowed in  ancient  custom  are  called,  represent  the 
girdle  bound  about  his  loins  by  the  Apostle  John 
lest  he  should  become  weary  in  his  wanderings.  The 
fire  of  St.  John  celebrates  the  solstice,  the  time 
when  the  days  are  longest,  and  also  the  time  when 
the  bloom  of  spring  passes  over  to  the  harvest. 
At  that  period  the  heat  of  summer  threatens  sick- 
ness, so  that  the  blessings  of  fertility  must  be  as- 
sured, and  all  impending  danger  be  averted.  It  is 
the  time  when  lost  treasures  rise  and  are  exposed 
to  the  light  of  the  sim,  and  spirits  seeking  release 
wander  about.  All  plants  then  develop  especially 
healing  properties,  and  water  is  then  particularly 
good  both  for  bathing  and  drinking.  This  is  ex- 
plained by  the  ancient  Germanic  belief  in  Baldur, 
the  god  of  light,  whose  place  is  here  taken  by  John 
the  Baptist.  The  fire  of  St.  John  thus  represents 
victory  of  light  over  darkness,  the  shortest  night 
of  the  year,  on  which  in  the  far  north  the  sun  does 
not  set,  being  transformed  into  day  by  the  fires. 
The  Church  was  fully  conscious  of  the  relation  of 
the  feast  of  St.  John  to  the  summer  solstice,  and 
endeavored  to  suppress  the  custom  of  kindling 
fires;  but  it  was  forced  to  yield  to  popular  usage,  so 
that  finally  the  fire  was  not  only  tolerated,  but  the 
clergy  and  the  nobility  took  part  in  the  celebration. 
Attempts  were  made  at  an  early  time,  however,  to 
give  the  fire  of  St.  John  a  Christian  interpretation, 
and  medieval  theologians  of  the  twelfth  and  thir- 


teenth centuries  interpreted  it  with  reference  to 
John  i.  8.  Others  sought  to  explain  the  fire  from 
the  legend  of  the  burning  of  the  Baptist's  bones  at 
Sebaste,  while  the  dance  was  supposed  to  be  a  rem- 
iniscence of  the  dance  of  the  daughter  of  Herodias, 
all  efforts  being  made  to  avoid  any  allusion  to  par 
ganism.  In  many  places,  especially  in  Evangelical 
countries,  the  fires  of  St.  John  have  been  forbidden 
in  modem  times,  or  have  become  obsolescent  of 
themselves.  (A.  Fbsybe.) 

BiBLiooaAPHT:  p.  If.  Padandi«  De  euUa  8,  JoannU  BapHttae 
antiqwUaiM  CkritUanae,  Rome,  1768;  C.  F.  de  Khauti, 
De  riiu  t^mt  in  natali  8,  Jchannu  acofnai^  Vianiuk  1750; 
Eraeh  and  Gniber,  AUgemBinB  Eneifdopfldie,  aeetion  II., 
vol.  xxiL,  p.  265;  F.  Nork,  PettkaUnder,  pp.  406  aqq.. 
Stuttgart,  1847;  J.  Grimm,  Dmdaeike  MyOuiogU,  p.  678 
aqq.,  G6ttingen,  1854;  R.  Chamben,  Book  of  Dav»,  under 
June  24,  2  Tola.,  London,  1862-64. 

JOHH,  SAINT,  OF  BEVERLEY:  Bishop  of  Hex- 
ham and  of  York;  d.  at  Beverley  (27  m.  e.s.e.  of 
York)  May  7,  721.  He  was  bom  in  Northumbria 
of  noble  parentage,  studied  at  Canterbury  under 
Archbishop  Theodore,  and  was  an  inmate  of  Hilda's 
monastery  at  Streanteshalch  (Whitby).  In  687  he 
became  bishop  of  Hexham,  and  on  the  death  of 
Bosa  in  705  was  transferred  to  York.  He  estab- 
lished a  convent  at  Beverley,  and  in  718  gave  up 
his  bishopric  and  retired  thither.  He  was  elo- 
quent, learned,  and  holy,  a  founder  of  schools,  and 
a  famous  teacher.  Bede  was  ordained  by  him  and 
may  have  been  his  scholar.  After  St.  Cuthbert,  he 
was  the  greatest  of  the  North  English  saints  and 
the  mirades  related  of  him  rival  those  of  Cuthbert 
and  Aidan.  Henry  V.  attributed  the  victory  at 
Agincourt  to  his  intercession,  the  battle  being 
fought  on  his  day. 

Bibxjoorapht:  The  fundamental  souroe  is  Bade,  Hiti.  ecd., 
iv.  23,  V.  a-6,  24.  Consult  alao:  FaaH  SboraeenMa,  ed. 
W.  H.  Dixon  and  J.  Raine,  I  84-02,  London,  1883;  J. 
Raine,  The  Hittoriane  of  the  Church  of  York,  I,  pp.  lu.-lx., 
23»-348,  611-^1  (no.  71  of  RoUm  8eriee,  ib.  1879);  W. 
Bright.  Early  BnoHeh  Church  Hiti.,  pp.  308-^300.  Oxford. 
1897;   DNB,  xxix.  436-^436;   DCB,  iii.  377-378. 

JOHll,  SAINT,  ORDER  OF  HOSPITALERS  OF: 

One  of  the  most  famous  of  the  so-called  military 
orders  of  the  Middle  Ages  (see  Miutart  Religious 
Orders).  They  are  known  by  various  names:  the 
Knights  Hospitalers  of  St.  John  of  Jerusalem,  Mil- 
ites  ho8pitali8  S,  Joannis  HieroaotymUant,  Johan- 
nxiae,  etc.;  later,  from  their  chief  seats,  Knights  of 
Rhodes  and  Knights  of  Malta.  The  origin  of  the 
order  is  obscure,  but  it  was  evidently  baaed  on  an 
older  foundation,  a  "  hospital  of  Jeru- 

Origin  salem,"  which  seems  to  have  been  an 
and  Davel-  independent  establishment  of  the  citi- 

opment  zensofAmalfi.  Previous  to  the  capture 
into  a      of  Jerusalem  by  the  Crusaders  (1099) 

Military     the  rector  of  the  hospital  was  a  Brother 

Order.  Gerhard  (or  Gerald;  in  later  time  the 
name  Tunc  or  Tonque  was  added),  who 
enlarged  the  institution  after  the  city  was  taken 
and  reorganised  it.  With  the  cooperation  of  the 
Crusaders  the  hospital  increased  in  importance,  and 
Gerhard  may  thus  be  regarded  as  the  founder  of 
the  Hospitalers  of  St.  John.  He  was  succeeded  by 
Raymund  du  Puy,  who  gave  the  brothers  a  rule 
which  was  approved  by  Innocent  II.,  Eugene  III., 


di7 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


John,  8alnt 


and  Lucius  III.,  and  in  1287-90  William  of  Stefano 
noade  the  first  collection  of  statutes;  a  second  was 
made  in  1303  and  these  two  collections  formed  the 
basis  of  all  subsequent  ones.  At  first  all  members 
wore  a  black  robe  with  a  cross  of  eight  points  of 
white  linen  aflBxed  to  it,  worn  on  the  left  breast. 
In  1259  Alexander  IV.  granted  to  members  of  the 
first  class  a  red  mantle  with  a  white  cross. 

In  hospital  service  the  order  was  most  active; 
its  institutions  were  models  for  the  age,  and  its 
rules  and  regulations  formed  the  patterns  for  the 
other  orders  of  Hospitalers  (q.v.).  The  chief  hos- 
pital at  Jerusalem  was  built  opposite  the  Holy 
Sepulcher  and  was  a  large  structure  with  wide 
colonnades,  in  which  hundreds  of  pilgrims  and  in- 
valids found  welcome  and  assistance.  This  institu- 
tion continued  its  activity  even  after  the  capture 
of  Jerusalem  by  Saladin,  while  the  order  sup- 
ported hospitals  in  numerous  other  places,  particu- 
larly in  Acre,  Cyprus,  Rhodes,  and  fiilalta.  Skilled 
physicians  were  soon  found  in  the  hospitals,  and 
all  clothing,  food,  wine,  and  other  necessities  for 
the  sick  were  furnished  by  the  various  houses. 
Gradually,  however,  as  the  struggle  against  the  in- 
fidels chdmed  every  energy,  the  knights  were  re- 
leased from  the  care  of  the  sick,  and  complaints 
were  soon  heard,  especially  in  the  East,  that  in- 
valids were  neglected  by  many  houses.  The  order 
became  more  and  more  knightly,  and  steadily  lost 
its  monastic  character,  whereas  originally  the 
monks  had  almost  outnumbered  the  knights  in  the 
membership  of  the  order.  With  surprising  rapid- 
ity valuable  possessions  and  privileges  were  ac- 
quired both  in  the  Orient  and  in  the  Occident.  In 
Palestine  the  castles  of  the  knights  stretched  from 
north  to  south,  especially  along  the  threatened 
frontier  from  Hebron  to  Ascalon,  on  the  eastern 
shore  of  Lake  Tiberias,  and  in  the  vicinity  of  Trip- 
olis  and  Antioch.  The  seat  of  the  grand  master, 
after  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  was  the  citadel  of  Mar- 
gat,  which  was  supposed  to  be  impregnable,  until 
it  was  taken  by  Sultan  Kalaun  in  1285,  Acre,  the 
last  possession  of  the  knights  in  Palestine,  being 
captured  six  years  later. 

A  scanty  remnant  of  the  order  fled  to  Cyprus, 
where  the  king  provided  them  a  refuge  in  the  city 
of  Limiaso.    In  1309,  so  speedy  was  its  revival, 

the  Grand  Master  Foukiues  de  Vil- 

The        laret  captured  the  island  of  Rhodes 

Knights     and  founded  a  kingdom  which  lasted 

m  Rhodes  for  two  centuries,  was  a  bulwark  of 

and  Malta.  Europe  against  the  Turks,  and  only 

fell  through  treachery  in  1522.  This 
was  the  period  of  the  order's  great  prosperity.  Its 
wealth  was  increased  by  the  greater  portion  of  the 
estates  of  the  Knights  Templars  (q.v.)  after  their 
suppression  in  1311,  and  the  income  of  the  Knights 
of  St.  John  was  at  least  36,000,000  francs  annually, 
eighteen  or  twenty  times  that  of  the  king  of  France. 
The  order  was  divided  into  eight  "languages," 
Provence  (always  considered  the  first),  Auveigne, 
France,  Italy,  Aragon,  England,  Germany,  and  Cas- 
tile. Eadi  "language"  was  subdivided  into  grand 
priories  and  th^  into  commanderies,  the  latter 
visited  periodically  by  the  grand  prior.  At  the 
bead  of  the  entire  order  stood  the  grand  master, 


aided  by  the  chapter-general  which  convened  at 
stated  intervals  and  had  legislative  power. 

After  the  loss  of  Rhodes  the  knights  had  no 
home  until  1530,  when  Charles  V.  gave  them  the 
island  of  fiilalta  (whence  the  name  "  Knights  of 
Malta  '*),  which  they  defended  courageously  against 
the  Turks.  With  the  grand-mastership  of  Jean  de 
la  Valette  (1557-68)  the  order  reached  its  climax, 
but  the  Reformation  brought  them  one  disaster 
after  another,  while  internal  dissension  added  to 
the  calamities,  and  the  knights  became  mere  pro- 
tectors of  merchantmen  against  pirates.  Under  the 
Grand  Master  Ferdinand  von  Hompesch,  the  island 
was  betrayed  to  Bonaparte  and  on  Sept.  4,  1800, 
it  was  seised  by  the  English.  The  order  was  sup- 
pressed in  Bavaria  and  Spain,  while  Paul  I.  of 
Russia,  who  had  been  elected  grand  master  in  place 
of  Von  Hompesch,  was  not  recognized  by  the  pope. 
The  Roman  Catholic  remnants  were  collected  under 
the  administration  of  a  grand  master  who  is  ap- 
pointed by  the  pope  and  who  has  resided  in  Rome 
since  1834. 

In   Prussia   the   commandery   of   Brandenburg 

preserved  its  eidstence  as  the  Protestant  part  of 

the  order,  although  its  property  was  confiscated 

in  1810  and  it  became  a  meaningless 

Modem  Af-  decoration.    In  1852,  however,  it  was 

filiations,  reorganised  by  Frederick  William  IV., 
and  has  since  been  extremely  active  as 
a  hospital  order.  It  has  founded  some  fifty  hos- 
pitals, including  one  established  at  Beirut  during 
the  persecutions  of  the  Christians  by  the  Druses  of 
Lebanon  in  1860.  In  the  wars  of  1864,  1866,  and 
1870  the  Hospitalers  gave  invaluable  aid  to  the 
sick  and  wounded.  In  like  manner  the  Roman- 
Catholic  Hospitalers,  called  distinctively  Knights  of 
Malta,  have  revived  the  original  functions  of  the 
order,  at  least  in  Germany.  (G.  UHLHOBNt.) 

Biblzoorapry:  A  very  complete  reriew  of  the  literature  of 
the  subject  is  given  by  F.  de  HeUwaid,  Bibliographie 
mUhodique  de  Vordre  .  .  .  de  St.  Jean  de  JeruetUem, 
Rmne,  1885.  The  Bouroee  are  collected  in  Codice  diplom- 
del  eaaro  mUiiare  ordine  OeroeoUmUanOt  Lucca,  1733,  and 
in  the  great  work  begun  by  J.  Delaville  de  Roulx,  Cartu- 
laireifiniraledeVordredeehoepUalieraS,  Jeande  JentedUm, 
of  which  2  vole,  have  ao  far  appeared,  Paris,  1804  eqq., 
with  which  cf .  the  same  author's  De  prima  oriifine  hoe- 
piiaKonnn  HieroeolymUarum,  Paris,  1886,  and  his  Lee 
Siaiuie  de  Vordre  .  .  .  ,  in  BibliotMque  de  VScole  dee 
ehartee,  zviiL.  pp.  341-356.  Consult:  R.  Aubert  de  Verto; 
d'Aubeuf,  HieL  dee  ehevaUer§  hoepilaliere,  Pftris*  1726; 
A.  von  Winterfeld,  GeedndUe  dee  ritterliehen  Ordene  St, 
JohanfUe  vam  Spilal  su  Jeruealem,  Berlin,  1850;  If.  J.  J. 
O.  Saige,  De  raneihinUS  de  VMpital  St.  Jean  de  Jeruealem, 
in  BibUolMque  de  Vicote  dee  chartee,  1863.  p.  652;  H.  von 
Ortenbuzi^  Der  Riiterorden  dee  heilUfen  Johannee  von 
Jeruealem,  Regensburg,  1866;  J.  Wilson,  Condee  Account 
<4  SU  Jokn*9  Oale,  ClerkenweU,  and  t^  the  Knighie  cf  St. 
John  <4  Jeruealem,  London,  1860;  F.  C.  Woodhouse,  The 
Military  Reliffioue  Ordere  af  the  Middle  Agee,  New  York, 
1870;  A.  T.  Drane,  The  Knighte  of  St,  John,  London,  1881; 
W.  K.  R.  Bedford,  The  Rea%dtt»ume  ttf  the  Old  Hoepital  of 
the  XmoMi  ^4  St.  Jiihn  at  ValeUa,  ib.  1882;  G.  Uhlhom, 
in  ZKO,  vi  (1882),  46;  H.  Pruts,  KuiturgeechidUe  der 
KreueeOge,  pp.  235  sqq..  Berlin,  1883;  F.  von  Finck, 
UAerndd  Hber  die  OeediidUe  dee  rUterHehen  Ordene  Sk 
Johannie,  Berlin,  1800;  C.  Herrlich,  Die  BaUey  Branden^ 
hurgh  dee  Johanniterordene,  ib.  1801;  J.  von  Pflug-Hartung. 
Die  Anfange  dee  JohannUerordene  in  DeuledUand,  ib.  1800; 
Helyot,  Ordree  wumaakquee,  iii.  72  sqq.;  Heimbuoher, 
Orden  und  Kongregationen;  KL,  vi.  1701-1803;  8:  F.  A. 
Caulfield.  Daum  <4  Chxie^tWMkg  in  Modem  Europe  .  .  . 
Knighte  of  the  Hoepital  ....  London,  1000. 


John  the  steadfast 
Johns,  John 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


218 


JOHll  THE  STEADFAST:  Elector  of  Saxony 
1525-32,  brother  of  Frederick  the  Wise  (q.v.);  b. 
at  Meissen  (15  m.  n.w.  of  Dresden)  June  30,  1468; 
d.  at  Schweinitz  (54  m.  n.e.  of  Merseburg)  Aug. 
16,  1532.  He  received  a  scholarly  education,  was 
trained  in  the  arts  of  knighthood,  and  is  said  to 
have  distinguished  himself  in  the  struggle  against 
the  Turks.  Luther's  writings  soon  won  his  heart, 
and  he  followed  the  development  of  the  reforma- 
tory movement  with  ever  increasing  interest.  It 
was  he  who,  in  the  absence  of  the  elector,  omitted 
to  publish  the  bull  directed  against  Luther.  In  his 
letters  to  his  brother  he  warmly  recommended 
Luther  and  admonished  the  cautious  elector  to 
adopt  more  decidedly  the  reformer's  cause  and  to 
influence  other  princes  in  the  same  direction.  His 
influence  decided  Frederick  to  protect  Luther  in 
the  Wartbuig.  During  the  printing  of  his  New 
Testament,  Luther  sent  John  the  single  sheets,  and 
thenceforth  he  read  the  Bible  daily.  In  October, 
1522,  Luther  came  for  the  first  time,  as  it  seems, 
on  his  journey  to  Erfurt  to  the  court  of  Weimar 
and  preached  several  times.  His  sermons  on  the 
limitations  of  secular  authority  caused  John  to  de- 
sire further  discussion  of  the  subject,  and  Luther 
published  his  treatise  Van  weUlicher  ObrigktUf  the 
principles  of  which  John  conscientiously  tried  to 
carry  out  throughout  his  life.  Too  one-sided  em- 
phasis of  these  principles  and  his  anxiety  not  to 
interfere  improperly  in  spiritual  matters,  seem  to 
have  been  the  reason  why  he  tolerated  for  a  long 
time  the  agitation  of  MQnser  and  Carlstadt.  Sim- 
ilarly he  did  not  interfere  with  the  abolition  of  the 
Corpus  Christi  procession,  and  allowed  the  reading 
of  the  mass  and  the  celebration  of  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per after  the  Protestant  fashion. 

When  he  became  sole  ruler,  after  the  death  of 
Frederick  (May  5, 1525),  he  annoimced  to  the  clei^ 
that  in  future  the  pure  word  of  God  should  be 
preached  without  human  addition,  and  that  all 
useless  ceremonies  should  be  abolished.  He  reso- 
lutely refused  an  agreement  with  his  cousin,  George 
of  Saxony,  and  with  the  landgrave  of  Hesse  openly 
confessed  the  Evangelical  doctrine.  To  be  pre- 
pared against  machinations  of  his  opponents,  a 
treaty  was  ratified  Feb.  27,  1526,  between  him  and 
Philip  of  Hesse,  which  was  soon  joined  by  other 
Evangelical  estates,  so  that  John  became  the  leader 
of  the  Evangelical  party.  As  such  he  appeared  at 
the  Diet  of  Speyer  in  1526  (see  Speybr,  Diets  of). 
Difficult  problems  awaited  him  at  home.  Before 
he  had  become  elector,  Nicolaus  Hausman,  preacher 
of  Zwickau,  had  called  his  attention  to  the  miser- 
able condition  of  the  Church  and  advised  him  to 
undertake  a  general  visitation,  pointing  to  Luther 
as  the  most  suitable  man  for  that  purpose.  Luther 
now  proposed  to  institute  four  or  five  commissions 
of  visitation  for  the  whole  country,  and  there  fol- 
lowed a  demand  of  the  visitators  that  the  privilege 
to  install  or  depose  clergymen  should  belong  ex- 
clusively to  the  sovereign.  It  was  a  step  in  the 
development  of  the  State  Church,  and  the  acknowl- 
edgment of  the  secular  ruler  as  the  protector  of  the 
Church. 

Owing  to  the  influence  of  Luther,  John  reoi^an- 
ised  the  University  of  Wittenbeig  and  checked  the 


greed  of  the  nobility  in  appropriating  the  pos- 
sessions of  the  Chiu*ch,  which  had  become  a  real 
danger  for  the  country.  During  this  constructive 
activity  of  the  elector  the  rumor  spread  of  the 
formation  of  a  league  of  Roman  Catholic  princes 
at  Breslau  (1528)  for  the  annihilation  of  the  Evan- 
gelical estates  and  the  extirpation  of  the  new  hei^ 
esy.  Otto  von  Pack  reported  to  Landgrave  Philip 
of  Hesse  that  he  and  the  elector  were  required  to 
reestablish  the  Roman  religion  in  their  countries. 
Both  were  convinced  of  the  genuineness  of  the  re- 
port and  prepared  for  defense  by  trying  to  gain 
new  allies  in  the  north  and  south.  At  the  advice 
of  Luther  and  contrary  to  the  wish  of  Philip,  John 
desisted  from  assuming  the  offensive.  In  full  con- 
fidence of  the  justice  of  his  cause  he  went  again  to 
the  Diet  of  Speyer  in  1529,  and,  by  openly  avowing 
his  Evangelical  convictions,  incurred  the  enmity 
of  the  majority.  He  defended  the  Evangelical  in- 
terpretation of  the  Recess  of  Speyer  of  1526,  ao- 
coniing  to  which  the  privilege  of  ecclesiastical  ren- 
ovation had  been  granted,  and  protested  against 
the  resolution  of  the  majority,  which  threatened 
the  further  existence  of  the  new  Church.  At  first 
he  was  inclined  to  meet  the  efforts  of  the  Stras- 
burg  Evangelicals  who  tried  to  imite  the  Protes- 
tants on  the  question  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  but 
Luther  dissuaded  him.  His  acceptance  of  the 
Schwabach  Article  (q.v.),  drawn  up  by  Luther, 
showed  his  determination  to  renounce  even  his  league 
with  the  landgrave,  if  the  latter  would  not  separate 
himself  from  the  imion  efforts  of  Switzerland  and 
Upper  Germany.  Although  he  had  sustained  many 
an  insult  from  the  emperor,  he  acknowledged  obe- 
dience to  him,  except  where  it  conflicted  with  the 
honor  of  God  and  his  soul's  welfare.  At  the  Diet 
of  Augsbuig,  in  1530,  his  conduct  was  heroic.  He 
firmly  maintained  his  Evangelical  position,  and 
refused  to  forbid  Evangelical  preaching  at  the  de- 
mand of  the  emperor.  The  great  services  he  ren- 
dered to  the  final  success  of  the  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion are  well  known.  On  his  homeward  journey 
he  learned  of  the  warlike  preparations  of  his  ene- 
mies, but  his  interpretation  of  the  Word  of  God 
withheld  him  from  opposing  an  attack  of  his  em- 
peror. After  some  weeks,  however,  he,  as  well  as 
Luther,  was  convinced  by  jurists  that  the  relation 
of  the  emperor  to  the  estates  was  not  strictly  mo- 
narchical, both  parties  being  boimd  by  law  and 
right,  and  that  the  emperor,  in  attacking  the  Evan^ 
gelicals,  acted  not  only  against  God,  but  against 
his  own  imperial  rights;  therefore  a  defense  of  the 
Evangelicals  would  be  justified,  and  in  1531  the 
Protestants  formed  a  defensive  league  under  the 
leadership  of  John.  On  the  question  of  the  elec- 
tion of  Ferdinand  as  Roman  king,  he  took  a  much 
firmer  stand.  At  the  beginning  of  the  Diet  of 
Augsburg  he  had  been  determined  to  oppose  it  for 
legal  reasons,  and  what  he  heard  later  of  the  prac- 
tises of  the  emperor  and  Ferdinand  confirmed  him 
in  his  opposition.  Luther  advised  him,  though 
hesitatingly,  to  concede  the  election,  but  in  this 
point  John  followed  his  chancellor,  BrQck,  who 
asked  him  to  protest  against  it.  The  elector  was 
declared  disobedient  because  he  did  not  appear 
personally  at  the  election,  and  thus  the  rupture 


210 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


John  the  StaadftMt 
Johns,  John 


between  him  and  the  emperor  was  decided.  Polit- 
ical conditions,  however,  forced  the  emperor  again 
to  approach  the  Evangelical  estates,  and  on  July 
23,  1532,  the  religious  peace  of  Nurembei^  (see 
NuRKMBEBO,  Rbligious  Pbacb  of)  was  ratified. 
John  had  not  the  gifts  of  statesmanship  which  his 
brother  Frederick  possessed,  but  he  was  a  man  of 
fearless  courage,  deep  Evangelical  convictions,  and 
unsullied  life.  (T.  Eolde.) 

Bibuoobapbt:  Soutoob  are:  SpdaUn's  Bioffraphie,  in  J.  B. 
Mencke.  ConapeeiuM  9eript,  rer.  Oerm,,  ii.  1123  aqq.,  Leipdc, 
1728;  C.  E.  FOntenmnn,  Urkundmbudi  Mwr  OesehidUe  dea 
fi«M*ata^  «u  Auoaburo,  2  voU.,  HaUe,  1833-35;  idem« 
Arehiv  fOr  die  Oeathichte  der  kirtMithtn  Refonnaiion,  i., 
part  1,  ib.  1833;  idem,  Neuea  Urkundenbudi  Mwr  GaadiidUe 
dmr  .  .  .  Kir^en^ReformaiUm,  voL  L,  Hamburg,  1842; 
C.  Q.  NeudMsker,  AkIenttUeke  out  dam  ZeiialUr  der  R^orma- 
Hon,  Nuramberg*  1839-40;  and  the  various  editions  of 
Luther's  correspondence.  C.  A.  H.  Burekhardt,  Oeathiehie 
der  eOekeUehen  Kirthen^  und  SdivlvieUallionen,  Leipsic. 
1879;  H.  Sohwars,  Landgraf  PhiUpp  von  Heaaen  und  dia 
Paekiaehen-Hdndel,  Leipsic,  1884;  O.  Winckelmann,  Der 
eehwaalkaidiaehs  Bund  und  der  MaHmrger  RAigionafriede, 
Straabunc  1892;  L.  von  Ranke,  DevtaAa  Geadiiehte,  vols. 
Iii.-iv..  Leipme,  1894;  Cambridge  Modem  Hietory,  ii.  233- 
276.  New  York,  1904;   and  the  literature  under  LirrBER; 

RBVOaiIA.TION. 

JOHN  OP  THESSALONICA :  Archbishop  of 
Theasalonica.  He  was  delegate  of  the  pope  at  the 
sixth  ecumenical  council  (Constantinople,  680).  In 
the  proceedings  of  the  second  synod  held  at  Nictea 
(Mansi,  xiii.  164)  occurs  a  fragment  of  his  dialogue 
between  a  Christian  and  a  pagan,  in  which  image- 
worahip  is  justified.  Image-worship,  he  says,  re- 
lates to  the  saints  and  not  to  the  pictures,  to  God 
as  he  used  to  walk  among  men;  even  the  angels 
have  a  certain  corporeality.  There  has  also  been 
handed  down  a  speech  of  John  entitled  "  On  the 
death  of  the  most  holy  .  .  .  mother  of  God  and 
ever  virgin  Mary."  It  is  complete  only  in  an  old 
Slavonic  translation  (in  Popov,  BMiografiXeskija 
maUrialy,  pp.  40-65,  Moscow,  1879);  fragments  of 
the  original  are  in  Tischendorf,  Apocalypses  apocry^ 
phae  (Leipsic,  1866).  The  speech  follows  closely 
the  De  dormUione  Marine  of  Pseudo-John  and  has 
been  ascribed  to  him.  There  is  also  extant  a  wri- 
ting entitled  "  On  the  glorious,  victorious  Deme- 
trius" (ASB,,  Oct.,  iv.  104-160)  which  bears  the 
name  of  John  of  Thessalonica. 

(N.  BONWBTBCH.) 
BnuoGEAPHT:  Leo  AUatius,  De  Symeonum  aeripHa,  pp.  105. 
110,  Paria,  1664;  M.  Le  Quien,  Oriena  ChriaUanua,  ii.  42. 
3  toIb.,  Paris,  1740;  W.  Cave,  Seriptarum  eeeleaiaaHeorum 
hiataria  Uieraria,  i.  697,  Oxford,  1740;  Fabridua-HarleB, 
BibHotheea  Graeca,  x.  219,  25a  285,  Hamburg  1807; 
Krumbacher,  OeeeMdUe,  p.  192;  DCB,  iu.  396. 

JOHN-BONITES:  An  order  of  hemuts,  founded 
by  Giovanni  Buono  (b.  at  Mantua  1168;  d.  Oct. 
23,  1249),  who,  after  long  years  as  a  strolling  jon- 
gleur, was  converted  in  1206.  Retiring  to  a  lonely 
spot  near  the  church  of  Santa  Blaria  di  Budriolo, 
not  far  from  Cesena,  he  la  said  to  have  lived  first 
as  an  absolute  hermit,  but  about  1217  b^gan  to 
gather  companions  around  him.  Although  he 
never  took  orders,  and  could  neither  read  nor  write, 
the  fame  of  his  extraordinary  mortifications  wrought 
marvellous  conversions,  both  among  his  immediate 
followers  and  among  the  heretical  Lombard  Pata- 
renes,  many  of  whom  he  restored  to  the  Church. 
Without  formulating  a  written  rule,  or  even  a  defi- 


nite mode  of  life,  for  his  spiritual  children,  com- 
munities of  hermits  are  said  to  have  originated  in 
his  own  lifetime,  located  at  Bertinoro  (near  Forli), 
Mantua,  Venice,  Bologna,  Panna,  Ferrara,  Pog- 
giolo,  Faenza,  Poncelia,  and  Rimini.  A  few  years 
before  Buono's  death,  the  John-Bonites  (Jchanrir 
boniiaef  JambanUae),  whom  their  founder  had  vested 
with  a  gray  habit,  were  bound  by  Innocent  IV.  to 
the  Augustinian  rule.  Alexander  IV.,  by  bull  of 
Aug.  13,  1256,  forced  them  to  enter  his  newly 
founded  order  of  Augustinian  hermits,  thus  ter- 
minating their  independent  existence.  The  efforts 
to  canonize  Giovanni  Buono,  originating  chiefly 
from  Mantua  and  begun  as  early  as  the  middle  of 
the  thirteenth  century,  resulted  only  in  his  beatifi- 
cation by  Sixtus  IV.  in  1483;  nevertheless,  he  is 
the  chief  patron  of  Mantua,  where  his  remains  have 
reposed  in  the  church  of  Santa  Agnese  Nuova  since 

1451.  (O.  Z6CKLBRt.) 

BnuooRAPBT:  The  Vita  of  the  founder,  by  A.  Calepino, 
with  commentary,  is  in  A8B,  Oct.,  ix.  693-886;  Helyot, 
Ordrea  monaatiquea^  iil.  8  aqq. 

JOHNS,  CLAUDE  HERMANN  WALTER:  (Church 
of  England;  b.  at  Banwell  (22  m.  8.w.  of  Bath), 
Somersetshire,  Feb.  20,  1857.  He  was  educated  at 
Queen's  College,  Cambridge  (B.A.,  1880),  and  was 
second  master  successively  at  Horton  College,  Tas- 
mania, in  1880-^  and  Paston  Granmiar  School, 
North  Walsham,  Norfolk,  in  1884-86.  He  was 
ordered  deacon  in  1887  and  ordained  priest  in  the 
following  year,  and  from  1887  until  1892  was  tutor 
in  St.  Peter's  Training  College  for  Schoolmasters, 
Peterborough,  as  well  as  curate  of  St.  Botolph's, 
Helpston  (1887-^),  and  of  St.  John's,  Peterbor- 
ough (1888-91).  Since  1892  he  has  been  rector  of 
St.  Botolph's,  CJambridge.  He  was  also  chaplain 
of  Queen's  College  from  1893  to  1901,  and  since  1897 
has  been  lecturer  in  Assyriology  in  Cambridge  Uni- 
vecsity,  as  well  as  in  King's  College,  London,  since 
1902.  He  has  likewise  been  Edwards  fellow  in 
the  former  university  since  1900,  and  was  honor- 
ary secretary  of  the  Cambridge  Pupil  Teachers' 
Centre  in  1894-1900.  In  theology  he  is  a  moderate 
Anglican.  He  has  written  Assyrian  Deeds  and  Doc- 
uments (3  vols.,  (Cambridge,  1898-1902);  An  As- 
Syrian  Doomsday-Book,  or  Liber  Censualis  of  the  Dis- 
trict round  Harran  (Leipsic,  1901);  The  Oldest  Code 
of  Laws  in  the  Worlds  Promulgated  by  Hammurabi 
(Edinburgh,  1903);  and  Babylonian  and  Assyrian 
Laws,  Contracts,  and  Letters  (New  York,  1904). 

JOHNS,  JOHN:  Protestant  Episcopal  bishop  of 
Viiginia;  b.  at  New  Castle,  Del.,  July  10,  1796;  d. 
at  Alexandria,  Va.,  Apr.  5,  1876.  He  studied  at 
Princeton  (B.A.,  1815),  and  subsequently  spent 
two  years  in  the  theological  seminary  there.  In 
both  college  and  seminary  he  was  a  classmate  of 
Charles  Hodge,  with  whom  he  formed  a  lifelong 
intimacy.  He  was  ordained  deacon  in  1819,  and 
priest  in  1820.  His  first  parish  was  All  Saints, 
Frederick,  Md.,  where  he  renuiined  till  1829,  when 
he  became  rector  of  Christ  Church,  Baltimore. 
This  charge  he  held  till  he  was  elected  assistant 
bishop  of  Virginia  in  1842.  He  became  bishop  in 
1862.  He  was  for  a  number  of  years  the  head  of 
the  Protestant  Episcopal  Theological  Seminary  of 


JohaMm 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


2d0 


Virginia.    He  wrote  A  Memoir  af  ikt  ^Life  cf  ikt 
Right  Rev.  WiUiam  Meads  (Baltimore,  1867). 
BiBuooRAniT:  W.  8.  Perry,  The  Bpiaeopak  in  Ammita, 
p.  87.  New  York.  1805. 

JOHHSOR,  BLIAS  HBNRT:  Baptist;  b.  at  Troy, 
N.  Y.,  Oct.  15,  1841;  d.  at  Chester,  Pa.,  Mar.  10, 
1906.  He  was  educated  at  the  University  of 
Rochester  (A.B.,  1862),  and  from  1862  to  1864  con- 
tinued his  studies,  a  part  of  the  time  at  Rochester 
Theological  Seminary.  After  being  acting  assist- 
ant paymaster  in  the  United  States  Navy  in  1864- 
1866,  he  entered  the  Baptist  ministry  in  the  latter 
year,  holding  a  pastorate  at  Le  Sueur,  Minn.,  in 
1866-68.  He  then  reentered  Rochester  Theolog- 
ical Seminary,  from  which  he  was  graduated  in 
1871,  spent  two  years  in  travel  in  Europe,  the  Holy 
Land,  and  Egypt,  after  which  he  was  pastor  at 
Ballston,  N.  Y.,  from  1873  to  1875  and  at  Provi- 
dence, R.  I.,  from  1875  to  1883.  From  the  latter 
year  until  his  death  he  was  professor  of  systematic 
theology  at  Croser  Theological  Seminary,  Chester, 
Pa.  He  edited  S<mg$  of  Praiee  for  Sunday  Schools 
(Philadelphia,  1882);  Our  Sunday  School  Songs 
(1885);  and  the  hymnal  Sureum  Corda  (1808);  be- 
sides being  associate  editor  of  The  Baptist  Hymnal 
(Philadelphia,  1883).  He  also  wrote  Uses  and 
Abuses  of  Ordinances  (Philadelphia,  1890);  Outline  of 
Systematic  Theology  (1892);  Review  of  Ethical  Mon- 
ism (New  York,  1895);  Etekid  Oilman  RMnson 
(1896);  Religious  Use  of  Imagination  (1900);  The 
Highest  Ufe  (1901) ;  Ths  Holy  Spirit  Then  and  Now 
(Philadelphia,  1904) ;  and  the  posthumous  Christian 
Agnosticism  as  Rdaied  to  Christian  Knowledge,  ed, 
with  Biographical  Sketch,  H.  C.  Vedder  (1907). 

JOHNSOR,  FRANCIS:  English  Separatist;  b.  at 
Richmond  (42  m.  n.w.  of  York),  Yorkshire,  1562; 
d.  at  Amsterdam  Jan.  10,  1618.  He  studied  at 
Christ's  College,  Cambridge  (B.  A.,  1581),  and  ^ 
came  fellow.  In  1589  he  was  expelled  from  the 
university  for  preaching  in  favor  of  Presbyterian 
polity,  went  to  Zealand,  and  became  minister  of 
the  English  Church  at  Middelbuig.  In  1591  he 
was  instrumental  in  destroying  the  entire  edition 
of  a  book  by  Barrow  and  Greenwood  (A  Plain 
Refutation  of  M,  Giffard'e  Book  Entitled  '<  A  Short 
Treatise  against  the  Donatists  of  England*':  wherein 
is  discovered:  (!)  the  forgery  of  this  whole  ministry; 
(f )  the  confusion;  (5)  false  worship;  and  (^)  anti- 
christian  disorder  of  those  parish  assemblies  called 
the  Church  of  England;  reprinted  Amsterdam, 
1605),  saving,  however,  two  copies  for  his  own  use, 
and  by  reading  them  was  converted.  In  1592, 
with  Greenwood,  he  organised  a  congregation  in 
London  and  was  imprisoned  in  consequence ;  in 
1597  he  settled  in  Amsterdam  and  became  minister 
of  the  Separatists  living  there;  because  of  disagree- 
ment with  Henry  Ainsworth  concerning  the  au- 
thority of  elders  he  went  to  Emden  about  1612, 
but  later  returned  to  Amsterdam.  He  wrote  sev- 
eral controversial  treatises. 

Bibuoqrapht:  D.  Neid,  HitL  <4  Ike  FwrUane,  ii.  40-41. 
London,  1822;  B.  Brooke,  Livet  qf  the  Pwiiane,  I  89^ 
397.  tt.  89-9a  ib.  1813:  H.  M.  Dexter.  CongresaHonaliem 
of  the  Laet  Three  Hundred  Yeare,  New  York.  1880;  W. 
Walker,  Creede  and  Platforme  ef  CongreffoiianaHem,  p.  41, 
n.  4,  New  York,  1893;    DNR  xxx.  9-11. 


JOHHSOH,  FRAHKUH:  Baptist;  b.  at  Frank- 
fort, O.,  Nov.  2,  1836.  He  was  educated  at  Col- 
gate University,  but  left  before  taking  his  degree, 
and  at  Colgate  Theological  Seminary,  from  which 
he  was  graduated  in  1861.  He  hdd  successive 
pastorates  at  the  First  Baptist  Church,  Bay  City, 
Mich.  (1862-64),  Lambertville,  N.  J.  (1864-^), 
Passaic,  N.  J.  (1866-72),  and  the  Oki  Cambridge 
Baptist  Church,  Cambridf^,  Mass.  (1872-88),  in- 
terrupted only  by  a  year  of  study  in  Germany  and 
travel  in  E^gypt  and  Palestine  in  1868-69.  He  was 
president  of  Ottawa  University  in  1890-92,  and 
since  the  latter  year  has  been  professor  of  church 
history  and  homiletics  in  the  University  of  Chi- 
cago. In  addition  to  being  associate  editor  of  The 
Watchman  in  1876,  his  writings  include:  The  Oos- 
pel  According  to  Matthew,  with  Notes  (New  York, 
1873);  Moses  and  Israel  (IB74);  Heroes  and  Judgee 
from  the  Law-Oiven  to  the  King  (1875);  The  Dies 
Irae  (Cambridge,  Mass.,  1880);  The  Stabat  Mater 
Dolorosa  and  the  Stabat  Mater  Speciosa  (Boston, 
1886);  The  New  Psychic  Studies  in  their  Relation 
to  Christian  Thought  (New  York,  1886);  The  Quo- 
tations <4  ^  ^^^  Testament  from  the  Old  Considered 
in  the  Light  of  Oeneral  Literature  (Philadelphia, 
1896);  The  Home  Missionaries  (Chicago,  1889); 
Have  We  the  Likeness  of  Christf  (1902);  and  The 
Christian's  Relation  to  Evolution  (1904). 

JOHHSOH,  FRSDBRICK  FOOTE:  Protestant 
Episcopal  bishop  coadjutor  of  South  Dakota;  b. 
at  Newtown,  Conn.,  Apr.  23,  1866.  He  was  grad- 
uated at  Trinity  College,  Hartford,  Conn.,  in  1894, 
and  at  Berkeley  Divinity  School,  Middletown, 
Conn.,  in  1897.  After  being  minister  at  Glenwood 
Springs,  Col.,  1896-97,  and  curate  of  St.  Stephen's, 
Colorado  Springs,  1897-99,  he  was  rector  of  Trinity, 
Redlands,  Cal.,  1890-1904.  He  was  then  diocesan 
missionary  in  Western  Massachusetts  for  a  year, 
and  in  1905  was  consecrated  bishop  coadjutor  of 
South  Dakota. 

JOHNSOH,  GISLB  CHRISTIAN:  Norwegian  the- 
ologian; b.  at  Fredrikshald  (58  m.  s.s.e.  of  Chris- 
tiania)  Sept.  10,  1822;  d.  at  Christiania  July  17, 
1894.  He  was  educated  at  the  cathedral  school 
of  Christiansand  and  at  the  University  of  Chris- 
tiania, after  which  a  scholarship  enabled  him  to 
travel  and  study  in  Berlin,  Leipsic,  Erlangen, 
Heidelberg,  TObingen,  and  Paris.  He  returned  to 
Norway  in  the  fall  of  1847,  and  was  appointed  lec- 
turer in  theology  at  the  university  two  years  later, 
becoming  professor  in  1860.  He  lectured  on  sys- 
tematic theology,  history  of  doctrine,  theological 
encyclopedia,  and,  after  1877,  on  church  history. 

Johnson  exercised  an  important  influence  on 
C!hristian  life  iii  general  as  well  as  on  his  students 
by  his  devotional  lectures  in  Christiania  and  else- 
where. He  spent  many  of  his  vacations  in  travel- 
ing through  the  country  in  search  of  health,  and  in 
these  travels,  which  were  generally  on  foot,  he 
visited  awakened  C!hristian  laymen.  His  theo- 
logical standpoint  was  strict  orthodoxy  of  the  old 
Lutheran  type,  and  he  worked  for  the  home  mis- 
sions in  Christiania,  the  Norwegian  Luther-founda- 
tion, the  students'  home,  and  similar  institutions. 
Despite  his  thorough  learning,  he  was  not  a  pro- 


221 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Johxiaon 


lifie  author,  for  his  rigid  self-eriticism  made  him 
too  timid,  but  when,  in  1857,  the  pietiatio  preacher 
G.  A.  Laznmers,  of  Skien,  left  the  established  Church 
and  undertook  to  found  a  "  free  apostolic  and  Chris- 
tian congregation,"  abolishing,  among  other  things, 
infant  baptism,  Johnson  published  his  Nogle  Ord 
cm  Bamedaaben.  He  also  collaborated  with  C.  P. 
Caapari  in  translating  the  Old  Testament  until 
1890,  and  with  F.  W.  Bugge  in  making  a  version  of 
the  New  Testament.  With  Gaspari,  furthermore, 
he  edited  Tidsakrift  for  den  evomgdxMvikenke  kirke 
i  Noqfe,  In  1863  he  founded  the  Lutherak  Kirke- 
Hdende,  which  he  edited  till  1875,  and  to  which  he 
contributed  many  articles.  In  1878-79  he  pub- 
lished his  Grundrida  af  den  aystemaiiake  Theologie, 
while  his  FordcBaninger  over  den  ckriatelige  Ethxk  and 
ForeUBamnger  over  DogmekiaUnien  appeared  pos- 
thumously in  1896.  J.  BELBHBiMt. 

JOHNSOH,  HBRRICK :  Presbyterian;  b.  at 
Kaughnewaga,  N.  Y.,  Sept.  22,  1832.  He  was 
graduated  at  Hamilton  College  in  1857  and  at 
Auburn  Theological  Seminary  in  1860.  After  be- 
ing associate  pastor  of  the  First  Presbyterian 
Church,  Troy,  N.  Y.,  in  1860-62,  he  was  pastor  of 
the  Third  Ptesbyterian  Church,  Pittsburg,  Pa.,  in 
1862-67  and  the  First  Presbyterian  Church,  Phila- 
delphia, in  1868-73.  He  was  then  professor  of 
homiletics  and  pastoral  theology  in  Auburn  Theo- 
logical Seminary  from  1874  to  1880,  after  which  he 
was  pastor  of  the  Fourth  Presbyterian  Church, 
Chicago,  until  1883.  He  taught  sacred  rhetoric  and 
pastoral  theology  in  McCormick  Theological  Semi- 
nary, Chicago,  1880-1906.  He  was  president  of  the 
Presbyterian  Board  of  Ministerial  Education  in 
1869-73  and  of  the  Presbyterian  Board  of  Aid  for 
Coll^^es  and  Academies  in  1883-1903,  moderator 
of  the  General  Assembly  at  Springfield,  111.,  in  1882, 
and  a  member  of  the  Presbyterian  Board  of  Pub- 
lication in  1868-73,  and  of  two  committees  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church  for  the  revision  of  the  Con- 
fession of  Faith  in  1890  and  1900.  In  theology  he 
is  a  liberal  conservative,  describing  himself  as  ''  a 
thorough  believer  in  both  the  doctrines  and  polity 
of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  as  warranted  by  the 
Word  of  God  and  represented  in  the  Presbyterian 
Confession  of  Faith  and  form  of  government."  He 
has  written:  CkriatianUy'a  Challenge  (Chicago,  1880) ; 
Plain  Talka  abmU  the  Theatre  (1882);  Revivala,  their 
Place  and  Power  (1883);  Preabyterian  Bulwarks 
(New  York,  1887);  Preabyterian  Book  of  Forma 
(Philadelphia,  1889);  From  Lave  to  Praiae  (1903); 
and  Ideal  Minutry  (1908). 

JOHHSON,  JOSEPH  HORSPALL:  Protestant 
Episcopal  bishop  of  Los  Angeles;  b.  at  Schenec- 
tady, N.  Y.,  June  7,  1847.  He  was  educated  at 
Williams  College  (A.B.,  1870)  and  (General  Theo- 
logical Seminary,  from  which  he  was  graduated  in 
1873.  He  was  ordered  deacon  in  the  same  year 
and  advanced  to  the  priesthood  in  1874.  He  was 
minister,  curate,  and  rector  of  Holy  Trinity,  High- 
land, N.  Y.,  in  1873-79,  and  rector  of  Trinity,  Bris- 
tol, R.  I.,  m  1879-«1,  St.  Peter's,  Westchester,  N.  Y., 
in  1881-86,  and  CJhrist  Church,  Detroit,  Mich.,  in 
1886-96.  In  the  latter  year  he  was  consecrated 
bishop  of  Los  Angeles. 


JOHHSOH,  SAMUEL:  1.  First  president  of 
King's  Coll^,  now  Columbia  University;  b.  at 
Guilford,  Conn.,  Oct.  14,  1696;  d.  at  Stratford, 
Conn.,  Jan.  6,  1772.  He  studied  at  Yale  College 
(M.A.,  1714),  and  became  a  tutor  there  in  1716,  on 
the  removal  of  the  college  from  Saybrook  to  New 
Haven.  He  was  ordained  pastor  of  a  Congrega- 
tional church  at  West  Haven  in  1720,  but  became 
a  convert  to  episcopacy  in  1722,  and  was  reordained 
in  England  in  1723.  On  his  return  to  Connecti- 
cut he  was  assigned  to  the  mission  at  Stratford, 
where  he  remained  till  1754.  Thereupon  he  was 
president  of  King's  Ck>llege,  New  York,  till  1763, 
when  he  resigned  this  position  and  returned  to 
Stratford.  In  1764  he  was  reappointed  to  his  old 
charge,  which  he  retained  till  his  death.  He  formed 
a  close  friendship  with  Bbhop  Geoige  Berkeley  (q.v.) 
during  the  latter's  visit  to  America,  and  accepted 
his  teaching.  For  many  years  his  pen  was  par- 
ticularly active  in  the  defense  of  episcopacy)  an 
unpopidar  cause  in  the  colonies,  and  his  adoption 
of  it  created  a  profound  sensation.  He  engaged  in 
long  controversies  with  Jonathan  Dickinson,  Thomas 
Foxcroft,  and  John  Graham.  His  principal  works 
are:  A  LeUer  from  a  Miniater  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land  to  kia  Diaaenting  Pariakionera  (New  York,  1733) ; 
A  Second  Letter  (Boston,  1734);  A  Third  Letter 
(1737);  A  SyaUm  of  Morality  (1746;  3d  ed.,  London, 
1754),  which  was  published  by  Benjamin  Franklin 
under  the  title  EUmenia  PhUoaophica  (Philadel- 
phia, 1752);  and  An  Engliah  and  Htbrew  Grammar 
(London,  1767). 

Biblioobapbt:  T.  B.  Chandler.  Th€  lAfe  af  S.  Johnaon  .  .  . 
FiTBt  PruiderU  cf  King'9  CoUage,  New  York,  1805;  W.  B. 
Spracue.  AnnaU  of  fhe  American  Pidpii,  v.  62-61,  ib.  1860; 

1.  W.  Riley,  American  PhOowphy;  the  Barly  ScHooU,  pp. 
63-126.  New  York.  1907. 

2.  Independent  clergyman  and  reformer;  b.  at 
Salem,  Mass.,  Oct.  10,  1822;  d.  at  North  Andover, 
Mass.,  Feb.  19,  1882.  He  was  graduated  from 
Harvard  in  1842  and  from  the  Harvard  Divinity 
School  in  1846.  He  entered  the  ministry  without 
ordination  and  never  associated  himself  with  any 
denomination,  though  in  his  views  he  was  closely 
related  to  the  Unitarians.  His  first  chaige  was  the 
Unitarian  (%urch  at  Dorchester,  where  he  re- 
mained one  year.  From  1851  till  1870  he  was  pas- 
tor of  the  Free  Church  at  Lynn.  He  took  a  prom- 
inent part  in  the  antislavery  agitation.  His  prin- 
cipal publications  are:  A  Book  of  Hymna  (Boston, 
1846),  in  collaboration  with  Samuel  Longfellow; 
The  Worahip  </  Jeaua  (1868);  and  Oriental  ReUg- 
iona,  and  their  BeUUion  to  Univeraal  Religion:  Inr 
dia  (1872),  China  (1877),  Peraia  (1885).  Samuel 
Longfellow  collected  his  Lecturea,  Eaaaya,  and  Ser* 
mona  (1883),  to  which  he  prefixed  a  Memoir. 

JOHNSOR,  THOMAS  GARY:  Presbyterian;  b. 
at  Fishbok  Hill,  Va.,  July  19,  1859.  He  was  edu- 
cated at  Hampden-Sidney  College  (B.A.,  1881),  the 
University  of  Virginia  (1883^84),  Union  Theolog- 
ical Seminary,  Richmond,  Va.  (graduated  in  1887), 
and  the  Yale  Divinity  School  (1887-88).  After 
being  professor  of  Old-  and  New-Testament  exe- 
gesis in  Austin  Theological  School,  Austin,  Tex., 
in  1888-90,  and  pastor  elect  of  the  Third  Presby- 
terian CSiurc^i  Louisville,  Ey.,  in  1890-91,  he  was 


JohMon        , 
onaaof  Orleaaa 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


222 


appointed  profesBor  of  the  Engliah  Bible  and  pas- 
toral theology  ^n  Union  Theological  Seminary, 
Richmond.  In  the  following  year  (1892)  he  waa  ap- 
pointed to  his  present  position  of  professor  of  eccle- 
siastical history  and  polity  in  the  same  institution. 
Besides  editing  the  collected  writings  of  Rev.  Prof. 
T.  E.  Peck  (Richmond,  Va.,  1885-87),  he  has  written : 
The  Life  and  LeUen  of  Robert  Lewie  Dabney  (Rich- 
mond, 1893);  Hietory  qf  the  Sovihem  PreAyUnan 
Church  (New  York,  1894);  John  Calvin  and  the 
Genevan  Re/ormalion  (Richmond,  1900);  Life  and 
Letters  of  Benjamin  Morgan  Palmer  (1906);  and 
Virginia  Preebyterianiem  and  Rdigioue  Liberty  in 
Cohnud  and  Revolutionary  Timee  (1907). 

JOHNSOH,  WILLIAM  ALLER:  Protestant  Epis- 
copalian; b.  at  Hyde  Park,  N.  Y.,  Aug.  4,  1833. 
He  was  educated  at  Colimibia  (A.B.,  1853)  and  at 
the  General  Theological  Seminary,  from  which  he 
was  graduated  in  1857.  He  was  ordered  deacon 
in  1857  and  ordained  priest  in  185S.  He  was  min- 
ister and  rector  of  St.  Peter's,  Bainbridge,  N.  Y., 
and  of  Christ  Church,  Guilford,  N.  Y.,  from  1857 
to  1862,  after  which  he  was  a  missionary  in  upper 
Michigan  for  two  years  (1862-64).  From  1864  to 
1870  he  was  rector  of  St.  Mary's,  Burlington,  N.  J., 
and  from  1871  to  1883  of  St.  John's,  Salisbury, 
Conn.  From  the  latter  year  until  his  retirement 
as  professor  emeritus  in  1900  he  was  connected  with 
the  Berkeley  Divinity  School,  Middletown,  Conn., 
where  he  was  suocesnively  professor  of  homiletics 
and  Christian  evidences  from  1883  to  1886  and  of 
ecclesiastical  history  from  1887  to  1900. 

JOHNSTON,  HOWARD  AGNBW:  Presbyterian; 
b.  near  Xenia,  O.,  June  29,  1860.  He  was  educated 
at  the  University  of  Cincinnati  (B.A.,  1882)  and 
Lane  Theological  Seminary,  Cincinnati,  from  which 
he  was  graduated  in  1885.  He  was  pastor  succes- 
sively of  the  Seventh  Presbyterian  Church,  Cincin- 
nati, in  1884-90,  Central  Church,  Des  Moines,  la., 
in  1890-93;  Forty-First  Street  Presbyterian  Church, 
Chicago,  in  1893-99;  and  Madison  Avenue  Pres- 
byterian Church,  New  York  City,  in  1899-1905. 
In  the  latter  year  he  resigned  to  be  for  a  couple  of 
years  special  representative  of  his  denomination  to 
its  Asiatic  missions,  and  in  1908  became  pastor  of 
the  First  Presbyterian  Church,  Colorado  Springs, 
Col.  He  has  written  Moaea  and  the  Pentateuch  (Cin- 
cinnati, 1893);  Studies  in  God* s  Methods  of  Training 
Workers  (New  York,  1900);  BO^  Criticism  and  the 
iivera^s  Man  (Chicago,  1902);  Studies  for  Personal 
Workers  (New  York,  1903);  Scientific  Faith  (Chi- 
cago, 1904);  The  Beatitudes  of  Christ  (1905);  Brief 
Studies  through  the  Bible  (New  York,  1905) ;  and 
Famine  and  the  Bread  (1908). 

JOHNSTON,  JAMES  STEPTOE:  Protestant  Epis- 
copal bishop  of  Western  Texas;  b.  at  Church  Hill, 
Miss.,  June  9,  1843.  He  was  educated  at  Oakland 
College,  Miss.,  and  the  University  of  Virginia,  but 
left  in  1861,  before  graduation,  to  enter  the  Con- 
federate Army.  He  served  throughout  the  Civil 
War,  first  as  a  private  in  the  Eleventh  Mississippi 
Regiment,  and  later  as  a  second  lieutenant  in 
Stuart's  cavalry.  After  the  end  of  the  war,  he 
studied  law  and  was  admitted  to  the  bar  in  1868. 


He  soon  tiuned,  however,  from  the  law  to  the 
Church,  and,  after  pursuing  his  theological  studies 
privately,  was  ordered  deacon  in  1869  and  priested 
two  years  later.  He  was  successively  minister  and 
curate  at  St.  James',  Port  Gibson,  Miss.,  in  1870- 
1876,  and  rector  of  the  Church  of  the  Ascension, 
Mount  Sterling,  Ky.,  in  1866-80,  and  of  Trinity, 
Mobile,  Ala.,  in  1880-88.  In  the  latter  year  he  was 
consecrated  missionary  bishop  of  Western  Texas. 
Within  his  diocese  he  has  enkuged  St.  Mary's  Hall, 
a  girls'  college,  and  has  founded  the  West  Texas 
Military  Academy,  both  at  San  Antonio. 

JOKTAN,  jek'tan:  According  to  Gen.  x.  25  sqq. 
a  son  of  Eber,  the  grandson  of  Shem,  brother  of 
Peleg,  and  father  of  thirteen  sons  (twelve  accord- 
ing to  the  LXX).  According  to  this  chapter  the 
Semitic  stock  divided  into  two  branches,  a  northern 
and  a  southern,  long  before  the  migrations  of  the 
Abrahamic  family;  and  the  names  of  the  thirteen 
sons  of  Joktan  point  to  southern  Arabia,  while 
Genesis  is  right  in  distinguishing  between  the 
Joktan  peoples  and  the  later  Ishmaelites.  The  Ara- 
bic ethnographers  make  the  same  distinction  be- 
tween the  sons  of  ^ahfan  (pure  Arabs)  and  Ishmael- 
ites. The  location  of  the  Joktan  peoples  as  given 
in  Gen.  x.  30  is  disputed.  Mesha  is  placed  by  De- 
litssch  on  the  northwestern  comer  of  the  Persian 
Gulf,  and  by  Knobel  about  fifty  miles  southeast  of 
Mecca.  In  the  first  case  Sephar  is  placed  in  the 
Himyaritic  Zaphar  in  Yemen  and  the  ''  mountain 
of  tlMS  east "  is  the  range  in  the  east  of  Hadramaut. 
In  the  other  case,  Joktan's  possessions  were  a  tri- 
angle in  southwest  Arabia.  But  neither  situation 
furnishes  good  locations  for  Ophir  (q.v.)  and  Havilah 
(verse  29).    See  Tablb  of  thb  Nations. 

(E.  Kautzbch.) 
Bibuoorapht:  The    oommmtariM    on    Genesis    and   the 

Utemtura  under  Tablb  op  Nations;    R  C.  A.  Riehm, 

HandwOrterimeh   de§   btblUeUn   AUertumB,    pp.    763-764. 

Leipaic,  1893;  DB,  ii.  743-744;  EB,  U.  2564;  JS,  vii.  225. 

JORAH:  Fifth  of  the  Mmor  Prophets  in  the  ar- 
rangement of  the  English  version.  He  is  called 
the  son  of  Amittai,  and,  according  to  II  Kings  xiv. 
25,  uttered  a  prophecy  concerning  Jeroboam  II. 
The  book  is  distinguished  from  other  prophetical 
books  by  the  fact  that  it  is  not  the  prophecy,  but 
the  personal  experiences  of  the  man,  in  which  the 
interest  seems  to  center.  To  escape  the  divine 
sununons  to  preach  repentance  to  Nineveh,  Jonah 
embarked  from  Joppa  for  Tarshish,  but  during  a 
storm  was,  at  his  own  advice  and  by  the  issue  of  a 
lot,  thrown  overboard,  and  swallowed  by  a  great 
fish  (i.  17).  Three  days  afterward  he  was  thrown 
up  upon  the  land,  and,  after  a  second  summons, 
began  preaching  to  the  Ninevites.  When  both  king 
and  people  began  to  repent,  Jonah  became  indig- 
nant at  the  divine  compassion,  but  was  convino^ 
by  God  of  his  foolishness  through  a  gourd  (iv.). 
Many  have  regarded  the  book  as  an  allegory  or  a 
poetic  myth,  while  others  hold  that  it  was  a  national 
prophetic  tradition  designed  to  serve  a  didactic 
aim,  and  contained  some  elements  of  historic  truth. 
Those  who  regard  the  book  as  history  appeal  to  the^ 
geographical  and  historical  notices  in  the  prophecy; 
for  example,  the  accuracy  of  the  description  of 
Nineveh  and  the  fitness  of  Jonah's  missioo  at  that 


dM 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Johnson 

Jonas  of  Orleans 


partieular  period,  when  Israel  was  ooming  into  oon 
tact  with  Assjrria.  Those  who  deny  the  credibility^ 
make  much  of  the  abundance  of  the  miraculous, 
especially  of  the  story  of  the  great  fish;  but  this  in- 
ddent  is  consistent  with  our  Lord's  use  of  it  (Matt. 
xii.  39  sqq.)  to  illustrate  his  own  resurrection  by 
the  use  of  material  gathered  from  folk-lore.  The 
central  piupose  of  the  book  is  to  teach  that  the 
heathen  world  is  called  to  the  knowledge  of  Yahweh 
to  take  its  place  in  his  kingdom  (iv.  10-11). 

That  the  Jonah  of  II  Kings  xiv.  25  has  set  down 
in  this  book  his  experiences  is  nowhere  indicated. 
The  narrative  at  beginning  and  end  is  so  abrupt 
that  it  has  probably  come  out  of  a  cycle  of  narra^- 
tives  like  those  which  center  about  Elisha;  indeed, 
an  old  Haggadah  calls  Jonah  a  prophet  of  Elisha's 
schcx>L  There  is  much  dififerenoe  about  the  date. 
Because  of  the  use  of  the  perfect  tense  in  iii.  3b, 
the  book  must  postdate  the  fall  of  Nineveh  (606 
B.C.);  and  linguistic  indications  agree  with  this, 
though  it  should  not  be  brought  below  the  fifth 
pre-Christian  century.  Attempts  to  find  Jahvistic 
and  Elohistic  sources  in  the  book  are  not  a  success. 

(W.  VoLCKt.) 
Bduookafht:  Commentaries  are:     Ephraem  Syms,    The 
ficpenteMM  <^  Nineveh,  Eog.  traiml..  London,   1863;    8. 
MhofaeU.  Philadelphia,  1875;  M.  Kalisoh,  in  BihU  Studied 
part  iL,  London,  1878  (gives  oonspectus  of  earlier  litera- 
ture);  A.  E.  O'Connor.  Geneva.  1883;   C.  H.  H.  Wright, 
BibHoal  Studiee,  Edinbungh.  1886;   H.  Martin,  Edinburgh. 
1891;  C.  von  Orelli,  Munich,  1806.  Eng.  tranal..  New  York, 
1803;  J.  Kennedy.  London,  1805;  W.  Nowaok.  Gfittingen. 
1897;    G.  A.  Smith.  Book  of  the  Twelve,  vol.  ii.,  London^ 
1898  (beet);    F.  Hitxig,  ed.  H.  Steiner.  Leipeic,   1004; 
E.  B.  Posey,  Minor  PropheU,  new  issue.  London,  1007«-< 
Special  treatises  are:   J.  Friedriehsen,  Uebereicht  iiber  die 


on  Jonah  and  Hoeea,  London,  1853;  T.  K.  Cheyne,  Theo- 
logical Review,  1877.  pp.  211-210;  K.  Vollers.  in  ZATW^ 
iii  (1883).  210  sqq..  iv  (1884).  1  sqq.;  W.  BOhme.  in 
ZATW,  vii  (1887).  224  sqq.  (on  the  literary  composition); 
A.  Merr,  Chreaiomaihia  Targumiea,  pp.  132-130.  Berlin, 
1807  (gives  the  Targum  on  Jonah);  H.  Schmidt,  Jona, 
Bine  Untenuehung  tur  vergUiehenden  Rdigionegeeehiete, 
Oftttingen,  1007;  DB,  ii  744-763;  EB,  u.  2666-2671;  JE, 
viL226-23a 

JOHASOFBOBBIO:  Hagiographer  of  the  seventh 
century;  d.  after  659.  He  was  a  native  of  Susa 
(the  Roman  Segusio),  at  the  foot  of  Mt.  Cents 
(about  28  m.  w.  of  Turin).  In  618,  still  quite 
young,  he  entered  the  monastery  at  Bobbio,  and 
was  educated  there.  He  cMscompanied  Bertulf,  the 
third  abbot,  to  Rome  in  627.  Since  he  had  a  per- 
sonal acquaintance  with  Eustasius,  abbot  of  Lux- 
euil,  who  died  in  the  spring  of  629,  he  may  have 
gone  to  Gaul  (where  he  remained  permanently)  as 
early  as  628.  While  temporarily  visiting  Bobbio 
at  a  later  time  he  promised  to  write  the  life  of  Co- 
lumban  and  his  successors  and  disciples,  and  com- 
pleted the  work  between  640  and  643.  About  this 
time  he  was  engaged  with  St.  Amandus  in  trying 
to  convert  the  heathen  Franks  on  the  Scheldt  and 
Scarpe.  While  staying  in  Arras  he  was  induced 
to  write  the  life  of  St.  Vedastes,  the  first  Prank- 
ish bishop  of  Arras,  and  in  Nov.,  659,  having 
meanwhile  obtained  the  dignity  of  abbot,  he  com- 
posed the  life  of  St.  John  of  Reomans.  Of  the  last 
events  of  Jonas'  life  and  of  his  death  nothing  is 
known.  The  Vita  Coiuwhanx^  Jonas'  principal  work, 
including  also,  in  its  second  part,  Eustasius,  Attala, 


Bertulf,  and  Burgundofara  (in  MPL^  Ixxxvii. 
1009-46;  cf.  Krusch  in  MittheUungen  dea  IfutUuU 
far  oMerreichiache  Oeschichtafanchung,  xiv.  385  sqq., 
Innsbruck,  1893;  Eng.  transl.  by  D.  C.  Munro  in 
Trandaiiona  and  ReprirUa  published  by  the  depart- 
ment of  history  of  the  University  of  Pennsylvania, 
ii.  7,  Philadelphia,  1895)  has  established  his  literary 
fame.  In  spite  of  its  silence  on  important  matters 
— ^like  the  Easter  controversy  and  the  first  applica- 
tion of  the  rule  of  St.  Benedict  in  Gaul — notwith- 
standing the  preference  for  marvelous  stories  in 
accordance  with  the  spirit  of  the  times,  it  rises  by 
a  certain  historical  sense  above  many  like  works. 
The  language,  too,  is  peculiar  and  novel  (cf .  Krusch, 
435),  and  proves  identity  of  authorship  for  the  Vita 
Columbani  and  the  Vitae  of  Vedastes  and  St.  John 
of  Reomans.  O.  Seebabs. 

Bibuoorapht:  Hietoire  UtUraire  de  la  France,  iii.  604  sqq.; 
Hertel,  in  ZHT,  xxbx,  307  sqq.;  8t6ber,  in  iSiltufi0»- 
herichie  der  Wiener  Akademie,  1885.  pp.  310  sqq.;  Knuch. 
in  Mittheilungen  dee  IneUiute  fOr  deterreichieche  Oi»ehiehie- 
foreehung,  xiv.  385  sqq.,  and  in  MQH,  Script,  rer,  Merov,, 
W  (1002).  30  sqq.;  Wattenbaoh.  DGQ,  i  (1808).  116,  118- 
110.  ii.  503. 

JOHAS  OP  ORLEAKS:  Bishop  of  Orleans  from 
821  till  his  death  in  844.  He  was  a  native  of 
Aquitania  and  succeeded  Theodulf  (d.  Sept.  18, 
821)  as  bishop  of  Organs.  He  attended  a  synod 
called  at  Paris  by  Louis  the  Pious  in  Nov.,  825, 
to  consider  the  question  of  image-worship,   and 

^was  sent  to  Rome  to  lay  the  resolutions  adopted 
before  Pope  Eugenius  II.  He  was  also  prominent 
in  the  synod  at  Paris  in  829,  called  by  the  em- 

*peror  to  find  remedies  for  abuses  of  the  time.    In 


Aneiduen  ia>er  Jona,  Leipaic.  1841;  W.  Drake.  NouiJ\^S25  Jonas  had  written  on  the  subject  in  his  D«  in- 

Mutiane  laicali,  which  gives  in  three  books  valuable 
descriptions  of  the  prevalent  moral  corruption  and 
urges  renovation  of  the  churchly  spirit.  Another 
topic  of  the  synod's  discussion,  the  duties  of  secu- 
lar rulers,  had  also  been  anticipated  by  Jonas  in 
828  in  a  little  work  De  institutione  regia,  which  now 
was  embodied  in  the  resolutions  of  the  synod. 
Jonas'  remarks  on  the  relation  between  the  spiritual 
and  secular  authorities  are  interesting.  The  latter 
are  dependent  upon  the  former.  The  power  of  the 
keys  has  been  entrusted  to  the  spiritual  office  by 
the  Lord  so  that  even  kings  have  to  submit  to  it. 
Man  can  not  judge  God;  and  therefore  he  can  not 
judge  the  representatives  of  God  (ecclesiastics). 
Louis  again  addressed  himself  to  Jonas  when  tl^ 
energetic  measures  of  (Illaudius  of  Turin  (q.v.) 
against  image-worship  became  known  in  the  Prank- 
ish realm;  and  sent  him  an  excerpt  from  the  doc- 
trinal works  of  Claudius  with  the  request  to  refute 
them.  The  death  of  Claudius  induced  Jonas  to 
withhold  his  refutation  at  the  time.  But  about 
842  he  laid  his  work  before  Charles  the  Bald,  the 
son  of  Louis.  Jonas  still  labored  imder  the  super- 
stition of  his  time.  He  distinguishes  a  double  ad- 
oration— one  that  is  due  to  God  alone,  and  one  that 
is  addressed  to  the  holy  images;  he  advocates  the 
worship  of  martyrs  and  relics,  believes  in  an  effect- 
ive intercession  of  the  saints  and  the  mother  of 
God,  and  demands  worship  oC  the  cross. 

(Albert  FRBTBTBDTt.) 
Bibuograprt:  His  worka  are  in  MPL,  ovi;  alao  partly  in 
L.  d'Achery.  Sjrieilegiim,  I  268^28,  824-336,  Fteis,  1666. 


Jonaa 
Jones 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


994 


Gonmlt  Hiatoin  UUirmn  dt  la  France,  W.  604-eOB,  ▼.  20- 
81:  A.  Ebert,  AUgemeine  OMckidUt  dtr  lAigraiur  dta 
Afiftelottflra.  U.  224-280.  LdiMie,  1880;  PottbMt,  We^ 
wtiwr,  p.  682. 

JORASi  JUSTUS:  German  Refonner,  dose  friend 
and  aaaociate  of  Luther;  b.  at  Nordhausen  (38  m. 
w.n.w.  of  Erfurt),  Saxony,  June  5, 1493;  d.  in  Eia- 
feld  (40  m.  s.  of  Erfurt),  Saxe-Meiningen,  Oct.  9, 
1555.  His  real  name  was  Jodocus  Koch,  but  he 
adopted  his  father's  C!hristian  name  as  a  surname 
during  his  university  career.  In  1506  he  matricu- 
lated at  Erfmt,  wbne  he  entered  into  dose  friend- 
ship with  Eobanus  Hess,  whom  he  emulated  in  his 
devotion  to  humanistic  studies  and  the  practise 
of  verse-writing.  Having  chosen  jurisprudence  as 
his  special  field,  he  followed  the  celebrated  teacher 
Henning  Gode  to  Wittenberg  in  1511,  but  returned 
about  three  years  later  to  Erfmt,  received  ordina- 
tion, and  became  prebend  in  the  Churdi  of  St. 
Severus  and  professor  in  law  at  the  university.  A 
member  of  the  circle  of  enthusiastic  humanists  who 
acknowledged  Eobanus  as  their  "  king  "  and  wor- 
shiped Erasmus  as  their  idol,  Jonas  took  advan- 
tage of  a  pilgrimage  made  by  Eobanus  in  1518  to 
enter  into  communication  with  the  great  scholar. 
In  the  following  year  he  made  his  personal  acquaint- 
ance, and  Erasmus  conceived  a  liking  for  his  young 
admirer,  and  subsequently  exerted  himself  to  pre- 
vent his  conversion  to  the  party  of  Luther.  Jonas 
in  return  spoke  of  Erasmus  as  his  ''  father  in 
Christ,"  his  instructor  and  guide  in  the  way  of 
right  living. 

In  1519,  while  absent  in  the  Netherlands,  Jonas 
was  chosen  rector  of  the  university,  and  at  the 
same  time  comprehensive  reforms  were  enacted 
whereby  the  study  of  Hebrew  and  Greek  together 
with  the  "  true "  philosophy  and  theology  was 
made  a  part  of  the  curriculum.  On  his  return 
Jonas  began  a  series  of  Bible-readings,  in  the  spirit 
still  of  Erasmus  and  not  of  Luther.  His  adhesion 
to  the  cause  of  the  great  Reformer  dates  from  about 
the  time  of  the  Leipsic  Disputation,  shortly  before 
which  event  Luther,  through  Johann  Lang,  offered 
his  friendship  to  Jonas;  the  latter's  first  letter 
bears  the  date  of  June,  1520.  Upon  the  death 
of  Henning  Gdde  at  Wittenberg  in  Jan.,  1521, 
Spalatin  recommended  Jonas  as  his  successor.  The 
elector  offered  the  vacant  professorship  to  Mutianus, 
who  declined,  and  likewise  recommended  Jonas. 
The  latter  received  the  appointment  at  Worms, 
whither  he  had  accompanied  Luther.  In  June  of 
the  same  year  he  removed  to  Wittenberg,  and, 
embracing  with  enthusiasm  the  doctrines  of  the  the- 
ologians there,  devoted  himself  to  an  active  cham- 
pionship of  the  Protestant  cause.  With  some  dif- 
ficulty he  succeeded  in  obtaining  his  transfer  to 
the  theological  faculty,  in  order  more  freely  to  de- 
vote himself  to  the  religious  propaganda. 

In  the  controversies  concerning  the  reform  of 
worship  at  the  court  church  during  Luther's  so- 
journ at  the  Wartburg,  Jonas  was  one  of  the  most 
earnest  advocates  of  Protestant  innovations.  From 
1523  to  1533  he  was  dean  of  the  theological  faculty 
and  delivered  lectures  on  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ments, but  gradually  his  professional  duties  were 
abandoned  for  literary  labors  in  the  great  cause 


For  Luther  he  carried  on  a  polemic  against  Johan- 
nes Faber  over  the  celibacy  of  the  dergy  (1523)  and 
later  came  into  conflict  with  his  fellow  student  at 
Erfurt,  Georg  Witsel.  His  gifts  revealed  them- 
selves, especiflJly,  however,  in  his  translations  from 
the  works  of  Luther  and  Melanchthon,  from  Ger- 
man into  Latin  and  vice  versa,  gifts  of  which  the 
two  men  gladly  availed  themselves,  allowing  him 
full  liberty  in  the  handling  of  their  writings;  among 
such  translations  were  the  German  versions  of 
Luther's  De  servo  arbitrio  and  Melanchthon's  Loci, 
At  the  same  time  Jonas  played  an  active  part  in 
the  great  events  of  the  Reformation,  such  as  the 
Marburg  Conference  and  the  Diet  of  Augsburg.  In 
1532  he  became  adviser  to  the  three  Anhalt  prin- 
dpalities  and  in  1538  drew  up  a  set  of  church 
ordinances  for  the  city  of  Zerbst.  Preeminent,  how- 
ever, were  his  services  as  visitator  during  the  in- 
troduction of  the  Protestant  faith  into  the  duchy 
of  Saxony,  and  as  author  of  the  new  church  ordi- 
nances there  enacted.  In  the  establishment  of  the 
Reformation  in  Halle  he  also  played  a  leading  part. 
In  1541,  while  passing  through  that  dty,  he  was 
invited  by  some  of  the  councilors  to  remain  with 
them  for  some  time  and  to  instruct  them  in  the 
Gospel.  Jonas  b^gan  his  work  imder  the  protec- 
tion of  the  elector  of  Saxony  who  made  use  of  his 
long  neglected  pow*er  as  burgrave  of  Halle  to 
further  the  establishment  of  the  Reformed  faith  in 
that  town.  In  1541-42  the  new  ritual  was  intro- 
duced into  the  various  churches,  and  in  the  summer 
of  the  latter  year  Jonas  was  made  superintendent. 
In  1543  he  drew  up  the  church  ordinances  for  the 
town.  With  the  aid  of  the  Wittenberg  jurist 
Kilian  Goldstein,  who  had  been  summoned  to  Halle 
as  syndic,  Jonas  carried  on  the  organization  of  the 
Protestant  Church  with  a  resolute  energy  that  left 
him  little  time  for  literary  labors.  In  1546  he  ac- 
companied Luther  on  his  last  journey  to  Eisleben, 
stood  beside  his  death-bed,  and  delivered  his  fu- 
neral oration.  Their  friendship  had  never  known 
any  interruption  and  the  "  Table  Talk  "  and  cor- 
respondence of  the  Reformer  testify  to  the  intimate 
relations  that  prevailed  between  the  two. 

Upon  the  outbreak  of  the  Schmalkald  War,  Jonas 
vigorously  assailed  the  emperor  and  Biaurice  of 
SfUEony,  and  on  the  capture  of  Halle  by  the  latter 
in  November,  1546,  he  was  compelled  to  flee.  He 
returned  in  January,  1547,  and  made  use  of  the 
situation  to  drive  the  monks  and  nuns  from  the 
city  and  to  wipe  out  all  traces  of  Roman  practise 
in  the  church  system.  But  Halle  fell  a  second 
time  into  the  hands  of  Maurice,  and  Jonas  was  onoe 
more  a  fugitive.  His  exile  seems  to  have  aged  him 
rapidly  and  to  have  weakened  his  powers,  but 
he  longed  nevertheless  for  active  employment. 
Through  petitions  and  the  intercession  of  others  he 
sought  to  appease  the  anger  of  Maurice,  but  it  was 
not  until  1548  and  after  a  humiliating  sulnuission 
that  he  was  permitted  to  return  to  Halle.  There, 
however,  disappointment  awaited  him;  the  town 
council,  reluctant  to  place  at  the  head  of  affairs  s 
weak  old  man  who  numbered  among  his  opponents 
the  powerful  elector  and  the  new  archbishop  of 
Magdeburg,  dedined  to  restore  him  to  his  pulpit 
and  restricted  him  to  a  lectureship  in  Latin.    In 


225 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jonas 
Jones 


1550  he  became  court  preacher  at  Coburg.  His 
friendship  with  Melanchthon  had  cooled  and  on 
the  subject  of  the  Interim  Jonas  appears  as  his  op- 
ponent. Melanchthon,  in  return,  spoke  of  him  as 
an  old  man  unfit  for  the  performance  of  active  pas- 
toral duties.  After  a  short  activity  in  Regensburg, 
in  1553  Jonas  became  superintendent  at  Eisfeld, 
where  he  remained  till  his  death,  occupied  partially 
with  his  old  labors  as  a  translator.  The  picture  of 
a  sealous  champion  of  the  Reformation,  devoting 
his  great  gifts  and  capacity  for  effort  to  the  cause 
of  the  faith,  is  somewhat  tarnished  by  the  unspar- 
ing wrath  of  his  polemic  and  an  avarice  that  was 
notorious.  (G.  Kawerau.) 

Bibuoosaprt:  His  letters  were  publiahed  by  Q.  Kawerau, 
2  volfl.,  Halle,  1884-85;  additions  have  been  made,  e.g., 
by  C.  A.  H.  Burkbardt,  in  ZeUaehrift  fikr  kirchlidte  Wiuen- 
adkaft  und  LtUn,  1880,  pp.  430  sqq.  His  life  has  been 
written  by  L.  Reinhard,  Altenburg,  1731;  G.  C.  Knapp, 
Halle,  1817;  H.  G.  Hasse,  Leipsic,  1862;  T.  Pressel, 
Elberfeld,  1862;  while  the  Feataehrift  of  his  four  hundredth 
anniversary  was  edited  by  K.  Meyer,  Nordhausen,  1803. 
Different  phases  of  his  life  are  treated  in:  W.  Bests, 
Katu^redner  der  ItUheriadien  Kirche  de§  ReformoHona- 
ZeiiaUen,  i.  140  sqq.,  Leipsic,  1866;  K.  Krause,  H.  E. 
Heaaua,  vol.  i.,  Gotha.  1870;  F.  Kropatschek,  J.  Ddlach 
oiM  FeUkirdi,  Greifswald,  1808;  G.  Bauch,  Die  EinfUhrung 
der  makmcMhoniadien  DdclamaUonan,  Breslau,  1000.  Con- 
sult also  the  literature  on  Luther  and  on  the  Reformation. 

JONCOURT,  jan^'car',  PIERRE  DE:  French 
Protestant;  b.  at  Clermont-en-Beauvoisis  (16  m. 
8.8.e.  of  Beauvais)  c.  1650 ;  d.  at  The  Hague  1715. 
In  1678  he  went  from  France  to  Holland  and  be- 
came pastor  at  Middelburg.  In  1686  he  was  elected 
secretary  of  the  Walloon  Synod  of  Rotterdam.  He 
was  pastor  at  The  Hague  from  1699  till  his  death. 
His  most  important  work  is  ErUretiens  aur  lea  dif- 
firenUa  mHhodes  d'expUgiter  V£crUure  (Amsterdam, 
1707),  in  which  he  violently  attacked  the  allegor- 
ical interpretation,  which  Cocceius  had  carried  to 
its  extreme  limits.  In  the  heat  of  the  ensuing  con- 
troversy Joncourt  said  certain  things  about  Coc- 
ceius which  the  Synod  of  Nimeguen  compelled  him 
to  retract  in  1708. 
Bduoorapht:  E.   Haag,   Hiat.   daa  dogmas,   Paris,    1862; 

Laehtenberger,  ESR,  vii.  427-428. 

JONES,  JEHKIIIS  LLOYD:  Independent ;  b.  at 
LlandyssU  (44  m.  n.w.  of  Swansea),  Cardiganshire, 
Wales,  Nov.  14,  1843.  He  emigrated  to  the  United 
States  in  childhood  and  wbjs  a  farm  hand  until  the 
age  of  nineteen.  He  served  in  the  Union  Army  for 
three  years,  and  soon  after  the  close  of  the  Civil 
War  entered  Meadville  Theological  School,  from 
which  he  was  graduated  in  1870.  He  then  entered 
the  Unitarian  ministry  and  was  pastor  of  All  Souls' 
Unitarian  Church,  Jaynesville,  Wis.,  until  1879, 
being  at  the  same  time  secretary  of  the  Western 
Unitarian  Conference.  He  also  organized  the 
Western  Unitarian  Sunday  School  Society,  of  which 
he  was  secretary  for  fourteen  years.  After  leaving 
Jaynesville  for  Chicago  he  organized  All  Souls' 
Church,  of  which  he  has  been  pastor  since  1882. 
In  1894  this  society  formally  withdrew  from  all  de- 
nominational affiliations  to  emphasize  its  inde- 
pendency. In  1894  he  was  one  of  the  founders  of 
the  World's  Parliament  of  Religions  held  in  con- 
nection with  the  Chicago  Exposition,  and  was  sec- 
retary of  the  meetings  of  that  congress,  while  as 
VI.— 15 


early  as  1878  he  had  been  one  of  the  foimders  of 
Unity,  which  he  has  edited  since  1879  and  which 
is  now  the  organ  of  the  Congress  of  Religion  move- 
ment. He  likewise  established  the  Abraham  Lin- 
coln Center,  of  which  he  is  now  superintendent,  as 
well  as  the  Chicago  Browning  Society,  and  has  been 
first  president  of  the  Illinois  State  Conference  of 
Charities,  lecturer  in  English  in  the  tmiversity  ex- 
tension course  of  the  University  of  Chicago,  and 
president  of  the  Tower  Hill  Summer  School  of  Lit^ 
erature  and  Religion.  He  was  one  of  the  organ- 
izers of  the  Municipal  Voters'  League  of  Chicago, 
and  takes  an  active  interest  in  all  movements  for 
the  advai^cement  of  civil  service,  independency  in 
politics,  and  similar  aims.  In  theology  he  was  a 
member  of  the  radical  wing  of  the  Unitarians  and 
sympathitsed  and  cooperated  with  the  Free  Re- 
ligious Association  and  kindred  organizations.  He 
has  now,  however,  renoimced  all  vestiges  of  de- 
nominationalism.  He  has  written:  The  Faith  that 
makes  Faithful  (Chicago,  1886;  in  collaboration 
with  W.  C.  Gannett);  Practical  Piety  (1890);  Word 
of  the  SpirU  (1897) ;  Bite  of  Wayside  Gospel  (2  vols.. 
New  York,  1899-1901);  and  NuggeUfrom  a  Welsh 
Mine  (Chicago,  1902). 

JONES,  JEREMIAH:  Welsh  Biblical  critic  and 
Independent  minister;  b.  in  Wales  1693;  d.  there 
1724.  He  was  a  grandson  of  Samuel  Jones  (1628- 
1697,  see  Jones,  Samuel,  1)  and  was  educated  by  his 
uncle,  Samuel  Jones  (1680-1719;  see  Jones,  Sam- 
uel, 2),  at  Gloucester  and  Tewkesbury.  Among 
his  colleagues  in  his  uncle's  academy  were  Joseph 
Butler  and  Thomas  Seeker,  afterward  archbishop 
of  Canterbury.  After  serving  Independent  con- 
gregations at  Market  Harborough,  Leicestershire, 
and  Cold  Ashby,  Northamptonshire,  he  became 
pastor  of  the  Independent  church  at  Nailsworth,  in 
the  parish  of  Avening,  Gloucestershire,  in  1719,  and 
in  the  same  year  took  charge  of  his  deceased  uncle's 
pupils.  Jones  is  remembered  for  his  admirable 
New  and  Ftdl  Method  of  Settling  the  Canonical  Au- 
thority of  the  New  Testament  (3  vols.,  London,  1726- 
1727;  reprinted,  3  vols.,  Oxford,  1798,  again  1827). 
He  also  published  A  Vindication  of  the  Former  Part 
of  St,  Matthew's  Gospel  from  Mr.  Whiston's  Charge 
of  Dislocations  (London,  1719;  reprinted,  Salop, 
1721,  Oxford,  1803). 
Biblxoobapht:  J.  J[oulmin],  in  Gantleman'a  Magaaine,  June, 

1803;  DNB,  zxx.  121-122. 

JONES,  RUPUS  MATTHEW:  Friend;  b.  at 
South  China,  Me.,  Jan.  25,  1863.  He  was  educated 
at  Haverford  College,  Haverford,  Pa.  (A.B.,  1885), 
Heidelberg  University  (1887),  and  the  University 
of  Pennsylvania  (1893-95),  and  was  principal  of 
Oak  Grove  Seminary,  Vassalboro,  Me.,  from  1889- 
1893.  Since  the  latter  year  he  has  been  professor  of 
philosophy  in  Haverford  College,  and  has  also  been 
editor  of  The  American  Friend  since  the  same  year. 
He  has  been  a  trustee  of  Bryn  Mawr  College  since 
1896  and  is  a  member  of  the  American  Philosoph- 
ical Society.  In  addition  to  editing  George  Fox: 
An  Autobiography  (Philadelphia,  1903)  and  Social 
Law  in  the  Spiritual  World  (1904),  he  has  written 
Life  of  Eli  and  Sybil  Jones  (Philadelphia,  1889); 
Practical  Christianity   (1899);    A   Dynamic  Faith 


Jones 
Jordaais 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


326 


(London,    1000);     and    A    Boy'$   Rdigion  from 
Memory  (Philadelphia,  1002). 

JORES,  SAMUEL:  1..0ne  of  the  founders  of 
Welsh  nonoonformity;  b.  near  Chirk  Castle,  Den- 
bighshire, Wales,  1628;  d.  at  Llangynwyd  (15  m. 
w.n.w.  of  Cardiff),  Glamorganshire,  Sept.  7,  1607. 
He  studied  at  Oxfonl  (B.A.,  1652;  M.A.,  1654), 
first  at  Merton  College,  from  which  he  was  expelled 
in  1648  for  refusing  to  submit  to  the  parliamentary 
board  of  visitors,  and  afterward  at  Jesus  College, 
where  he  was  elected  fellow  in  1652  and  bursar  in 
1655.  In  1657  he  was  given  Presbyterian  ordina- 
tion and  inducted  to  the  living  of  Llangynwyd. 
On  the  passing  of  the  Act  of  Uniformity  in  1662 
he  was  ejected  from  his  living  and  subsequently 
imprisoned,  but  in  1672  he  was  licensed  to  preach 
in  four  private  houses  besides  his  own.  About  this 
time  he  established  in  his  farmhouse  the  first  non- 
conforming theological  academy  in  Wales.  In  1680 
Jones'  school  was  selected  as  one  of  the  places  for 
the  education  of  the  exhibitioners  of  the  Presbyte- 
rian board.  To  this  institution  the  present  Car- 
marthen Presbyterian  College  traces  its  origin. 
Jones  is  described  by  Calamy  as  "  a  great  philoso- 
pher, a  considerable  master  of  the  Latin  and  Greek 
tongues,  and  a  pretty  good  Orientalist."  He  was 
also  a  poet  of  some  reputation. 
Bibuoobapht:  Samuel  Pfelmer,  NonconformiaU*  Memaritd, 

ii.  624,  London.  1778;  T.  Rees.  HUt.  d  ProteaUmt  Nonean- 

formUy  in  WaUt,  pp.  163.  177.  230-242.  ib.,  1883;  DSB, 

XXX,  160-161. 

2.  Non-conformist  tutor  in  England;  b.,  probably 
in  Pennsylvania,  c.  1680;  d.  in  England  1710.  He 
was  the  son  of  one  Malachi  Jones,  a  Welsh  preacher 
who  had  emigrated  to  America.  He  studied  under 
private  tutors  in  England  and  in  1706  entered  the 
University  of  Leyden,  where  he  became  the  pupil 
of  Herman  Witsius  and  Jacob  Perizonius.  A  few 
years  later  he  opened  an  academy  at  Gloucester, 
which  in  1712  he  removed  to  Tewkesbury.  By 
this  time  his  school  had  attained  considerable  re- 
pute and  numbered  among  its  pupils  Joseph  But- 
ler, Samuel  Chandler,  and  Thomas  Seeker.  It  was 
from  here  that  Butler  carried  on  his  anonymous 
correspondence  with  Samuel  Clarke  (1675-1720). 
In  1714  the  Presbyterian  board  began  to  send  pupils 
to  Jones.  With  the  exception  of  two  Latin  dispu- 
tations (Leyden,  1708)  Jones  published  nothing. 
A  manuscript  copy  of  his  Latin  lectures  on  Jewish 
antiquities  has  been  preserved.  Samuel  Clarke 
gave  various  transcripts  of  Jones'  lectures  to  Philip 
Doddridge,  for  use  in  his  academy. 
Biblioqbapht:  Walter  Wilson,  in  Monthly  RepoaUory,  1809, 

pp.  651-652;    DNB,  xzx.  161  (where  other  notices  are 

indicated). 

JONES,  SAMUEL  PORTER:  Methodist  Epis- 
copal Church,  South;  b.  in  Chambers  County,  Ala., 
Oct.  16,  1847;  d.  near  Memphis,  Tenn.,  Oct.  15, 
1900.  He  was  educated  by  private  tutors  and  in 
boarding-schools,  and,  after  serving  in  the  Con- 
federate Army  in  the  Civil  War,  was  admitted  to 
the  Georgia  bar  in  1869.  He  became  addicted  to 
liquor,  however,  and  his  career  as  a  lawyer  was  se- 
riously afifected.  He  was  converted  in  1872  and 
was  admitted  to  the  ministry  of  the  Methodist 
Episcopal  Church,  South,  in  the  same  year.     He 


held  various  pastorates  from  1872  to  1880,  after 
which  he  was  agent  of  the  North  Georgia  Orphan- 
age (1880-92).  From  that  time  until  his  death  he 
was  extremely  active  as  a  revivalist  and  advocate 
of  total  abstinence,  and  became  one  of  the  best- 
known  Evangelists  in  the  United  States,  attracting 
popular  attention  by  his  unconventional  addresses, 
which  abounded  with  witty  and  pregnant  sayings. 
He  wrote:  Sermoru  and  Sayings  (Nashville,  Tenn., 
1883);  Mu9ie  Haa  Series  (Cincinnati,  O.,  1886);  QuU 
your  Meanness  (1886) ;  Sam  Jones*  Own  Book  (1887) ; 
St.  yLouis  Series  (1890);  and  Thunderbolts  (1895). 

JO]IES,Wn«LIAM,OFHAYLAKD:  English  theo- 
logian; b.  at  Lowick  (19  m.  n.e.  of  Northampton), 
Northamptonshire,  July  80,  1726;    d.  at  Nayland 
(14  m.  S.S.W.  of  Ipswich),  Suffolk,  Jan.  6, 1800.    He 
studied  at  the  Charterhouse  and  at  University  Col- 
lege, Oxford  (B.A.,  1749).    Here,  largely  through 
the  influence  of  his  friend,  Geoi^  Home,  he  adopted 
the  views  of  John  Hutchinson  (q.v.).     After  his 
graduation  he  was  curate  for  a  number  of  years,  first 
at  Finedon,  afterward  at  Wadenhoe,  Northamp- 
tonshire.   In  1764  he  was  presented  to  the  vicar- 
age of  Bethersden,  and  in  1765  to  the  rectory  of 
Pluckley,  both  in  Kent.    On  June  22,  1776,  he  was 
elected  a  fellow  of  the  Royal  Society.     In  1777  he 
obtained  the  perpetual  curacy  of  Nayland,  Suf- 
folk, and  exchanged  Pluckley  for  Paston,  North- 
amptonshire.   Thenceforth  he  resided  at  Nayland 
and  came  to  be  known  as  Jones  of  Nayland.    In 
1788  he  became  chaplain  to  George  Home  (bishop 
of  Norwich).    He  was  the  originator,  though  not 
the  editor,  of  the  British  Critic,  a  theological  quar- 
terly, of  which  the  first  number  appeared  in  Lon- 
don in  May,  1793.    In  1798  he  was  presented  by 
Archbishop    Moore    to   the   sinecure    rectory  of 
Hollingboume,  Kent.    Jones  was  a  man  of  vast 
learning  and  sound  piety,  and  one  of  the  most 
prominent  churchmen  of  his  time.  The  school  repre- 
sented by  him  is  regarded  as  forming  a  link  between 
the  non-jurors  and  the  Oxford  school.    His  works, 
some  forty  in  number,  are  written  from  the  Hutch- 
insonian  point  of  view.      The  best-known  are:  The 
Catholic  Doctrine  of  the  Trinity  (Oxford,  1756;  ed. 
J.   L.   F.   Russell,   London,    1866;    published  by 
S.P.C.K.,  1899);   An  Essay  on  the  First  PrindpUt 
of  Natural  Philosophy  (Oxford.  1762);    Physiohq- 
ical  Disquisitions  (London,  1781);    Lectures  on  ihe 
Figurative  Language  qf  the  Holy  Scripture  (1786; 
new  ed.,  1863);  An  Essay  on  the  Church  (1787;  new 
ed.,    1863);     and    Memoirs   of  .  .  .  George  Home 
(1795).    William  Stevens  collected  and  edited  his 
Works  (12  vols.,  1801;   reprinted  in  6  vob.,  1810). 
Some  of  his  tracts  were  reprinted  under  the  title, 
Tracts  on  the  Church  (Oxford  and  London,  1850). 
Bibliography:  W.  Stevens,  A  Short  Account  of  the  Life  and 
WriHngt  of  WUUam  Jone9,  London.  1801;    John  Hunt. 
HiH.  cif  lUUowut  Thmnght  «»  England,  iiL  306^10.  ib. 
1873;    L.  Stephen,  Hitl.  of  BnglMt  Thought  in  the  18^ 
Century,  viii.  18-20,  adi.  89.  2  vols..  New  York.  1881;  J.  H. 
Overton,  The  Churdi  in  England,  ii.  268.  290-291.  Londoo, 
1897;   J.  H.  Overton  and  F.  Relton,  The  EngUah  Churdi 
U714-1900\  pp.  206-207  et  paarim,  ib.  1906;  DNB,  xxx. 
177-178. 

JONES,  WILLIAM  BASIL:  Bishop  of  St.  Davids; 
b.  at  Cheltenham  Jan.  2,  1822;  d.  at  Abergwili  (2 
m.  n.e.  of  Carmarthen),  Wales,  Jan.  14, 1897.  From 


927 


REUGI0U8  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jonas 
Jozdanla 


the  Shrewsbury  School,  where  he  spent  seven  years, 
be  passed  to  the  University  of  Oxford  (B.A.,  1844; 
M.A.,  1847).  He  was  a  scholar  of  Trinity  College, 
1840-45,  fellow  of  Queen's  College,  1848-51,  fellow 
of  University  CoUege  1851-57,  tutor  1854-58,  lec- 
turer on  modem  history  1858-65,  and  select  preacher 
1860-62,  1866-67,  1876-78,  as  also  select  preacher 
at  Cambridge  in  1881.  He  took  a  prominent  part 
in  the  formation  of  the  Cambrian  Archeolpgical 
Association  in  1846-47,  was  one  of  its  general  sec- 
retaries, 1848-51,  and  joint  editor  for  the  association 
in  1851.  At  Oxford  he  formed  an  intimate  friend- 
ship with  William  Thompson,  afterward  archbishop 
of  York,  through  whom  he  received  many  prefer- 
ments. He  was  examining  chaplain  to  Thompson 
1861-74,  prebendary  of  York  Minster  1863-74, 
perpetual  curate  of  Haxby  1863-65,  vicar  of  Bish- 
opthorpe  1865-74,  archdeacon  of  York  1867-74, 
rural  dean  of  Bishopthorpe  1869-74,  chancellor  of 
York  1871-74  and  canon  residentiary  of  York 
1873-74.  He  was  elevated  to  the  see  of  St.  David's 
in  1874.  He  was  remarkably  successful  in  advan- 
cing the  work  of  education  and  missions  in  his 
diocese. 

His  more  important  works  are:  VesHgea  of  the 
Gael  in  Gwynedd  (London,  1851);  The  History  and 
Antiquities  of  St.  David's  (4  parts,  1852-57),  in 
collaboration  with  E.  A.  Freeman;  The  New 
Testament  Illustrated  with  a  Plain  Explanatory 
Cofnmentary  for  Private  Reading  (2  vols.,  1865), 
in  collaboration  with  Archdeacon  Churton;  The 
Peace  of  God:  Sermons  on  the  R^econciliation  of  God 
and  Man  (1869);  and  Ordination  Addresses  (Oxford, 
1900),  with  a  preface  by  Gregory  Smith. 
Bxblioorapht:  L  G.  Smith,  HolyDayt,  p.  87,  London,  1900; 

DNB,  supplement,  iii.  47-49,  where  refeienee  to  eoattered 

noticee  is  given. 

JORAM  (JEHORAM;  the  two  forms  are  used 
interchangeably  in  the  sources) : 

1.  Fifth  king  of  Judah,  son  and  successor  of  Je- 
hoshaphat.  His  dates  according  to  the  old  chron- 
ology are  892-885  b.c;  according  to  Kamphausen, 
851-844  B.C.;  according  to  Duncker,  848-844  B.C.; 
according  to  Curtis  (DB,  i.  401),  851-843  b.c.  The 
Chronicler  (II  Chron.  xxi.  2-4)  reports  that  on 
Joram's  accession  he  put  his  brothers  to  death. 
No  notice  of  this  occurs  in  Kings,  but  the  fact  is 
not  improbable  since  he  had  married  Athaliah, 
daughter  of  Ahab  and  Jezebel  of  Israel,  where  as- 
sassination was  not  uncommon.  Moreover,  Athar 
liah's  usurpation  of  the  kingdom  through  assassina- 
tion (see  Joabh),  together  with  her  known  influence 
over  her  husband,  increases  the  probability.  The 
notable  event  of  Joram's  reign  was  the  revolt  of 
Edom  and  his  narrow  escape  from  capture  when  he 
was  trying  to  reduce  the  Edomites  to  subjection. 
The  revolt  of  Edom  is  but  the  reflex  of  the  prior 
revolt  of  the  Moabites  from  the  northern  kingdom 
(see  2,  below).  The  indications  of  a  general  revolt 
are  increased  by  the  Chronicler's  narrative  concern- 
ing a  body  of  Arabs  and  Philistines  who  sacked 
Joram's  palace  and  carried  ofiF  all  his  sons  but  one. 
The  Chronicler  attributes  his  death  to  a  loathsome 
disease  (probably  the  same  as  that  described  in 
Acts  xii.  23),  and  asserts  that  his  burial  was  dis- 
honorable (but  cf.  II  Kings  viii.  24). 


2.  Ninth  king  of  Israel,  second  son  of  Ahab  and 
successor  to  his  brother  Ahaziah.  His  dates,  ac- 
cording to  the  old  chronology  are  896-884  B.C.; 
according  to  Kamphausen,  854-843  b.c;  accord- 
ing to  Duncker,  851-843  b.c;  according  to  Oirtis, 
852--842  B.C.  (>ne  of  the  events  of  his  reign  was  an 
unsuccessful  attempt,  in  company  with  Jehosha- 
phat  of  Judah,  to  reduce  to  subjection  the  Moabites 
who,  according  to  the  Moabite  stone  (q.v.),  had  re- 
volted from  his  brother.  The  army  arrived  before 
the  fortress  of  Kir-hareseth  and  besieged  it;  and 
in  the  straits  of  the  siege  the  **  king  of  Moab  "  sac- 
rificed his  son  on  the  wall  in  sight  .of  the  besiegers. 
This  act  dismayed  the  allies  and  they  withdrew. 
It  is  not  impossible  that  the  "  great  wrath  "  of 
II  Kings  iii.  24  (R.  V.,  maigin)  indicates  a  pestilence 
which  attacked  Israel  and  was  attributed  to  the 
offended  deity.  A  second  event  was  the  attempt 
to  recover  Ramoth-gilead  from  the  Arameans,  in 
which  Joram  was  assisted  by  Ahaziah  of  Judah.  He 
was  wounded  and  obliged  to  retire  to  Jezreel,  near 
which  he  fell  at  the  hands  of  Jehu.  It  is  an  open 
question  whether  the  events  of  II  Kings  iv.-viii. 
15  belong  to  Joram's  reign,  as  the  king  of  Israel  of 
that  narrative  is  not  named.  It  is  clear  from 
II  Kings  be.  22  and  x.  18-27  that  the  Baal  cult 
had  flourished  in  Joram's  reign,  while  II  Kings  iii. 
13-14  is  emphatic  as  to  the  continuing  influence  of 
Jezebel. 

Bibuoorapht:  The  aouroee  for  1  are:  I  King»  xxii.  60;  II 
Kings  viii.  16-24,  29;  II  Chron.  xxi.;  and  for  2  are:  II 
Kings  i.  17,  iii..  viii.  28-ix.  26.  The  literature  is  given 
under  Ahab.  Consult  also:  C.  F.  Bumey,  Notea  an  the 
Htbrmo  Text  <^  .  .  .  Kinoe,  Oxford,  1903;  DB,  u.  659- 
660;   BE,  u.  2360-2362. 

JORDAK.    See  Paleotine. 

JORDAN,    HBRMARll    SIEGFRIED    ARNOLD: 

German  Lutheran;  b.  at  Sandau-an-der-Elbe  (35 
m.  n.w.  of  Brandenburg)  July  30,  1878.  He  was 
educated  at  the  universities  of  Erlangen  (1896-97) 
and  Greifswald  (1897-99;  lie.  theoL,  1902),  and 
after  being  a  private  tutor  in  Deyelsdorf,  Pomer- 
ania,  from  1899  to  1903,  was  connected  with  the 
cathedral-chapter  of  Berlin  in  1903-04.  Since  the 
latter  year  he  has  been  privat-docent  for  New-Tes- 
tament exegesis  and  church  history  in  the  Univer- 
sity of  Greifswald.  He  has  written:  Die  Theologie 
der  neuentdeckten  Predigten  Novatians  (Leipsic, 
1902);  Rhythmische  Prosa  in  der  altchristlichen 
lateinischen  Literatur  (1905);  and  Rhythmische  Pro- 
satexU  aus  der  OUesten  ChristenheU  (1905). 

JORDANIS  (originally  perhaps  Jomandes):  The 
first  and  only  Gothic  historian  whose  works  are 
extant;  d.  c.  560.  He  descended  from  a  noble 
family  related  to  the  royal  family  of  the  Amali. 
His  grandfather  had  been  notary  of  the  Alanic  King 
Candac  in  Moesia.  Jordanis  was  also  notary  untQ 
his  conversion,  which  probably  implies  that  he  as- 
sumed an  ecclesiastical  position.  He  was  probably 
bishop  of  Croton,  in  any  case  not  an  Arian,  but  a 
Catholic.  Vigilius,  to  whom  he  dedicated  one  of 
his  works,  seems  to  have  been  the  pope  of  that 
name  (538-555),  and  they  were  both  in  Constanti- 
nople about  551.  JordaniB  left  two  works,  a  his- 
tory of  the  Goths  or  rather  of  Moesia,  which  seems 
to  have  had  the  title  De  origins  et  actibusque  Get- 


Joria 
Joaaph 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


MB 


aruMf  and  a  oompendium  of  universal  history,  often 
called  De  regnorum  ae  temporum  auccesiione,  also 
De  hreviatiane  ehramcorum,  by  Mommsen  De  turn' 
ma  temporum  vd  origins  actOnuque  gerUia  Romano- 
rum,  The  former  he  dedicated  to  his  otherwise 
unknown  friend  Castalius  or  Castulus,  the  latter 
to  Vigilius.  The  history  of  the  Goths,  which  ex- 
tends to  551,  was  written  probably  in  that  year  in 
Constantinople  or  in  Chaloedon.  The  chronicle  of 
the  world  had  been  begun  between  Apr.,  550,  and 
Apr.,  551,  before  the  other  work,  but  is  continued 
until  552.  The  history  of  the  Goths  shows  little 
originality  as  it  follows  closely  the  lost  work  of 
Cassiodorus  which  seems  to  have  had  the  same 
title.  Toward  the  end  Jordams  used  also  the  an- 
nals of  Marcellinus  Comes.  The  style  is  obscure, 
artificial,  and  sententious,  but  this  is  undoubtedly 
due  to  the  soiu'ce  used  by  Jprdanis.  The  funda- 
mental view  of  the  identity  of  the  Getae  and  Goths 
is  probably  also  borrowed  from  Cassiodorus.  The 
universal  history  is  practically  a  history  of  Rome; 
for  the  rest  Jonlanis  furnishes  merely  genealogies 
and  names  of  kings.  The  work  contains  nothing 
but  extracts  from  other  historians. 

(WiLBELM  AlTMANM.) 

Biblxoobapht:  His  History  of  the  Qoths  has  been  printed 
often,  best  ed.,  by  A.  Holder,  Freiburg.  1882.  Both  his 
works  are  edited  by  T.  Monunsen  in  MOH,  Auct.  AnH., 
▼.  1  (1882),  1-138.  with  prefatorial  notes,  pp.  T.-Ixxir. 
A  yery  useful  list  of  editions  and  literature  is  given  by 
Potthast,  WegweUer,  pp.  682-084.  A  useful  article  on 
his  life  and  works  is  in  DCB,  iii.  431-438.  Consult:  L. 
▼on  Ranke.  WaioM<^%diie,  iv.  2,  pp.  313-327,  Leipeic, 
1884;  A.  Ebert.  All4fMmn$  OeaehichU  der  LUmtUur  det 
AftHelaZters,  i.  566-562.  Leipsic.  1888;  W.  8.  Teuffel. 
GtaekiehU  der  rUmUOini  LUerahar,  pp.  1256-1260,  1283. 
ib.  1800. 

JORIS  (or  JORISZOON,  "  the  son  of  George  "), 
JAH  DAVID:  Dutch  Anabaptist;  b.,  probably  at 
Ghent  or  Bruges,  1501  or  1502;  d.  at  Basel  Aug. 
25,  1556.  He  was  originally  a  glass-painter,  but 
was  of  an  adventurous  disposition,  and  after  long 
wanderings  abroad  settled  in  Delft  and  married. 
An  ultrarenthusiast,  he  eagerly  embraced  the  Ref- 
ormation, circulated  hymns  and  tracts,  and  vio> 
lently  assailed  the  priesthood  and  the  mass.  In 
1528  lie  publicly  insulted  a  religious  procession,  for 
which  he  was  imprisoned,  pilloried,  flogged,  and 
had  his  tongue  burned  through,  in  addition  to  being 
banished  for  three  years.  He  then  joined  the  Ana- 
baptists, among  whom  he  speedUy  became  promi- 
nent, although  he  disapproved  the  Anabaptist  in- 
surrection at  Mttnster  (q.v.)  and  openly  opposed 
Battenburg,  the  leader  of  the  extreme  radicals. 
After  the  fall  of  Mttnster,  Jons  sought  to  reunite 
the  Anabaptist  factions,  but  his  success  was  only 
temporary,  and  he  was  attacked  by  sectaries  of  all 
shades.  On  the  other  hand,  enthusiasts  called  him 
"  the  hallowed  of  the  Lord,''  and  proclaimed  him  a 
prophet  and  bringer  of  judgment,  so  that  in  1536 
he  himself  became  convinced  of  his  divine  mission. 
At  the  same  time  he  began  to  have  visions,  and 
gradually  gathered  about  him  a  circle  of  followers 
(the  "  Davidists ")  who  trusted  him  implicitly, 
even  forming  a  distinct  Anabaptist  sect  with  a 
chiliastic  basis.  The  chief  centers  of  its  activity 
were  Oldenburg,  eastern  Friesland,  and  the  Nether- 
lands, but  after  1538  the  authorities  sharply  opposed 


it,  and  many  of  its  adherents  were  executed.  Joris 
himself,  however,  repeatedly  escaped  in  such  re- 
markable ways  as  to  give  rise  to  the  belief  that  be 
could  make  himself  invisible.  Meanwhile  he  was 
untiring  in  his  activity.  He  had  already  had  much 
success  among  the  followers  of  Battenburg,  and 
for  a  time  among  the  Anabaptists  of  MQnster,  but 
the  adherents  of  Melchior  Hoffmann  in  Strasbuig, 
like  Johannes  a  Lasco  and  Menno  Simons,  rejected 
his  overtures.  The  Landgrave  Philip  of  Hesse,  on 
the  other  hand,  granted  him  protection  on  condi- 
tion of  his  accepting  the  Augsburg  Confession.  His 
unceasing  personal  propaguida  was  aided  by  his 
numerous  writings,  of  which  the  most  important 
was  his  t'Wond&^foeck,  waerin  dot  van  der  werddt 
aan  verdoien  gheopenbaeri  is  (Deventer  [?],  1542),  a 
jumbled  mass  of  fantasy,  mystery,  and  all^ory. 

With  the  amassing  of  wealth  from  his  adherents 
and  the  despair  of  gaining  a  great  following,  a  new 
period  began  in  the  career  of  Joris.  In  Aug., 
1544,  he  appeared  at  Basel  under  the  name  of 
John  of  Bruges,  a  rich  and  distinguished  fugitive 
from  Holland  for  the  sake  of  the  Gospel.  He  was 
accepted  as  a  citizen,  led  an  irreproachable  religious 
life,  was  conspicuous  for  his  charities,  and  acquired 
considerable  property,  including  a  small  castle  at 
Binningen.  His  propaganda  was  now  restricted  to 
writing  mystic  treatises  and  epistles  to  hia  follow- 
ers, whom  he  urged  to  conform  externally  to  the 
existing  Church.  On  the  other  hand,  he  was  in 
touch  with  opponents  of  the  dominant  Church, 
pleading  for  Servetus  in  an  anonymous  petition  of 
1553,  writing  to  Schwenckfeki  (though  he  opposed 
his  deification  of  the  humanity  of  Christ),  and  being 
acquainted  with  C^astellio.  The  identity  of  "  John 
of  Bruges  "  with  the  Dutch  Anabaptist  Jan  David 
Joris  was  not  discovered  until  three  years  after  his 
death  and  burial.  In  Apr.,  1550,  the  University 
of  Basel  condenmed  Joris  as  a  heretic  and  on  May 
13  his  body  was  exhumed  and  burned,  together 
with  his  books  and  portrait.  His  Basel  adherents 
were  obliged  to  do  penance  in  the  cathedral  on 
June  6,  but  in  Hoktein  and  Holland  the  sect  lin- 
gered, heresy-trials  of  the  Davidists  occurring  as 
late  as  the  end  of  the  sixteenth  century. 

(A.  HEOLBBf.)   K.  HOLL. 

Bxbuoobafht:  A  favorably  partisan  aooount  is  given  by 
Q.  Arnold,  Kirehen-  und  KttMr-HUtori^  4  vok..  Frank- 
fort, 1700-15,  eorreeted  by  tha  eritiod  diaeuasion  of 
Nippold,  in  ZHT,  1863,  1864,  1868.  Joris'  biography 
was  written  by  A.  van  der  Linde,  The  Hague.  1807.  ef. 
BibliophiU  Beige,  1866.  pp.  137.  168.  1866.  pp.  129  sqq. 
On  his  teaching  consult  A.  Jundt,  Hiatoire  du  pani/Uume, 
pp.  164  sqq..  Strasburg.  1876. 

JORTm,  JOHN:  Archdeacon  of  London;  b.  in 
London  Oct.  23,  1608;  d.  there  Sept.  5,  1770.  He 
was  the  son  of  a  Huguenot  exile  from  Brittany, 
who  in  1691  became  a  gentleman  of  the  privy 
chamber.  He  received  his  education  at  the  Char- 
terhouse School,  and  at  Jesus  College,  Cambridge 
(B.A.,  1719;  M.A.,  1721),  where  he  held  a  fellow- 
ship 1721-28.  He  was  ordained  in  1724,  and  pre- 
sented to  the  college  living  of  Swavesey,  Cambridge- 
shire, in  Jan.,  1727,  wUch  he  resigned  in  Feb., 
1731,  to  become  preacher  at  a  chapel  in  New 
Street,  London.  In  1731  he  started  a  magazine 
entitled,  MiaceUaneoua  Ohaervations  upon  Authors, 


290 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Joria 
Joseph 


Ancient  and  Modem,  which  continued  for  two  years. 
In  1737  he  was  presented  to  the  vicarage  of  East- 
well,  Kent,  which  he  soon  resigned.  In  1747  he 
resigned  his  position  in  New  Street  to  accept  an 
appointment  to  a  chapel  in  Oxenden  Street,  where 
he  preached  till  1760.  He  was  assistant  to  War- 
btirton  at  Lincoln's  Inn,  1747-50,  and  Boyle  lec- 
turer in  1749.  In  1751  he  was  presented  to  the 
rectory  of  St.  Dunstan's-in-the-East  by  Thomas 
Herring,  archbishop  of  Canterbury,  who  gave  him 
the  Lambeth  degree  of  D.D.  in  1755.  In  1762  he 
became  chaplain  to  Thomas  Osbaldeston,  bishop 
of  London,  who  gave  him  a  prebend  in  St.  Paul's 
and  presented  him  to  the  vicarage  of  Kensington, 
which  he  held  with  St.  Dimstan's.  He  was  made 
archdeacon  of  London  in  1764.  Jortin  was  a  scholar 
of  liberal  views,  and  wrote  with  an  engaging  light- 
ness of  style.  His  more  important  works  are:  Dts- 
eouraea  on  the  Truth  of  the  Christian  Religion  (Lon- 
don, 1746);  Remarks  upon  Ecdeeiaetical  History 
(5  vols.,  1751-73);  Six  Dissertations  (1755);  The 
Life  of  Erasmus  (2  vols.,  1758-60);  Sermons  (7 
vols.,  1771-72);  and  Trads,  PhiloLafgical,  Critical, 
and  MisceUaneoua  (2  vols.,  1790). 
BnuooRAPBT:  J.  DUney.  Memoin  of  fhM  Uft  and  Writing9 
t^John  Jortin^  London,  1792;  A  Memoir  by  R.  Heathoote 
to  the  3d  ed.  of  Jortin'a  Stmumt,  ed.  R.  Jortin.  ib.  1787; 
another  to  the  edition  of  the  TVocto,  ut  sup.;  while  a  Life 
la  prefixed  by  W.  Troliope  to  an  edition  of  the  Remarke, 
2  vole.,  ib.  1846.    Consult  DNB,  xxx.  201-203. 

JOSEPH  OF  ARIMATHBA:  A  wealthy  and  pious 
member  of  the  Sanhedrin  who  begged  the  body  of 
Jesus  and  laid  it  in  his  own  tomb,  which  had  not 
hitherto  been  used — a  fact  in  which  the  Evangel- 
ists evidently  see  symbolic  significance.  The  story 
is  told  in  all  four  Gospels  (Matt,  xxvii.  57-60;  Mark 
XV.  42-46;  Luke  xziii.  50-54;  John  xix.  38-42), 
and  the  manner  of  telling  betrays  a  warm  interest 
in  Joseph's  personality,  Us  courage,  and  his  piety. 
Arimathea  is  probably  to  be  identified  with  Ramah 
or  Ramathaim  (Josh,  xviii.  25;  I  Sam.  i.  1;  I  Mace, 
xi.  34),  five  miles  north  of  Jerusalem.  Won  by  the 
preaching  of  Jesus  concerning  the  kingdom  of  God, 
Joseph  openly  joined  himself  to  the  disciples  of 
Jesus,  and  he  did  not  consent  to  the  judgment  of 
the  Sanhedrin.  The  differences  of  the  reports  in 
the  Gospels  are  probably  to  be  solved  as  follows; 
Ifark  and  Luke  have  in  mind  simply  the  fact  that 
Joseph  had  prepared  a  worthy  grave;  how  he  had 
oome  to  do  it  was  not  a  question  with  which  they 
concerned  themselves.  Matthew  took  this  into 
account  and  explained  that  it  had  been  prepared 
for  Joseph  himself.  John,  who  appears  to  have 
had  the  other  accounts  before  him,  seems  to  have 
raised  the  question  why  Jesus  was  not  laid  in  a 
grave  of  his  own  instead  of  in  a  stranger's,  and 
answers  it  by  reference  to  the  nearness  of  the  Sab- 
bath, the  consequent  lack  of  time  for  preparations, 
and  the  handiness  of  the  grave  already  prepared. 

(K.  Schmidt.) 
Bibuoorapht:  The  subjeet  is  diaeuMed  in  the  wetiona 
devoted  to  the  burial  of  Jeeua  in  the  principal  lives  cited 
under  Jnus  Chxut.  and  in  the  Bible  Dictionaries.  Per- 
tinent matter  will  be  found  in  the  discussions  of  the  Qospel 
of  Peter  and  the  Acts  of  Pilate  mentioned  under  Apoc- 
■TPHA,  B,  7. 

JOSEPH    AKD    ASERATH,    STORY    OF.      See 

PsEin>BPiORA.PRA,  Old  Tbotambnt,  II.,  36. 


JOSEPH  BRYENNIOS:  Bysantine  theologian  of 
the  fifteenth  century;  b.,  probably  in  Lacedaemon, 
about  1350;  d.  apparently  in  Crete  about  1436. 
Bryennios,  whose  original  name  was  Bladynteros, 
entered  a  Cretan  monastery  about  1375,  but  some 
twenty  years  later  was  obliged  to  leave  the  island 
on  account  of  a  conflict  with  the  clergy.  He  then 
went  to  Constantinople,  joined  the  Studites,  and 
soon  became  the  court  chaplain  of  the  Emperor 
Manuel  Paleologus,  thus  gaining  an  important  in- 
fluence in  ecclesiastical  polity.  In  1416  and  1418 
he  was  imperial  ambassador  to  the  West,  and  at 
first  enjoyed  the  favor  of  John  Palseologus,  but 
when  the  emperor,  for  reasons  of  state,  favored 
imion  with  the  Latin  Church,  Joseph,  a  rigid  an- 
tagonist of  this  measure,  retired  from  public  life, 
and  apparently  spent  the  last  years  of  his  life  in 
Crete.  He  was  primarily  a  theologian,  although 
his  writings  (first  edited  by  Eugenius  Bulgaria,  3 
vols.,  Leipsic,  1768-84)  contain  a  mass  of  material 
on  all  branches  of  Byzantine  learning,  especially 
rhetoric,  dialectics,  geometry,  astronomy,  physics, 
and  philosophy.  He  was  the  author  of  twenty-one 
addresses  and  three  dialogues  on  the  Trinity,  while 
other  sermons  are  devoted  to  the  Virgin,  redemp- 
tion, eschatology,  faith«  the  plan  of  salvation, 
Easter,  the  Transfigiuration,  and  the  Tabor-light. 
His  attitude  toward  union  la  given  in  his  "  Speech 
of  Counsel "  and  "  On  the  Union  of  the  Cretans," 
while  his  twenty-six  letters  contain  many  theo- 
logical allusions.  Bryennios  was  rigidly  orthodox 
and  had  no  sjnmpathy  with  humanism  or  with 
western  thought.  The  prime  source  of  authority, 
in  his  opinion,  was  the  Bible,  which  was  supple- 
mented by  the  Church  Fathers,  who  had  estab- 
lished the  truth  of  the  dpgmas  contained  in  the 
Scriptures,  so  that  these  principles  required  no 
further  proof  and  were  superior  to  human  reason. 
God  can  be  defined  only  negatively,  and  man  was 
created  as  the  end  of  creation.  Seeking  to  gain  his 
apotheosis  by  his  own  powers,  however,  he  lost  the 
fellowship  of  God,  though  he  retained  the  freedom 
of  the  will.  The  mission  of  Christ  was  to  enable 
man  to  attain  the  end  for  which  he  was  created, 
the  special  agency  being  the  manifestation  of  the 
person  of  the  Lord.  (Phjupp  Meter.) 

Bibuoorapht:  Fabricius-Harles,  BiUiotheca  Oraeea,  xi.  669- 

660,  Hamburg.  1806;   Krumbacher.  QeechidOe,  p.  114;    P. 

Meyer,  in  TSK,  Iziz  (1806),  28^310;  idem,  in  BywanHnr 

iedie  ZeUeckrifi,  1896.  pp.  74-111;    J.  Drftaecke.  in  NKZ, 

1896.  pp.  206-228. 

JOSEPH  THE  CARPENTER,  mSTORT  OF.    See 
Apocrypha,  B,  I.,  4. 
JOSEPH,  THE  HUSBAKD  OF  MARY:    In  the 

primitive  Chmtsh  there  are  no  historic  records  of  a 
special  cult  in  honor  of  Joseph,  and  the  earliest 
moniunents  of  Christian  art  represent  him  only  in 
groups  with  Mary  and  the  Christ-child.    In  this 
period  he  appears  as  a  young  man,  and  it  is  not 
until  the  fifth  or  sixth  century  that  he  is  repre- 
sented as  aged,  a  concept  borrowed 
TheVen-    from  the  apocrjrphal  Gospels  of  the 
exation  of  Infancy.    According  to  the  legend  in- 
Joseph,     corporated  in  these  documents,  Joseph, 
when  he  married  Mary,  was  an  aged 
widower,  having  as  sons  by  his  first  marriage  James, 
Joses,  Judas,  and  Simon  (cf.  Matt.  ziii.  55;   Mark 


Joseph 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


830 


vi.  1  sqq.).  This  tradition  persisted  throughout 
the  Middle  Ages,  but  is  now  disregarded  by  occi- 
dental Roman  Oatholicism,  which  regards  Joseph, 
if  not  as  a  jroung  man,  at  least  in  the  prime  of  man- 
hood. It  is  very  possible  that  he  died  early,  as 
mention  of  him  disappears  from  the  Gospels;  and 
since  the  days  of  Ambrose  and  Jerome  it  has  been 
a  Roman  dogma  that  his  marriage  with  Mary  was 
merely  nominal,  although  this  view  receives  no 
certain  confirmation  from  the  New  Testament. 
Legend,  followed  by  later  medieval  art,  holds  that 
Joseph  died  in  18  or  27  A.D.,  with  Mary  and  Jesus 
by  his  side,  and,  according  to  some  accoimts,  John 
the  Evangelist.  This  tradition,  combined  with  the 
fact  that  older  legends  occasionally  speak  of  his 
grave,  but  never  mention  his  remains,  forms  the 
kernel  of  the  medieval  legends  and  regulations  for 
the  Joseph  cult.  Jean  Gerson,  Bernardino  of  Siena, 
and  Francis  of  Sales  declared  that  he  had  been 
translated  bodily  to  heaven.  The  cult  of  Joseph 
flourished  in  the  West  after  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury, and  relics  b^gan  to  appear,  although  these 
were  never  corporal,  but  such  objects  as  his  ring  of 
betrothal,  or  pieces  of  his  garments. 

In  the  early  Church  Joseph  possessed  no  special 
day,  and  until  the  medieval  period  the  traditions 
on  this  subject  were  diveigent.  The  Copts  cele- 
brated July  20,  while  among  the  Greeks  his  day 
was  the  Fourth  Simday  in  Advent,  which  was  also 
dedicated  to  Mary,  David,  and  James  the  Just. 
Another  day,  however,  Mar.  19,  said  to  have  been 
brought  to  the  West  by  a  Syrian  Carmelite  of  the 
fourteenth  century,  gradually  found  acceptation, 
and  was  finally  confirmed  by  Gregory  XV.  in  1621. 
Pius  IX.,  in  1870,  made  this  feast  one  of  the  first 
class,  and  declared  St.  Joseph  the  patron  saint  of 
the  entire  Roman  Catholic  Church,  and  Leo  XIII., 
in  1889,  ordered  a  series  of  rosary  prayers  to  St. 
Joseph  for  the  whole  of  October. 

All  orders  founded  in  honor  of  St.  Joseph  and 
called  by  his  name  are  modem  in  origin.  The  fol- 
lowing orders  of  men,  established  under  his  protec- 
tion as  the  Biblical  ideal  of  obedience,  may  be 
mentioned:  (1)  The  Secular  Priests  of  St.  Joseph 
were  founded  at  Rome  in  1620  by  Paolo  Motta, 
and  their  rule,  partly  based  on  that 
Joseph      of  the  Oratory  of  St.  Philip  Neri,  was 

Orders,  confirmed  by  Innocent  XI.  in  1684. 
(2)  The  Cr^tenists,  or  Missionaries  of 
St.  Joseph  (Josephites),  were  established  about  the 
middle  of  the  seventeenth  century  by  Jacques  Cr6- 
tenet,  a  surgeon  of  Lyons.  They  were  chiefly  mis- 
sion-preachers and  spread  through  many  dioceses 
of  France,  but  were  overwhelmed  by  tliA  Revolu- 
tion, although  they  were  later  revived  ss  heads  of 
educational  institutes  in  various  places.  (3)  The 
Brethren  of  St.  Joseph  were  founded  at  St.  Suscien, 
near  Amiens,  by  Bishop  J.  P.  de  Chabons  in  1823, 
imitating  an  elder  body  of  the  eighteenth  century, 
to  conduct  primary  schools,  assist  the  clergy  in 
catechizing,  promote  singing,  and  similar  purposes. 
(4)  The  Josephites,  or  Sons  of  St.  Joseph,  were  es- 
tablished at  Grammont,  Belgium,  by  Canon  Van 
Combrugghe  in  1817  for  the  education  of  yoimg 
men  of  the  better  classes.  Besides  the  mother 
house  at  Granmiont,  they  have  daughter  houses  at 


Melle,  Jouvain,  Tillemont,  and  BruneUe,  in  Bel- 
gium, and  St.  George's  College,  at  Weybridge,  Eng- 
land; they  are  assisted  by  the  Josephite  nuns  of 
Bruges.  (5)  The  Josephite  Brothers  of  the  Holy 
Cross  were  founded  in  1821  in  the  diocese  of  Le 
Mans  by  the  priest  Dujarrie.  Until  recently  they 
possessed  some  forty  houses  in  France,  the  French 
colonies,  and  North  America,  and  devote  them- 
selves primarily  to  the  training  of  artisans,  although 
some  conduct  secondary  schools.  (6)  The  Brothers 
of  St.  Joseph,  founded  at  Quillins  (department  of 
Rh6ne)  by  Abb^  Rey  in  1835  for  the  education  of 
destitute  children,  had  their  chief  center  at  Citeaux 
from  1848  to  1888,  but  are  now  suppressed. 

The  majority  of  female  orders  of  St.  Joseph  are 
French.  The  oldest  and  most  widely  extexided  is 
(1)  the  Congr^ation  of  St.  Joseph  at  Bordeaux, 
founded  in  1638  by  Marie  Delpech  de  TEstang;  it 
extended  rapidly  to  other  cities  of  northern  and 
western  France,  forming  at  La  Rochelle  in  1672  a 
new  branch  called  Religieuses  de  la  Congregation  de 
Saint  Joseph,  dite  de  la  Trinity  (or,  de  Jesus,  Marie, 
et  Joseph).  (2)  The  Hospital  Sisters  of  St.  Joseph 
of  La  Fl^he  (in  Anjou)  were  established  in  1642, 
while  about  1650  the  Jesuit  Medaille  founded  (3) 
the  Daughters  of  St.  Joseph  at  Le  Puy.  These 
three  orders  in  twenty  years  had  over  9,000  mem- 
bers and  1,200  houses  throughout  all  France.  The 
order  last  named  established  at  Clermont  in  1666, 
through  the  advice  of  Canon  Laborieux,  (4)  the 
Nims  of  St.  Joseph  of  the  Good  Shepherd  to  con- 
duct refuges  for  fallen  women.  It  siu^ved  the 
Revolution  and  still  has  its  mother  house  at  Cler- 
mont, with  some  sixty  daughter  houses.  About 
1800  Mother  Javouhey  founded  (5)  the  Sisters  of 
St.  Joseph  at  Cluny,  whence  they  spread  to  Sene- 
gambia,  French  Guiana,  and  other  colonies  of 
France,  excepting  Algiers  and  Cochin-China.  (6) 
The  Sisters  of  St.  Joseph  of  the  Visitation  were 
founded  at  Marseilles  about  1840  by  Emilie  Vialard, 
who,  in  1834,  had  establbhed  a  similar  sisterhood 
at  Alby  for  the  instruction  of  the  young  and  the 
care  of  the  sick.  Daughter  houses  of  these  two 
sisterhoods  have  spread  to  Algiers  and  Tunis  (from 
Alby),  as  well  as  to  Jerusalem  (from  Marseilles). 
(7)  A  North  American  order  of  Sisters  of  St.  Joseph 
was  foimded  at  Emmitsbuig,  Md.,  in  1809  by  Eliza 
Ann  Seton,  which  in  1850  was  imited  with  the 
American  Sisters  of  Mercy  and  ss  early  as  1868 
had  ninety-one  houses  with  some  1,100  sisters. 

(O.  Z6CKUBRt.) 
Bibuoorapht:  On  the  oult:  A3B,  19  Mar.,  vol.  iii.;  Bene- 
dict XIV.,  De  aervarum  D^i  bmiiiflaUione,  iv.  2,  ohap.  20, 
7-58,  Bonona,  1738;  PrimauU  de  S.  Joeepk  d*aprk»  VSpie- 
oopal  oatKoliqae  ei  la  tkMogie,  Parifl,  1807;  J.  SeiU,  Die 
Verehntng  dee  KeUigen  Joeeph  in  ihren  (feechiehUicken  ErU- 
tpiddung,  Freiburg,  1908;  KL,  vi.  1878-1879.  On  the 
order*:  Helyot.  Ordree  monaetiguee,  iv.  406.  411  aqq..  viii. 
25  aqq.,  186  sqq.;  Heimbueher,  Orden  und  Konffregationent 
vol.  iii.  pasum;  KL.  vi.  1874-1878. 

JOSEPH  OF  MBTHONB:  Greek  theologian  of  the 
fifteenth  century.  Of  his  life  little  is  Imown,  ex- 
cept that  he  lived  in  Crete  and  was  a  zealous  advo- 
cate of  the  union  between  the  Greek  and  Latin 
Churches,  the  majority  of  his  writings,  which  are 
collected  in  MPO,  dix.,  being  devoted  to  this  ob- 
ject.    His  most  noteworthy  work  was  his  defense 


281 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Joseph 


of  the  five  chief  theses  of  the  Council  of  Florence, 
discussing  at  length  the  procession  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  imleayened  bread,  purgatory,  eternal  life, 
and  the  supremacy  of  the  pope.  This  treatise  was 
at  first  erroneously  ascribed  to  Gennadius  Scholarius. 
Joseph  also  disciussed  the  same  council  in  the  long 
dialogue  first  edited  by  Leo  Allatius  in  his  Oraeda 
crthodoxa,  i.  583-654  (Rome,  1652). 

(Pbilipp  Meter.) 
Bxbuogbapht:  Fabrioius-Haries,  BiblioAsea  Oraeea,  xi.  458, 
Hamburg,  1806;   Krumbaoher,  Ge§thiehie,  pp.  118-119. 

JOSEPH  THE  PATRIARCH:  Oldest  son  of  Jacob 
and  Rachel.  The  name  "  Joseph  "  (Hebr.  Yoaeph) 
was  probably  originally  Josephnel,  "  may  God  add  " 
(Gen.zzx.24;  see  Jacob).  Tlie  relation  of  the  sources 
of  the  story  of  the  patriarch  as  given  in  the  Book 
of  Genesis  (xzz.  22-24,  zzzvii.,  zzziz.  1)  is  similar 
to  that  in  the  history  of  Jacob  (q.v.).  E  and  J  pre- 
dominate, P  being  used  more  ezten- 
The  sively  only  toward  the  end  (Gen.  zlvi. 
Sources.  1).  The  attempt  to  distinguish  be- 
tween £  and  J  is  without  convincing 
success.  It  is  asserted  that  J  calls  the  traveling 
Arabian  merchants  Ishmaelites,  while  E  calls  them 
Midianites;  that  E  (Gen.  zzzvii.  28)  makes  them 
take  Joseph  out  of  the  pit  without  the  complicity 
of  his  brothers  and  so  ''steal"  him  (Gen.  zl.  15) 
while,  according  to  J,  he  yras  sold  by  his  brothers 
(also  according  to  Gen.  zlv.  4);  that  for  J  Joseph's 
Egyptian  master  was  a  wealthy  private  citizen, 
for  £,  the  captain  of  the  guard  and  keeper  of  the 
prison.  In  all  essential  points,  however,  the  story 
must  have  been  told  in  the  same  way  by  both  E 
and  J.  Joseph's  character  justifies  Jacob's  especial 
love.  Its  fundamental  quality  was  his  earnest  fear 
of  God  (Gen.  zzzvii.  2,  zzziz.  9,  zli.  16,  zlii.  18, 
zlv.  8,  1.  19-20),  who  showed  him  grace  both  in  his 
own  sight  and  before  men,  making  him  appear  the 
purest  and  the  noblest  of  the  sons  of  Jacob. 

In  considering  the  historical  value  of  the  tradi- 
tion of  Joseph,  the  references  to  Egypt,  its  cus- 
toms, manners,  etc,  are  of  especial  importance. 
Modem  investigation  of  the  monu- 
Historicity  ments  has  ezplained  and  justified  the 
of  the  recital.  While  formerly  many  schol- 
Namtive.  are  thought  to  find  in  Joseph's  story 
erroneous  statements  of  E^^yptian 
conditions,  Hengstenbei^  and  the  Egyptologists 
Ebera  and  Brugsch  have  shown  that  the  story  is 
almost  entirely  concordant  with  the  monuments 
of  EJgypt.  Caravan  trade  was  carried  on  by 
the  An^  from  the  most  remote  times  between 
Syria,  Palestine,  and  the  country  of  the  Nile;  pre- 
cisely the  three  spices  mentioned  in  Gen.  zzzvii.  25 
(cf.  zliii.  11)  were  always  staple  articles  of  com- 
merce between  Gilead  and  E^gypt;  the  caravan 
route,  aftec  crossing  the  Jordan  at  Beth-shan,  passed 
by  Dothan;  there  was  a  good  market  for  yoimg 
slaves  in  E^gypt;  Potiphar  bears  a  genuine  £!gyp- 
tian  name  ("  devoted  to  Ra  ");  such  stewardships 
as  that  with  which  Joseph  was  entrusted  by  Poti- 
phar appear  frequently  in  the  E^^yptian  inscriptions 
and  on  the  moniunents;  the  scene  between  Joseph 
and  Potiphar's  wife  is  practically  duplicated  in  a 
story  preserved  in  the  D'Orbmey  Papyrus  ("  The 
Tale  of  Two  Brothers  "),  written  down  for  Set!  II. 


when  he  was  crown  prince  (cf.  H.  Brugsch,  Aim 
dem  Orient,  Berlin,  1864,  pp.  7  sqq.;  Eng.  transl.  in 
W.  M.  F.  Petrie,  Egyptian  Tcdea,  London,  1894-95; 
cf .  A.  H.  Sayce,  Higher  Criticism  and  the  Monuments^ 
London,  1894);  dreams  were  matters  of  intense 
interest  in  EJf^t;  the  two  court  officials  of  Gen. 
zl.  1  appear  as. representatives  of  the  court  butlers 
and  the  court  bakers,  even  the  title  "  chief  of  the 
bakers  "  has  been  foimd;  an  illustration  of  the 
dream  of  the  court  baker  is  given  in  a  representa^ 
tion  of  the  court  bakery  of  Rameses  III.  (J.  G. 
Wilkinson,  Manners  and  Customs  of  the  Ancient 
Egyptians,  ii.  385,  London,  1837),  wherein  a 
lc»d  of  freshly  baked  bread  on  a  board  or  mat 
(elsewhere  a  basket,  Wilkinson,  ii.  393)  is  borne 
away  on  the  head;  according  to  the  Roeetta  stone 
and  the  Decree  of  Canopus,  E^^yptian  kings  on 
their  birthdays  were  accustomed  to  issue  amnee- 
ties;  the  double  dream  of  the  Pharaoh  (Gen.  zli.)  us 
thoroughly  £!g3rptian;  the  very  words  ye'or,  "stream" 
(  —  Nile)  and  ahu,  "  reed-grass,"  are  E^^yptian;  the 
number  seven  was  significant  in  the  land;  the  kine, 
that  is,  the  good  and  the  lean  years,  quite  properly 
come  up  out  of  the  stream  which  was  the  object  of 
divine  honors  as  the  fructifier  of  the  entire  country; 
the  cow  is  symbolical  of  Isis-Hathor,  the  fems^ 
principle  of  fertility,  and  therefore  especially  ap- 
propriate for  the  representation  of  the  productivity 
of  the  land;  the  "  magicians  "  of  chap.  zli.  8  cor- 
respond to  the  sacred  scribes  who,  besides  devoting 
themselves  to  the  arts  of  writing,  mensuration,  and 
astronomy,  were  also  entrusted  with  the  task  of 
ezplaining  portents;  the  shaving  of  the  hair  and 
the  changing  of  clothing  on  the  occasion  of  an  ap- 
pearance before  the  Pharaoh  (Gen.  zli.  14)  was  re- 
quired by  ancient  EJgyptian  custom,  while  among 
the  Israelites  baldness  was  regarded  as  an  infir- 
mity; the  ceremonies  accompanying  the  conferral  of 
his  new  dignities  upon  Joseph  (Gen.  zli.  42)  are  all 
faithfully  represented  on  the  monuments;  the  cry 
abrech  (Gen.  zli.  43,  E.  V.  margin)  which  was 
shouted  by  a  nmner  appears,  indeed,  to  have  been 
an  Assyrio-Babylonian  title,  but  the  names  given 
in  zli.  45  are  clearly  EJgyptian.  As  master  of  the 
granaries,  Joseph  really  held  the  place  in  the  king- 
dom nezt  after  that  of  the  Pharaoh;  hence  he 
properly  calls  himself  (zlv.  8)  Pharaoh's  father, 
lord  over  his  whole  house,  ruler  of  all  the  land  of 
E^^ypt;  in  chap.  zlii.  6  he  is  called  "  governor  " 
over  the  land;  the  designation  adhon,  "  lord,"  has 
even  found  its  way  into  Egyptian  and  the  title 
ab-^n-pira'o  in  the  sense  of  "  counselor  of  the  Pha- 
raoh "  occurs  often  in  the  papyri.  The  economic 
regulations  promulgated  by  Joseph  must  be  judged 
according  to  the  standard  of  Egsrptian  conditions. 
The  taz  imposed  (zli.  34)  was,  in  the  rich  land  of 
Egypt,  neither  hard  to  bear  nor  unusual,  and  the 
fact  that  the  State  assumed  possession  of  all  landed 
property,  with  the  ezception  of  that  belonging  to 
the  priests,  was  a  result  of  the  centralizing  tendencyi 
more  necessary  and  therefore  more  justifiable  in 
that  land  than  elsewhere.  Two  cases  of  this  kind 
are  given  in  H.  Brugsch,  Oeschichte  Aegyptens, 
Leipsic,  1877,  pp.  130,  244  sqq.,  Eng.  transl.,  Lon- 
don, 1879.  The  fact  that  Canaan  sufiFered  from  a 
drought  at  the  same  time  is  also  in  accord  with 


Joseph 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


282 


natural  conditions,  and  the  Amama  Tablets  re- 
cord that  Canaan  imported  com  from  Egypt  (cf.  H. 
BnigBch,  Die  biblischen  suben  Jahre  der  HungerB- 
not,  Leipsic,  1891;  Sayce,  ut  sup.,  pp.  217-218). 
Since  Egypt  was  the  great  producer  of  wheat,  the 
Semitic  tribes  in  times  of  scarcity  naturally  mi- 
grated thither,  where  they  were  not  seldom  received 
with  justifiable  suspicion  (xUi.  9).  The  settlement 
of  the  Hebrews  in  the  land  of  Goshen  (q.v.)  is  in 
accord  with  the  conditions,  since  this  territory  had 
for  a  long  time  been  the  resort  of  invading  Semites 
and  was  adapted  to  the  nomadic  manner  of  life. 
Finally,  the  embalming  of  Joseph  and  the  seventy 
days  mourning  for  him  (1.  1  sqq.)  are  thoroughly 
E^ptian.  Taking  all  these  facts  together,  it  is 
impossible  to  escape  the  conviction  which  Ebers 
expresses:  ''  The  whole  of  Joseph's  history,  even 
in  its  smallest  details,  must  be  regarded  as  in  ac- 
cord with  the  actual  conditions  in  Egypt."  To  be 
sure,  this  general  agreement  with  Egyptian  condi- 
tions and  manners  does  not  of  itself  positively  es- 
tablish the  historic  character  of  the  recital;  but  the 
assertion  that  the  author  or  compiler  was  not  familiar 
with  E^^yptian  conditions  is  equally  pure  assiunp- 
tion.  It  is  true  that  several  things,  especially  the 
mention  of  the  "  Land  of  Rameses  "  (Gen.  xlvii. 
11),  a  name  which  could  scarcely  have  been  used 
before  the  nineteenth  dynasty,  make  it  unlikely 
that  Joseph's  story  is  from  a  nearly  contempora- 
neous source.  It  seems  probable  that  the  account 
was  written  about  the  time  of  the  Exodus  (A.  H. 
Sayoe,  ut  sup.,  pp.  212-213). 

The  determination  of  the  period  of  E^^yptian 
history  to  which  the  Hebrew  immigration  belongs 
depends  upon  the  relations  of  the  He- 
The  brews  with  the  Hyksos.  Josephus' 
Date  of  supposition  {Apiotif  i.  14)  that  this 
Joseph,  noxnadic  people  of  Semitic  race  was 
identical  with  the  Hebrews  does  not 
agree  with  the  modest  position  the  Hebrews  occu- 
pied in  the  land  according  to  the  Biblical  narrative. 
But  Joseph's  activity  must  have  fallen  in  the  Hyk- 
sos period.  The  430  (or  400)  years  of  the  Egyp- 
tian bondage  (Ex.  xii.  40;  Gen.  xv.  13),  even  if  the 
Exodus  took  place  under  Memeptah  and  certainly 
if  it  took  place  earlier,  point  to  that  period.  Geor- 
gius  Syncellus  gives  Aphophis  as  the  name  of  the 
Pharaoh  of  the  Exodus,  that  is,  the  Apepi  of  the 
moniunents,  who,  according  to  Brugsch,  reigned 
shortly  before  the  beginning  of  the  eighteenth  dy- 
nasty. To  this  time  belongs  also,  in  the  opinion  of 
Brugsch,  the  famine  of  many  years  mentioned  in 
his  Geschichte  Aegyptena,  pp.  243  sqq.  The  Hyksos 
kings  may  have  b^n  as  anxious  to  attract  Semitic 
settlers  as  the  first  rulers  of  the  New  Empire  (eight- 
^nth  dynasty)  were  to  hold  them  aloof  or  to  op- 
press them.  The  darkness,  however,  which  en- 
shrouds the  period  of  the  Hyksos,  especially  the 
ruthless  destruction  of  their  monuments  by  a  later 
dynasty,  may  have  obliterated  all  definite  informa- 
tion  of  Joseph  and  his  family.  In  general,  in  the 
memory  of  the  P]e;yptians,  this  tribe  was  confused 
with  the  other  Semitic  inhabitants  of  the  Delta, 
and  consequently  separate  features  of  the  history 
of  Joseph  and  Moses  appear  confusedly  interwoven 
with  other  events  in  Egyptian  tradition.    Among 


Jews  and  Mohammedans  the  tale  of  Joseph's  fate 
was  especially  fancied,  and  it  has  been  embellished 
with  much  legendary  matter,  especially  by  the 
Mohammedans  (cf.  Koran,  surah  xii.). 

C.  VON  Orblu. 
Bibuoobapht:  The  ionroes  are:  Gen.  xxz.  22-24,  aczxvii.. 
xxjdx.  1.  The  best  oo^denaed  treatment  of  the  subject 
is  either  the  artiele  by  Driver  in  DB,  it  767-775,  or  the 
article  in  EB,  ii.  2683-2594.  There  is  a  monograph  by 
H.  O.  Tomkins,  Life  and  Timet  of  Joeeph  in  the  Ljoht 
of  BgyvHan  Lirrt,  London.  1891.  Consult  further,  besides 
the  literature  mentioned  in  the  text:  E.  W.  Hensstenbeis* 
Die  BiUhrr  Afoeee  und  die  Aegypier,  Berlin,  1841;  C.  von 
Lengerke,  Kanaan,  pp.  331  sqq..  K6ni|csberB,  1844;  G. 
Ebers,  Die  Aegtfpier  und  die  BiUher  Moeee,  voL  i.,  Leipsie, 
1868;  A.  H.  Sayoe.  PaJbriardud  PaluHne,  pp.  200  sqq.. 
London,  1896;  W.  Staerk,  Studien  sur  Rmligione-  und 
8praeh4/eeehiekl€,  ii.  21  sqq.,  Berlin,  1899.  For  the  bearing 
of  research  in  Egypt  on  the  Joseph  story  see  the  literature 
cited  under  Egypt.  Some  parallels  to  the  story  and  to 
that  of  the  "  Two  Brothers  "  are  given  in  A.  Lang,  MyA, 
Ritual  and  Religi&n,  u.  303-306.  London,  1887.  On  the 
general  relations  of  archeology  cf .  the  article  by  Driver 
in  D.  G.  Hogarth,  AuOufriiyand  Arehaeolooy,  London,  1890. 

JOSEPH  n. 

The  Enlightenment.     Political  Reforma  (|  1). 
Governmental  Control  of  the  Church  (|  2). 
Position  of  the  Qergy  in  the  State  (|  3). 
Refonns  Affecting  the  Cure  of  Souls  (|  4). 
Religious  Toleration  Established  (|  5). 
Successes  and  Failures  of  the  Reforms  (|  6). 

Joseph  II.,  Holy  Roman  Emperor  1765-90,  son 
of  Francis  I.  (grand  duke  of  Tuscany,  emperor, 
1745-65)  and  Maria  Theresa  (queen  of  Bohemia 
and  Hungary,  archduchess  of  Austria,  1740-48), 
was  bom  at  Vienna  Mar.  13,  1741,  and  died  there 
Feb.  20,  1790.  Austria  stands  in  the  front  rank 
of  strictly  Roman  Catholic  countries  which  in  the 
second  half  of  the  eighteenth  century  found  them- 
selves compelled  to  break  with  their  antiquated 

system  to  find  the  way  for  a  new  ex- 

I.  The  En-    istenoe.    The  defeats  of  Austria,  espe- 

lightemnent  cially  in  the  Seven  Years'  War  (1756- 

Political      1763),  had  shown  Maria  Theresa  the 

Reforms,     lack   of   centralization,    of    financial, 

intellectual,  and  moral  power  in  her 
country  and  the  necessity  of  reforms.    Although  a 
good  Catholic  and  personally  antagonistic  to  the 
Enlightenment,  she  permitted  the  leaders  of  this 
intellectual  movement  to  expand  the  new  views  of 
Territorialism  (q.v.)  and  Febronianism  (see  Hont- 
HBiM,  JoEiANN  NiKOLAUS  von).    Archdukc  Joseph 
became  one  of  the  most  prominent  and  fervent 
advocates  of  the  new  ideas,  and  when  he  became 
coregent  after  the  death  of  Emperor  Franda  (Aug. 
18, 1765),  ecclesiastical  reforms  were  carried  out  in  a 
more  thorough  and  independent  manner,  especially 
as  popes  like  Clement  XIV.  (1769-74)  and  Pius  VI. 
(1775-1799)  tried  to  save  the  hierarchy  by  the  most 
fai^reaching  concessions.    On  the  death  of  the  em- 
press in  1780  Joseph  became  sole  ruler^  and  dow 
began  an  entirely  new  system,  which  was  carried 
out  within  a  few  years.    The  old  feudal  order  was 
to  make  room  for  the  monarchical  state  of  the  En- 
lightenment,  in  which  no  privileged  classes  and 
estates  existed.    In  the  political  sphere  Joseph  con- 
tinued the  centralization  of  the  old  Hapsbuig  coun- 
tries; in  the  social  sphere  he  attempted  to  raise  the 
state  of  the  peasants  and  of  industry.    Serfdom 
was  abolished,  taxes  on  landed  property  were  equal- 


988 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


JoMph 


bed,  and  the  industrial  life  was  freed  from  its  para- 
lyzing  fetters. 

Joseph  was  a  pronounced  territorialist.  AU  ex- 
ternal relations  of  the  Church  (i.e.,  everything  out- 
side of  the  dog;mas  in  the  proper  sense),  t^  ad- 
ministration of  the  sacraments,  and 
2.  Goyem-  inner  discipline  over  the  clergy,  were 
mental  to  be  placed  under  the  regulating  and 
Control  supervising  power  of  the  State.  He 
of  the      thought  of  the  relation  of  the  churches 

Church,  of  his  countries  to  Rome  entirely  in 
the  Febronian  sense.  The  peculiarity 
of  his  system  of  church  polity  has  been  styled 
Josephinism,  a  term  which  implies  the  imion  of 
Febronianism,  Episcopalianism,  and  territorialism, 
with  the  political  viewpoint  dominating.  He  was 
in  no  way  hostile  to  the  Church;  Roman  Catholi- 
cism appeared  to  him  the  historically  developed  and 
therefore  the  natural  form  of  churchdom  in  his 
countries;  but  he  did  not  subject  his  government  to 
merely  ecclesiastical  points  of  view.  The  Church 
appeu«d  to  him  only  as  the  oi^anization  of  one  of 
the  spheres  in  which  the  life  of  the  people  develops, 
and  which  is  therefore  subordinated  to  the  whole, 
the  State.  The  ultimate  aim  of  all  his  reforms  was 
the  supremacy  of  the  State.  The  means  was  the 
introduction  of  the  enlightenment  to  raise  up  new 
ethical  and  intellectual  power.  Accordingly,  the 
churches  of  the  Hapsbuig  countries  were  to  be  de- 
tached, as  far  as  possible,  from  their  l^al  connection 
with  the  papacy  and  consolidated  into  a  uniform 
oiganisation  imder  the  church  government  of  the 
sovereign.  Consequently  the  Placet  (q.v.)  for  all 
kinds  of  papal  bulls  and  briefs  was  renewed  and 
strictly  carried  out.  The  bull  UnigenUua  was  never 
to  be  mentioned,  and  the  bull  In  coena  Domini  torn 
out  of  the  books  of  liturgy.  In  1781  all  relations 
were  broken  off  between  the  religious  orders  and 
their  superiors  and  brethren  in  foreign  countries. 
At  the  same  time,  the  orders  were  subordinated  to 
the  disciplinary  power  of  the  bishops  and  arch- 
bishops. Similar  ordinances  were  applied  to  the 
whole  clergy.  Communication  with  Rome  was  to 
be  through  Austrian  ambassadors.  Nobody  was 
allowed  to  ask  for  papal  titles  in  Rome,  or  to  send 
money  there.  The  bishops  received  the  right  to 
absolve  and  dispense,  especially  in  matrimonial  mat- 
ters, and  to  institute  new  festivals,  devotions,  etc. 
Every  appeal  to  Rome  was  forbidden.  As  at  many 
points  along  the  boundaries,  Austrian  dominions 
were  under  the  authority  of  foreign  bishops,  a 
new  circumscription  of  the  dioceses  was  necessary. 
Moreover,  the  coniiection  of  the  bishops  with  the 
secular  ruler  was  made  closer,  closer  even  than  that 
with  the  pope.  There  was  demanded  of  them  a 
new  oath  of  subjection  to  the  temporal  ruler  which 
preceded  that  to  the  pope.  Nevertheless,  there 
remained  for  the  pope  a  certain  privilege  over  the 
internal  and  external  relations  of  the  Austrian 
Church;  and,  when  possible,  the  emperor  tried  to 
gain  his  consent  to  the  ecclesiastical  reforms. 

The  special  jurisdiction  of  the  clergy  was  abol- 
ished, the  clergy  was  subjected  to  the  legislative 
and  judicial  powers,  bishops  were  to  wait  for  the 
placet  for  their  consecration  and  the  State  assumed 
oiatrimonial  legislation  (1783).    As  it  was  the  aim 


of  Joseph  to  bring  the  clergy  into  closer  connection 
with  the  Austrian  State  and  make  its  representa- 
tives more  efficient  in  their  profession 
3.  Position  than  had  been  possible  under  the  old 
of  the      system,  he  placed  their  education  in  the 
Clergy  in    hands  of  the  central  authority  of  civil 
the  State,    instruction,  the  imperial  conmiission  of 
schools.    The  theological  students  were 
forbidden  to  visit  the  Collegiiun  Germanicum  et 
Hungaricum  in  Rome  (Nov.  18,  1781),  which  insti- 
tution was  replaced  by  a  Collegium  Germanicum  et 
Himgaricum  in  Pavia.     In  1783  the  theological 
schools  in  the  monasteries  were  closed,  and  "  general 
seminaries  "  were  opened  as  State  institutions  under 
the  superintendence   of  the  imperial  commission. 
As  the  monasteries  were  regarded  as  the  chief  seats 
of  all  sentiments  inimical  to  the  State,  and  as  they 
deprived  the  State  of  a  great  number  of  efficient 
men  that  were  urgently  needed  for  the  multitude 
of  new  parishes,  a  law  of  Jan.  12,  1782,  ordered  the 
dissolution  of  all  religious  orders  not  engaged  in 
preaching,  teaching,  or  nursing  the  sick.    In  this 
way  the  nimiber  of  monasteries  in  Austria  and 
Hungary  was  reduced  from  2,163  to  1,425. 

No  less  comprehensive,  *and  evincing  the  same 
character,  were  the  reforms  relating  to  the  internal 
life  of  the  Church.    The  emperor  made 
4.  Re-      the  greatest  efforts  to  elevate  the  cure 
forms      of  souls  and  to  adapt  its  organisation 
Affecting    to  the  needs  of  the  changed  conditions, 
the  Cure    Many  of  the  monastic  churches  were 
of  Souls,    transformed  into  parish  churches.  The 
emoluments  of  a  religious  State  fund 
were  used  for  the  foundation  of  churches,  pastor- 
ates, and  chaplaincies;    former  monks  were  em- 
ployed in  pastoral  work.    At  the  same  time  Joseph 
deeply  influenced  the  order  of  the  church  service. 
His  aim  was  to  do  away  with  the  merely  external 
and  mechanical  practise  of  religion  and  further  the 
ideal  of  the  Enlightenment,  the  worship  of  God  in 
spirit  and  in  truth,  and  the  practical  love  of  fellow 
men.    He  paid  special  attention  to  preaching,  to 
the  instruction  of  youth,  and  to  congregational 
singing.    On  Apr.  21,  1783,  there  was  issued  a  new 
church  order  for  Vienna,  which  served  as  a  pattern 
for  the  whole  country.     All  orders  of  service  which 
went  beyond  the  Roman  ritual  were  done  away. 
The  Latin  language  was  abolished,  and  the  German 
introduced  into  the   services.    Rules  were  given 
with  respect  to  the  luxurious  ornamentation  of  the 
churches,  the  magnificent  processions,  the  brilliant 
illuminations,  exhibition  of  relics,  pilgrimages,  etc. 
A  rational  and  systematic  care  of  the  poor  and  sick 
was  substituted  for  begging  and  the  arbitrary  giv- 
ing of  alms. 

An  edict  of  Oct.  13,  1781,  established  religious 

toleration  for  the  whole  Hapsbuig  monarchy,  for 

the  German  and  Bohemian  countries,  Hungary  and 

her  dependencies,  Italy,  and  the  Neth- 

5.  Relig-    erlands.    The  adherents  of  the  Augs- 

ious  Tolera-  burg  and  Helvetic  confessions,  as  well 

tion  Es-     as  members  of  the  Greek  Church,  ob- 

tablished.   tained  a  limited  freedom  of  worship. 

Each  group  of  a  hundred  families  was 

permitted  to  build  a  meeting-house,  but  without 

bells,  steeples,  or  street  entrances,  and  a  school 


JOMph 
Jr  — 


'OBQphUB 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


284 


and  employ  their  own  teachers  and  subordinate 
pastors,  who  were  to  be  confirmed  by  the  emperor. 
Civil  disqualifications  arising  from  denominational 
differences  were  abolished.  In  Gennan  countries, 
Bohemia,  and  Moravia  the  number  of  non-Catholics 
in  1782  was  73,722.  By  1788  this  number  had  in- 
creased  to  156,865.  The  number  of  tolerated  con- 
gregations  in  Htmgary  and  Transylvania  in  1783 
was  272;  in  1784  it  was  758.  By  collections  in 
Austria  and  Hungary,  in  the  empire,  in  the  Evan- 
gelical Netherlands,  in  Switserland,  Denmark,  and 
Russia,  considerable  sums  were  raised  for  the  or- 
ganization of  Evangelical  congregations.  The  gov- 
ernment itself  made  efforts  to  establish  order  and 
develop  the  inner  conditions  of  the  Protestant 
churches.  A  special  consistory  was  formed  for  the 
Protestants  in  Germany,  Bohemia,  and  Moravia. 

It  is  self-evident  that  such  an  enormous  revolu- 
tion in  all  spheres  met  with  the  strongest  opposition, 
especially  from  the  Curia.  On  Mar.  22.  1782,  Pius 
VI.  paid  a  visit  to  Vienna  to  ezpostu- 
6.  Sncceisep  late  with  the  emperor;  but  he  was 
and  Fail-  received  with  cold  politeness  and  re- 
1UW  of  the  turned  without  having  accomplished 
Rflfonna.  his  purpose.  In  the  old  countries  of 
the  Hapsbuig  crown  the  sentiment  was 
very  different.  Among  the  bishops  Joseph  had  friends 
and  foes.  The  Febronian  views  of  the  Enlighten- 
ment (q.v.)  were  represented  by  the  archbishop 
of  Salsbuig,  as  well  as  by  the  bishops  of  K6nig- 
gr&tz,  Wiener  Neustadt,  Ijaibach,  Seckau,  etc.,  while 
the  old  ecclesiastical  views  were  adhered  to  by  the 
archbishop  of  Vienna  and  the  Hungarian  episcopate 
under  the  leadership  of  its  primate.  In  the  German 
and  Bohemian  countries  the  ecclesiastical  reforms 
as  a  whole  went  through  peacefully,  though  the 
changes  in  the  cultus  and  in  ecclesiastical  ethics 
caused  some  bitterness.  Tl&e  political-social  reforms 
pleased  peasants  and  dtisens,  but  aroused  the  op- 
position of  the  privileged  classes.  In  Hungary  the 
ecclesiastical  reforms  were  carried  out  without  op- 
position, but  the  political  and  social  revolutions 
necessitated  by  the  centralizing  tendency  of  the 
emperor,  as,  for  instance,  the  attempts  to  break  the 
old  constitution  of  Hungary  and  Transylvania,  to 
govern  the  country  in  a  despotic  manner  by  State 
officers,  to  introduce  German  as  the  official  language, 
and  to  abolish  serfdom  with  the  privileges  of  the 
nobility  and  the  clergy,  enraged  the  Magyar  nobility 
in  such  a  way  that  on  Jan.  30,  1790,  all  politictd 
and  social  reforms  had  to  be  repealed.  In  the 
Netherlands  the  edict  of  toleration  was  promulgated 
November,  1781,  and  was  carried  out  without  diffi- 
culty, in  spite  of  the  opposition  of  the  estates  and 
the  clergy.  The  other  ecclesiastical  provisions  were 
opposed  only  by  the  clergy  and  the  monastic  orders. 
But  here,  too,  the  attempt  to  break  the  old  feudal 
constitution,  the  self-government  of  the  estates  and 
the  privileged  position  of  the  clergy  and  nobility  in 
dty  and  country,  met  in  1787  with  the  most  violent 
opposition  in  all  prominent  circles.  On  Jan.  7, 
1790,  the  provinces  declared  themselves  independ- 
ent, and  the  general  political  condition  deprived  the 
emperor  of  all  hope  of  victory.  Disappointed  and 
defeated  he  died  the  following  month.  There  is  no 
doubt  that  the  impatience  and  haste  of  his  reforms 


greatly  injured  his  work,  and  yet  his  reign  became 
the  starting-point  for  a  new  and  higher  develop- 
ment of  Austria.  The  system  of  ecclesiastical 
legislation  continued  after  ^  death,  except  that  in 
the  Netherlands  his  brother  and  successor  Leopold 
was  compelled  to  sacrifice  all  ecclesiastical  innovsr 
tions,  even  the  edict  of  toleration,  in  order  to  re- 
gain his  provinces.  In  Hungary  and  Transylvania 
the  main  bulk  of  the  ecclesiastical  reforms,  and  es- 
pecially the  edict  of  toleration,  remained  in  force. 
In  Austria  most  of  the  estates  required  the  restitu- 
tion of  the  old  feudal  conditions  and  the  old  dom- 
ination of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church;  but  Leo- 
pold refused  both.  Of  the  ecclesiastical  legislation 
only  the  ''  general  seminaries  "  were  discontinued. 
The  bishops  were  allowed  to  erect  their  own  insti- 
tutions and  to  dispose  of  the  order  of  church  serv- 
ice. The  great  mass  of  reforms  within  the  Church 
remained  until  1848.  At  the  time  of  Napoleon  I. 
Joeephimsm  extended  over  all  the  South  German 
states,  Bavaria,  Warttemberg,  Baden,  and  Hesse. 
It  was  only  in  1848  that  it  was  entirely  broken  in 
Austria,  as  well  as  in  the  South  German  states. 
Only  the  edict  of  toleration  remained  in  force  in 
Austria,  and  was  embodied  in  the  constitution. 

(Karl  MOllbr.) 

BiBUOOEArar:  Souroee  an:  A.  von  Ametb,  Maria  Tkentia 
und  Joseph  il,,  ikre  KorretpondenM^  3  toIb.,  VieniiA,  1867; 
J.  Kropatachek,  Hanibudi  .  .  .  Verordnungen  und  Oe- 
MfM,  10  vols..  Vienna,  1785-01;  Codex  jwia  eedenatUn 
Joaephini,  2  vols.,  Presburg*  1788;  Sammbino  der  Verord- 
nunffen  und  OeeetM  KaiMr$  Joeeph  //.,  10  vols..  Vienna, 
1788.  Consult:  K.  Ritter,  Kaimr  Joetph  und  aeine  kirch- 
Uek$n  Refarmen^  2  vols.,  Regensburg,  1867;  S.  Brunner« 
Die  iheolooiBdie  Diener$duift  am  Hofe  Jotphs  //.,  Vienna, 
1868;  idem.  Die  Mj/tterien  der  Aufkldrung  in  Oeeterreieh 
1770-1800,  lb.  1860;  T.  von  Kern,  Die  R^armen  der 
Kaieerin  Maria  Thereeia,  Leipdo,  1800;  A.  Wolf.  Die 
Aufhebung  der  KlOeter  in  inner deierreid^,  Vienna,  1871; 
id«n,  Oeeterreith  unter  Maria  TKereeia,  Joeeph  li.,  und 
Leopoid  ii.,  Berlin,  1883;  E.  Friedbeis,  Die  Orenaen 
ewieeken  Stoat  und  Kirdie,  TQbingen,  1872;  A.  von  Arneth, 
Oeeehiehte  Maria  Therteia,  ix.  1-260,  Vienna.  1870;  C.  von 
Hook,  Der  deterreichieche  SUuUerath  1760-1848,  ib.,  1870; 
E.  Hubert,  La  Condition  dee  proteetante  en  Betgique  depute 
Charlee  V.  iuequh  Joeeph  U„  BniMels,  1882;  G.  Frank, 
Dae  Tolerampatent  Kaieere  Joeeph  Il„  Vienna,  1882;  L. 
Leger,  Hiet.  of  Auetro-Hungary,  London,  1880;  H.  Sehlit- 
ter.  Die  Regieruno  Joeeft  II.,  vol.  i..  Vienna,  1000;  F. 
Frishc,  Kaieer  Joeeph  II.,  ib.  1003;  J.  Bryoe,  The  Holy 
Roman  Empire,  New  York.  1004;  F.  Geier.  Die  DurehfUhr- 
ttfiff  der  Inrehlichen  ReformenJoeepht  11.,  Stuttgart,  1005; 
E.  Gothein.  Der  Breiegau  unier  Maria  Thereeia  und  Joeeph 
//.,  Heidelberg.  1007;  H.  Frani,  Siudien  tur  kireMiehen 
Reform  Joeephe  II.,  1008. 

JOSEPHUS,  FLAVIUS. 
I.  Life, 
n.  Works. 

**  Jewish  War  "  and  "  Antkxmtifls  "  (i  1% 
Remaining  Works  (|  2). 
Editions  (|  3). 

L  Life:  Flavius  Josephus,  the  Jewish  historian, 
was  born  in  the  first  year  of  the  reign  of  Caligula, 
37-38  A.D.;  d.  at  Rome  after  100  A.n.  His  father 
Matthias  belonged  to  a  respected  family  of  priests 
in  Jerusalem.  Josephus  reports  proudly  that  at 
the  age  of  sixteen  he  went  through  the  three  "  phil- 
osophical schools  "  of  the  Jews,  those  of  the  Phari- 
sees, Sadducees,  and  Essenes,  and  that  for  the  next 
three  years  he  lived  with  a  hermit  named  Banus. 
At  the  age  of  nineteen  he  publicly  joined  the  Phari- 
sees {Vila,  i.-ii.).   In  64  a.d.  he  undertook  a  journey 


986 


REUGI0U8  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Joseph 
Joaephufl 


to  Rome  to  obtain  the  release  of  certain  imprisoned 
priests.  He  had  hardly  returned  to  Palestine  when 
the  great  insurrection  against  the  Romans  broke 
out  (66  A.D.).  In  the  beginning  Josephus  was 
without  doubt  opposed  to  the  rebellion,  but  after 
the  first  victories  of  the  Jews,  he,  too,  joined  it, 
more  by  force  than  by  free  will;  he  even  became 
commander  in  Galilee.  As  such  he  organized  in 
the  winter  of  66-67  the  military  forces  of  Galilee 
and  made  preparations  for  the  campaign  which 
began  in  the  spring  of  67.  Activities  centered 
around  the  fortress  of  Jotapata,  which  was  for  six 
weeks  bravely  and  cleverly  defended  by  Josephus 
against  the  army  of  Vespasian.  After  the  capture 
of  Jotapata  he  became  a  prisoner  of  the  Romans; 
after  the  second  year  of  his  imprisonment  he  was 
released  by  Vespasian,  who  in  69  had  become  em- 
peror. He  then  adopted  the  name  of  Flavins 
Josephus  and  devoted  the  remainder  of  his  life  to 
the  interest  of  the  Flavian  emperors.  He  accom- 
panied Vespasian  to  Alexandria,  returned  thence 
in  the  suite  of  Titus  to  Palestine  and  was  in  the 
army  of  the  latter  during  the  whole  siege  of  Jeru- 
salem in  the  year  70.  After  the  capture  of  Jerusa- 
lem Titus  took  him  to  Rome,  where  he  seems  to 
have  settled  down  to  literary  work.  Vespasian 
gave  him  a  dwelling-place  in  his  own  former  resi- 
dence, made  him  a  Roman  citizen,  and  presented 
him  with  an  annual  salary  and  a  considerable  tract 
of  land  in  Judea.  With  the  following  emperors, 
Titus  (79-81  A.D.)  and  Domitian  (81-96  a.d.),  Jo- 
sephus enjoyed  the  same  favor.  It  is  not  Imown 
how  long  he  lived  and  in  what  relation  he  stood 
to  the  later  emperors.  He  must  have  been  living 
in  the  time  of  Trajan,  since  in  his  Vita  he  mentions 
King  Agrippa  II.  as  having  already  died  (100  a.d.). 
n .  Works :  The  works  of  Josephus  were  all  com- 
posed in  the  Greek  language,  with  the  exception  of 
his  first  draft  of  the  '*  Jewish  War,",  which  was  in 
Aramaic.  His  principal  purpose  was 
I.  "  Jewish  to  communicate  to  the  Greco-Roman 
War  '*  and  world  the  knowledge  of  the  history  of 
"  Antiq-  his  people,  whom  he  defends  and  glori- 
uities."  fies  in  every  possible  way.  The  "  His- 
tory of  the  Jewish  War,"  in  seven 
books,  is  his  earliest  and  most  carefully  written 
work.  The  first  and  second  books  gave  a  survey 
of  Jewish  history  from  the  time  of  the  Maccabees 
to  the  outbreak  of  the  insurrection  against  the 
Romans.  The  rest  of  the  work  is  a  detailed  ac- 
count of  the  war  from  the  beginning  in  66  to  the 
complete  suppression  in  73.  It  was  written  late  in 
the  reign  of  Vespasian  (69  to  79  a.d.;  cf.  War,  pref- 
ace, chap,  i.;  Ant.f  preface,  chap.  i.).  It  was  pre- 
sented to  Vespasian,  Titus,  and  Agrippa  II.,  and 
the  author  received  commendation  for  the  accu- 
racy of  his  account.  The  "  Antiquities  "  ('^  Jew- 
ish Archeology  ")  iatk  comprehensive  history  of  the 
Jewish  people  from  the  beginnings  of  Biblical  his- 
tory to  the  outbreak  of  the  war  in  66  a.d.,  in  twenty 
books,  after  the  model  of  the  Romaiki  archaiologia 
of  Dionysius  of  Halicamassus.  It  was  completed 
in  the  thirteenth  year  of  Domitian,  93-94  a.d.  For 
the  Biblical  period  (books  I.-XI.)  Josephus  draws 
almost  exclusively  from  the  Bible  in  the  Septuagint 
version,  but  he  modifies  the  Biblical  story  and  sup- 


plements it  by  l^ends,  following  current  traditions. 
Here  and  there  he  seems  to  have  employed  also 
Hellenistic  compilations  of  Biblical  history,  espe- 
cially those  of  Demetrius  and  Artapanus.  Finally, 
he  inserted  notices  from  Greek  writers  of  profane 
history  when  he  dealt,  for  instance,  with  the  flood, 
with  primitive  man,  with  Phenician  history,  and 
the  like.  The  post-Biblical  period  of  Jewish  his- 
tory is  treated  by  Josephus  without  any  due  sense 
of  proportion  according  to  the  condition  of  his 
sources.  He  has  little  to  say  on  the  period  from 
Alexander  the  Great  to  the  time  of  the  Maccabees, 
filling  the  gap  with  an  extensive  extract  frcHn 
Pseudo-Aristeas  (see  Abisteas)  on  the  origin  of  the 
Greek  translation  of  the  Bible.  For  the  history  of 
the  Maccabees  (175-135  b.c.)  he  had  an  excellent 
source  in  I  Maccabees  (see  Apocrtpha,  A,  IV.,  9), 
which  he  supplemented  from  the  works  of  Polyb- 
ius.  The  later  history  of  the  Hasmoneans  seems 
to  depend  upon  the  more  general  works  of  Strabo 
and  Nicolas  of  Damascus.  The  main  source  for 
the  history  of  Herod  (books  XV.-XVII.)  was  Nico- 
laus  Damascenus,  who,  as  an  intimate  councilor  of 
Herod,  was  acquainted  with  the  internal  history  of 
the  court  and  described  in  great  detail  the  history 
of  his  land.  The  history  from  the  death  of  Herod 
to  the  outbreak  of  the  war  (books  XVIII.-XX.)  is 
treated  quite  meagerly.  For  the  last  decades  Jo- 
sephus was  able  to  draw  from  oral  information  or 
from  his  own  experience.  He  inserted  a  niunber 
of  documents — decrees  of  the  Roman  senate,  let- 
ters of  Roman  magistrates,  decrees  of  cities  of  Asia 
Minor  under  Roman  influence,  and  the  like — ^the 
majority  of  these  dating  from  the  time  of  Cnsar 
and  Augustus  and  having  high  value.  The  genur 
ineness  of  the  passsge  on  Jesus  Christ  (XVIII.,  iii. 
3)  is  generally  given  up. 

The  title  afl^ed  to  the  autobiography  {Vita)  of 
Josephus  is  misleading,  since  it  recounts  and  justi- 
fies his  activity  in  Galilee  in  the  winter  of  66-67 
A.D.  In  this  work  Josephus  attacks 
2.  Re-  especially  Justus  of  Tiberias,  who,  be- 
mahiing  ing  a  man  of  conservative  tendencies. 
Works,  had,  like  Josephus,  joined  the  insur- 
rection more  by  force  than  by  free 
will  and  had  subsequently  tried  to  exonerate  him- 
self for  participation  in  the  rebellion  and  to  place 
the  responsibility  upon  Josephus.  The  latter  re- 
taliated in  his  Vita  by  representing  Justus  as  the 
chief  agitator  and  hiniself  as  the  real  friend  of  the 
Romans.  The  work  was  written  after  the  death  of 
Agrippa  II.,  therefore  after  100  a.d.  Tbe  Contra 
Apionem  presents  a  well-written  systematic  apology 
for  Judaism  in  reply  to  various  attacks,  especially 
in  the  literary  world.  The  usual  title  Contra  Ap- 
ionem is  misleading,  since  only  a  part  of  the  work 
is  occupied  with  the  polemic  against  Apion.  Por- 
phyry (De  abstinentiaf  iv.  11)  quotes  it  under  the 
title  Proa  Uma  HellSnaa,  the  oldest  Church  Fathers 
under  the  title  Peri  Ua  tdn  JoudaiOn  archaiotUoa, 
Jerome  was  the  first  to  use  the  title  Contra  Apion- 
em, Since  Josephus  quotes  in  this  work  the  "  An- 
tiquities" it  must  have  been  written  later  than 
93  A.D.  That  IV  Maccabees  was  wrongly  ascribed 
by  the  Fathers  to  Josephus  is  now  universally  rec- 
ognized.   Similarly  the  work  discussed  in  Photius, 


To»pliti 
JoshuA 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


21 


BMudheea,  ood.  48,  under  the  title  Peri  tau  panloa 
or  Peri  Ub  tou  paniOB  aitiae  or  Peri  U$  tau  pantos 
oueiaa,  is  of  ChriBtian  origin  and  is  quoted  by  the 
author  of  the  Philoaaj^ttmena  as  his  own.  The 
author  of  both  is  most  probably  Hippolytus,  among 
whose  works  there  is  mentioned  one  entitled  Peri 
tou  pantoe.  A  work  projected  by  Josephus  on  the- 
ology seems  never  to  have  been  written. 

The  first  edition  of  the  Greek  text  of  the  works 
of  Josephus  was  published  by  Frobenius  and  Epis- 
copius  (Basel,  1544).  It  was  followed  by  the  Ge- 
neva editions  of  1611  and  1634,  and  by  the  edition 
of  Ittig  (Leipsio,  1691).  A  text  of  the  complete 
works,  revised  after  manuscripts,  was  furnished 
by  Hudson   (2  vols.,  Oxford,  1720).    Then  came 

the  editions  of  Havercamp  (2  vols., 
3.  Bdi-  Amsterdam,  Leyden,  Utrecht,  1726), 
ttons.       of   Oberthar    (3    vols.,  Letpic,  1782- 

1785),  and  of  Richter  (6  vols.,  Leip- 
sio, 1826-27).  On  the  basis  of  Havercamp's  ma- 
terial the  text  was  revised  by  Dindorf  \Z  vols., 
Paris,  1845-47).  This  was  followed  by  the  pocket 
edition  of  Bekker  (6  vols.,  Leipsic,  1855-56).  A 
comprehensive  collation  of  all  good  manuscripts 
was  made  only  in  recent  times  by  Niese;  his  efforts 
resulted  in  a  critical  edition  which  by  the  richness 
of  the  apimratus  far  excels  aU  former  editions 
(Flavii  Joiephi  opera  edidit  el  apparahi  criiieo  in- 
etruxU  Benedidue  Nieae,  6  vols.,  Berlin,  1887-94; 
vol.  vii.  is  a  carefully  compiled  index,  1895).  On 
the  basis  of  Niese's  apparatus  appeared  an  edition 
by  Naber  (6  vols.,  Leipsic,  1888-96).  There  exists 
an  early  Latin  translation  of  the  complete  works  of 
Josephus,  with  the  exception  of  the  Vita,  Cassio- 
dorus  seems  to  be  the  author  of  the  Latin  transliv- 
tion  of  the  "  Antiquities  "  and  of  the  Contra  Apionem. 
The  first  printed  edition  of  the  Latin  Josephus  was 
published  by  Johann  SchQssler  in  Augsburg,  1470. 
Since  then  imtil  the  appearance  of  the  first  Greek 
edition  it  has  been  printed  frequently,  and  the  later 
editions  were  frequently  corrected  after  the  Greek. 
A  critical  edition  of  the  Latin  version,  resting  upon  a 
comprehensive  use  of  the  sources,  was  begun  by  Boy- 
sen  as  vol.  xxxvii.  of  the  Vienna  CSEL  (Vienna,  1898) . 
With  the  Latin  translation  of  the  BeUum  Judaieum 
is  not  to  be  confounded  a  Latin  condensation  which 
is  known  imder  the  name  of  Egesippus  or  Hegesip- 
pus.  The  name  E^gesippus  is  only  a  corruption 
from  Josippus,  a  Latin  form  of  "  Josephus.''  The 
work  has  some  original  additions,  dates  from  the 
second  half  of  the  fourth  century  a.d.,  and  has  been 
doubtfully  ascribed  to  Ambrose.  The  first  edition 
appeared  in  Paris,  1510;  a  critically  revised  text 
appeared  under  the  title  Hegesippus  qui  dicitvr  eive 
Egeeippue  de  heUo  Judaico  ope  codicia  Caeellani 
recognttuSf  ed.  W^ber^  opua  morte  Weberi  inierrup- 
turn  abaolvU  Caeaar  (Bfarbuig,  1864).  Under  the 
name  Josippon  or  Joseph,  son  of  Gorion,  there 
exists  a  history  of  the  Jewish  people  to  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem,  in  the  form  of  a  compendium 
written  in  Hebrew,  which  is  in  the  main  excerpted 
from  Josephus,  but  in  many  respects  differs  widely 
from  him.  There  appeared  an  edition  of  it  with 
a  Latin  translation,  by  J  F.  Breithaupt  (Gotha, 
1707,  1710).  Since  the  sixteenth  century  the 
works  of  Josephus  have  been  translated  into  almost 


all  modem  European  language^.    Among  the  Ec 

lish  translations  Traill's,  giving  the   Vita  and  t 

War,  are  especially  esteemed  TLondon,  1S62).     [T 

standard  English  translation  has  loni;  been  that 

W.  Whiston  (London,  1737,  often  reproduced,   \ 

test  ed.  by  D.  S.  Maigoliouth,  1906).     Others  wc 

by  T.  Lodge  (1602,  and  often);  Sir  R.  L.  TEstran 

(1702  and  often);   J.  Court  (1733,  and  of  ten), - 

Thompson  and  W.  C.  Price  (2  vols.,  1777-78);  ai 

T.  Bradshaw  (1792)].  (E.  SchCrbh.) 

Bibuoobapbt:  The  best  diaeu— ion  is  in  SchQrer.  Getehiek 

i.  74-100,  607-613.  iii.  370,  Eng.  tnnal.   I.,  i.  77-82. 

214-223.  II.  iii.  221-222;  SchOxer  fumiehes  very  abundi 

mAterinl  in  the  original  artide  in  Hauek-Heraog,  S 

ix.  377  sqq.    A  very  full  diseueiion  is  to  be  found  in  DC 

lit  441-460.    The  older  material  ic  sunested  in  Fabridi 

Hariea,   BUdiolheea  Ortuca,  r.  49-66.      Consult   fortbi 

V.  E.  P.  Chaaiea.  Dt  Cmiioriii  hutorique  de  tnaouu  JoakjH^ 

Paris.  1841;  Crauaer,  in  T8K,  zzvi  (1853),  46-nB6.  006^92 

Reuas.  in  Rtmis  d»  OiMooie,  18M.  pp.  253-319;    W.  . 

Terwogt.  HH  Ltven  van  .  .  .  Flaviua  Joaephtts,  Utxedi 

1863;    R.  Nioolai.  OrisckiaekM  LUeraitirgeeehichit,  iL  2,  p 

563-669.   Magdeburg,   1877;    A.  von  Outachmid,  KUii 

Sekriflen,   iv.   336^384.    Leipoie.    1893;     C.    WaehnnntJ 

EinUUung  in  daa  Studium  der  aUen  Oeackiehie,  pp.  43S 

449.  ib.  1896;  Nieae.  in  HiatonadiM  ZeitMckrift,  Izxvi  (1896 

193-237:     Unger.    in    SMA,    philoaophiach-philofagifldi 

Klane.  1895.  pp.  551-604. 1896.  pp.  357-397, 1897.  pp.  189 

244;  H.  Pbter,  Die  oeaehiehUiehe  Liientur  Hber  die  ramiet^ 

Kaieereeil,  i.  394--401.  Leipdc.  1897;    P.   Krfigar,  PkU 

und  Joee^ue  olt  Apologeten  dee  Judeniume,    ib.   1906 

Oeiliier.  Auieure  eaerie,  i.  314-327. 

JOSHUA,    jesh'yu-a:    An    Ephraimite,    son   d 
Nun,  servant  and  helper  of  Moses  (Ex.  xxiv.  13), 
and  his  successor  in  the  leadership  of  Israel  (Num. 
zxvii.  18-23).    On  assuming  the  leadership,  Joshua 
sent  spies  who  were  entertained  by  Rahab  in  Jeri- 
cho, and  on  their  return  reported  the  situation  in 
Canaan  (Josh.  i.  10-ii.  24).    He  then  ordered  prep- 
arations to  be  made  for  the  invasion,  which  took 
place  on  the  tenth  day  of  the  first  month  of  tbe 
forty-first  year  after  the  exodus  from  Egypt.    It 
has  been  said  that  Joshua  used  the  fords  of  the 
Jordan;   but  the  place  and  the  season  of  the  year 
are  unfavorable  to  this  supposition,  since  at  that 
time  the  Jordan  overflows  its  banks  (Josh.  m.  15; 
I  Ghron.  xii.  15).    According  to  the  narrative  the 
upper  waters  of  the  river  stayed  as  if  dammed  up, 
whQe  the  lower  waters  flowed  off  into  the  Dead 
Sea.    The  suggestion  of  Elostermann  that  the  phe- 
nomenon may  have  been  caused  by  a  severe  earth- 
quake which  raised  the  bed  of  the  river  or  pro- 
duced a  landslide  across  the  river  bed,  which  was 
afterward  carried  away  by  the  flood,  offers  a  nat- 
ural  explanation  of  the  way  in  which  the  river  was 
crossed  dry-footed.    To  preserve  the  memory  of 
this  crossing,  the  leader  had  twelve  stones  carried 
from  the  bed  of  the  river  and  set  up  at  Gilgal,  mid- 
way between  the  river  and  Jericho  (Josh.  iv.  M> 
20-24).    The  people  were  then  circumcised  and 
the  feast  of  the   Passover  was  celebrated.    The 
promise  made  to  Joshua  that  Yahweh,  the  leader 
of  the  host  of  the  people  which  had  become  Yah- 
weh's,  would  be  his  helper  was  fulfilled  in  the  ta- 
king of  Jericho,  the  walls  of  which  were  thrown 
down  in  an  earthquake  (Josh.  v.  13-xxz.  vi.),  white 
of  the  inhabitants  only  Rahab  and  her  family  were 
saved  alive.    The  punishment  of  Achsn  and  the 
treaty  secured  by  the  Gibeonites'  device  followed- 
According  to  Deut.  xxvii.,  after  the  capture  of  Ai 


887 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


fSSS 


ihiiB 


Joshua  led  the  people  in  a  northerly  direction  to 
Ebal  and  CSerizim,  and  overcame  a  combination  of 
Canaanites  gathered  to  punish  Gibeon  for  its  treaty 
with  Israel,  on  which  occasion  occurred  what  has 
been  read  as  a  miracle  in  the  staying  of  the  sun 
and  the  moon  in  their  courses,  to  be  interpreted 
probably  as  a  subjective  effect  of  the  quickness  and 
completeness  of  the  victory  (Josh.  z.  1-14).  This 
was  followed  by  the  conquest  of  the  southern  part 
of  the  land  as  far  as  Kadesh-bamea  and  westward 
to  Gluu  (Josh.  X.  29  sqq.),  succeeded  by  a  third 
campaign  in  which  the  kiisgs  of  the  northern  cities 
were  subdued  near  Merom.  While  by  these  wars 
the  country  was  won,  with  the  exception  of  the 
Philistine  and  Phenidan  coast,  not  all  was  actu- 
ally in  the  possession  of  the  Hebrews;  and  several 
years  after  the  ending  of  the  campaigns  Joshua's 
seat  of  government  was  still  at  Gilgal  (Josh.  xiv.  6). 
It  was  at  this  place  that  Joshua's  second  task 
was  begun — the  division  of  the  land  among  the 
tribes.  Judah,  Ephraim,  and  Manasseh  first  re- 
ceived their  allotments,  and  the  ark  was  carried 
from  Gilgal  to  Shiloh  in  Benjamin  (Josh,  xv.- 
xviii.  1).  This  was  followed  by  the  allotment  of 
the  portions  to  the  other  tribes,  and  the  permission 
to  the  EastJordan  tribes  to  return  to  their  own 
district,  having  fulfilled  their  duty  to  the  tribes 
west  of  the  river  (Josh,  xviii.-xxii.).  In  anticipa> 
tion  of  his  death  Joshua  gathered  first  the  elders 
and  then  the  people  at  Shechem  to  receive  his  last 
instructions,  which  he  commemorated  by  a  pillar 
or  stone  under  the  terebinth  at  Shechem  (Josh, 
xxiv.  2&-27).  He  died  at  the  age  of  one  hundred 
and  ten.  (W.  VoLOtt.) 

Bibuoohafrt:  J.  H.  St&heUn.  in  TSK,  xxiv  (1840).  804 
Bqq.;  J.  Sockel,  Dia  Broi>eruno  des  heUigen  Landea  dureh 
Jotna,  GlmwiU.  1870;  J.  B.  Meyer.  Joshua  and  the  Land  cf 
Prownae,  London.  1803;  and  the  literature  under  Joshua. 
Book  of. 

JOSHUA,  BOOK  OF:  The  sixth  of  the  books 
of  the  Old  Testament  in  the  arrangement  of  the 
English  Bible.  According  to  the  Hebrew  canon, 
it  is  the  first  book  of  the  second  part,  containing 
the  prophetical-historical  books.  It  was  originaUy 
the  conclusion  of  the  Pentateuch.  The 

Contsnti  conception  of  the  Talmud  {Baba  baihraf 
and        14b)  that  Joshua  was  the  author  of 

Sources,  the  book  is  no  longer  tenable;  nor  is 
that  of  Keil,  who  regarded  it  as  a  uni- 
fied book  drawn  up  by  an  ejre-witness  of  the  events 
(cf.  Josh.  V.  1,  R.V.,  margin).  For  contents  see 
Hexateuch,  §  2.  The  part  which  deals  with  the 
conquest  bears  the  impress  of  those  sections  of  the 
Pentateuch  derived  from  J£  (hardly  to  be  distin- 
guished in  this  book);  the  second  part  resembles 
more  the  style  of  the  priestly  writer,  but  with  in- 
sertions of  JE  (xviii.  3-10).  But  throughout,  these 
elements  are  more  or  less  interwoven,  with  Deuter- 
onomic  portions  also  thrown  in  (especiaUy  in  viii.; 
cf .  viii.  30  sqq.,  with  Deut.  iv.  41-43,  and  note  the 
Deuteronomic  expressions  in  Josh,  xxiii.  5,  11,  14). 
There  are  also  expressions  which  linguistically 
belong  neither  to  JE  nor  P,  indicating  that  the 
redactor  has  employed  other  material:  such  are  the 
combinations  **  the  Lord,  the  God  of  Israel "  (iour- 
teen  times,  only  elsewhere  in  the  Hexateuch  in  Ex. 


V.  1,  xxxii.  27),  and  the  term  "mighty  men  of 
valor"  (Josh.  i.  14,  etc.).  Thus  the  work  of  several 
hands  is  distinguishable  in  the  composition  of  the 
book.  It  appears  from  analysis  that  the  parts 
belonging  to  P  are  later  than  those  which  are  as- 
signed to  JE;  and  that  JE  and  P  lay  before  the 
Deuteronomist  who  composed  the  book  found  in  the 
times  of  Josiah.  It  was  he  who  dosed  the  Penta- 
teuch and  made  Joshua  the  beginning  of  the  his- 
torical narrative,  reediting  it  and  working  it  over, 
but  bestowing  upon  it  no  such  care  as  he  exercised 
upon  the  Pentateuch.  There  are  indications  that 
its  text  has  had  an  independent  history. 

In  the  book  data  are  found  which  tend  to  fix 
the  date  of  the  sources  out  of  which  it  was  com- 
piled or  from  which  it  was  derived.  Thus  chap, 
viii.  28  must  have  been  written  long  prior  to  Isa. 
X.  28;  xvi.  10  must  be  earlier  than  the  beginning  of 
Solomon's  reign  (I  Kings  ix.  16);  xv.  63  must  pre- 
cede the  incident  told  in  II  Sam.  v.  6;  x.  13  can 
not  be  earlier  than  the  time  of  David,  since  the 
book  of  Jasher  contained  David's  elegy  on  Saul 
and  Jonathan;  vi.  25  and  xiv.  14  do  not  imply  that 
the  source  was  contemporary  with  Rahab  and 
Joshua,  since  the  reference  is  to  the  descendants 
of  Rahab  and  C!aleb.  That  the  part  dealing  with 
the  division  of  the  land  rests  on  documents  is  in 
itself  probable  (cf.  xviii.  9);  and  the  absence  of 
reports  of  strife  over  tribal  boundaries  implies  that 
the  boundaries  were  based  on  an  old  decision.  The 
list  of  kings,  xii.  9  sqq.,  is  regarded  by  Ewald  as  an 
old  dociunent.  But  variations  in,  e.g.,  the  count 
of  cities  shows  that  the  text  has  not  remained  un- 
altered (xv.  32,  xix.  15,  38).  This  book  with  the 
first  four  books  of  the  Pentateuch  and  parts  of 
Deuteronomy  was  known  to  the  prophets  Hosea, 
Amos,  and  Micah.  Thus  the  general  scheme  of 
history  regarded  by  Micah  as  ^own  to  his  con- 
temporaries under  Hezekiah  agrees  with  that  pre- 
sented in  Numbers  and  Joshua  (Micah  vi.  1  sqq., 
which  recalls  the  narrative  of  JE).  So  in  Amos 
there  are  reminiscences  of  the  narrative  of  P  (as 
in  ii.  10,  V.  25,  vii.  4;  cf.  particularly  ii.  7  with 
Lev.  XX.  3,  xxii.  2,  32).  So  Hoe.  xii.  4  may  be 
compared  with  Gen.  xxxv.  9  sqq.,  in  which  minu- 
tiiB  of  agreement  suggest  that  Hosea  had  the  re- 
port of  P  before  him. 

The  credibility  of  the  narrative  of  the' book  has 
been  assailed  on  the  ground  that  it  contains  not 
history  but  l^end.  The  chief  occasion  for  this  is 
comparison  with  Judges  i.  It  is  said  that  while 
Joshua  implies  the  conquest  of  (^aan  by  the 
tribes  in  unison.  Judges  i.  records  the 
His-        piecemeal    occupation    by    individual 

toricity.  tribes  or  aggregations.  But  Judges 
i.  1  professes  to  deal  with  what  oc- 
curred after  the  death  of  Joshua,  not  with  the 
events  of  his  life.  Moreover,  while  the  general  im- 
pression which  the  book  of  Joshua  gives  is  that  of 
a  complete  conquest,  its  individual  expressions 
limit  this  (xxiii.  7,  12).  Thus  at  Joshua's  death  no 
tribe  had  fully  completed  the  conquest  of  the  por- 
tion allotted  to  it,  and  especially  the  fortresses  and 
plains  remained  in  Canaanitic  possession.  Thus 
Judges  i.  appears  as  the  story  of  the  continuation 
of  the  subjugation  of  the  land,  and  there  is  no 


Joshn* 
Jovianos 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


888 


contradiction  between  that  chapter  and  the  ac- 
count in  Joshua.  The  credibility  is  also  attacked 
on  the  ground  that  the  narrative  concerning  the 
East-Jordan  tribes  is  unnatural.  Similarly  the 
narrative  of  the  division  is  assailed,  needlessly, 
since  the  prospective  nature  of  the  division  is  im- 
plied in  the  allotment  of  the  Philistine  and  Pheni- 
cian  ooastland,  which  was  not  conquered.  The 
objection  urged  because  of  the  miracles  stands 
upon  the  same  ground  as  objections  to  the  super- 
natural in  other  books  of  Scripture.  As  Israel's 
origin  is  to  be  distinguished  from  that  of  other 
peoples,  so  is  the  shaping  of  its  subsequent  history. 

llie  relation  of  the  book  of  Joshua  to  Judges  is 
such  that  the  latter  appears  in  several  cases  to  have 
borrowed  from  the  former.  The  Septuagint  has 
at  the  close  of  Joshua  an  addition,  partly  apocry- 
phal and  partly  derived  from  the  book  of  Judges, 
to  the  effect  that  the  Israelites  of  that  time  changed 
the  location  of  the  ark,  that  Phinehas  succeeded 
his  father  Eleasar  in  the  priesthood  and  was  buried 
in  his  father's  grave,  and  that  Israel  worshiped  the 
gods  of  the  people  who  surrounded  them  and  were 
under  the  dominion  of  Eglon,  king  of  Moab, 
eighteen  years.  (W.  VoLCKf.) 

For  the  Samaritan  book  of  Joshua  see  Samaria, 
Samaritans. 

BtBuoGRAPHT:  CommeiitariM  are:  C.  Steuenu«el,  GM- 
tingen.  1900;  F.  J.  B.  Maurer,  Stuttgart,  1831;  C.  F. 
KeU.  Erlaogen,  1847.  1874.  Eng.  trand..  Edinbuigh.  1857; 
A.  Knobel,  Leipaic,  1861;  T.  E.  Espin.  in  BibU  Commen- 
kary,  London.  1872;  H.  Croeby.  New  York.  1875;  O.  A. 
MoLeod,  Cambridge.  1878;  J.  J.  Liae,  in  Pulpit  Comment 
tary,  London,  1881;  C.  F.  A.  Dillmann.  Leipeic.  1886; 
-J.  Lloyd.  London.  1886;  J.  S.  Black,  Cambridge.  1801; 
8.  Oettli.  Munioh,  1893;  W.  H.  Bennett,  in  SBOT,  Balti- 
more. 1895;  F.  W.  Spurling.  London,  1901.  Questions 
of  oritioiom  are  disouaeed  in:  J.  E.  Carpenter  and  Q.  Har- 
ford-Batteriby.  The  PmUUmtch,  London,  1900;  L.  KOnig. 
AUtMiammaiche  Studien,  yol.  l.  Meurs.  1836  (decides  the 
book  a  unit  and  Joshua  its  author);  J.  W.  Colenao.  Ttu 
Pmiaitud^  and  A»  Book  cf  Joshua  eriUeaUy  Examirud, 
London,  1862-71;  Himpel,  in  TQS,  1864-65;  J.  HoUen- 
berg,  in  TSK,  xlvii  (1874).  462-506;  idem,  Dis  aUsan^ 
drinitehe  Ueberaetgung  dea  BudtM  Joaua,  Meun,  1876;  K. 
Budde,  in  ZATW,  tu  (1887).  pp.  93  sqq.;  E.  Albers,  Die 
QuellenbericKto  in  Jo&ua  t.-«ii..  Bonn.  1890;  DB,  ii.  779- 
788:  BB.  ii.  2600-2609;  JB,  tu.  284-288:  and  the  vari- 
ous works  dted  under  Bibugal  iMTBODUcmoii.  and  the 
pertinent  sections  in  works  on  the  history  of  Israel  giyen 
under  Ahab. 

JOSIAd,  jo-soi'a:  Fifteenth  king  of  Judah,  son 
and  Buoceseor  of  Amon.  His  dates,  according  to 
the  old  chronology,  are  641-010  B.C.,  according  to 
Kautzsch,  640-600  B.C.,  and  he  became  king  at  the 
age  of  eight  years.  The  detailed  accounts  of  his 
reign  (II  Kings  zxii-xxiii;  II  Chron.  xxxiv.- 
xxzv.)  begin  with  his  eighteenth  year;  the  Chron- 
icler's remark  in  II.,  xxxiv.  3  probably  depends 
upon  II  Kings  xxiii.  4  sqq.  According  to  II  Kings 
zxii.  3  sqq.,  Josiah  ordered  the  temple  to  be  re- 
paired, which  had  probably  not  been  done  since 
the  reign  of  Joash  (II  Kings  xii.  11  sqq.)  and  Hil- 
kiah  the  priest  then  reported  that  he  had  found  in 
the  temple  the  book  of  the  law.  Its  contents  so 
overwhelmed  the  king  with  apprehensions  of  evil 
that  he  rent  his  clothes,  and  an  oracle  was  sought 
from  Huldah  the  prophetess,  who  reported  that  the 
threatenings  were  to  be  realised,  since  the  book 
was  true.    The  king  then  summoned  to  Jerusalem 


the  elders  of  the  people,  the  priests,  and  the  proph- 
ets ("  priests  and  Levites,"  II  Chron.  xcdv.  30), 
and  to  them  the  book  was  read.  There  followed 
a  thorough  cleansing  of  the  temple  and  city  of  the 
accessories  to  idolatrous  worship,  and  to  this  was 
added  abolition  of  the  worship  on  the  high  places, 
while  the  priests  of  that  service  were  brought  to 
the  capital,  where,  though  excluded  from  service 
at  the  sanctuary,  they  received  the  emoluments  of 
their  order.  Josiah  then  turned  his  attention  to 
high  places  in  what  had  been  the  northern  king- 
dom, especially  to  that  at  Bethel,  and  they  were 
defiled  with  the  bones  of  the  dead.  The  work  was 
concluded  by  a  notable  observance  of  the  Passover 
rendered  memorable  apparently  by  the  numbers 
and  unity  of  those  celebrating. 

The  historic  value  of  the  reports  about  the  re- 
form of  the  cultus  is  bound  up  with  the  question 
as  to  what  the  law  book  was  which  was  discovered, 
and  can  be  solved  only  in  connection  with  criticism 
of  the  Pentateuch  (see  Hexateuch).    In  case  this 
book  was  not  one  which  had  been  lost  to  sight,  but 
was  an  unknown  and  new  codification  having  for 
its  purpose  the  abolition  of  worship  at  the  high 
places  and  concentration  of  worship  at  Jerusalem, 
the  conclusion  is  forced  that  it  was  practically 
identical  with  Deuteronomy;    but  it  does  not  fol- 
low that  the  transaction  was  due  to  Hilkiah  and 
the  prophets  of  that  time,  while  priestly  interesta 
were  not  served  by  the  publication  of  the  book. 
The  noteworthy  fact  is  the  forcible  impression  it  ' 
made  upon  Josiah  and  his  contemporaries  and  its 
bearing  upon  the  Josianic  reformation.    The  re- 
sults were  important  for  the  history  of  Israel,  since 
the  unity  of  cult  had  symbolic  relation  to  the  mon- 
otheistic   conception    of    deity.    Josiah's    reform 
created  a  new  basis  for  the  activity  of  the  proph- 
ets, it  affected  worship  in  the  second  temple,  and 
set  forth  the  unity  of  God  as  the  center  of  thought 
in  the  religion  of  Israel.    The  questions  arise,  with 
what  right  did  Josiah  extend  his  efforts  in  behalf 
of  a  pure  cultus  into  the  northern  kingdom,  and 
why  did  he  throw  himself  across  the  path  of  Pha- 
raoh Necho  when  the  latter  was  on  his  way  to  the 
Euphrates.    While  the  northern  region  was  nom- 
inally under  the  rule  of  Assyria,  that  power  was 
about  to  fall.    The  time  would  seem  ripe  for  what 
had  been  foretold  by  the  prophets,  the  unification 
of  Israel  and  Judah,  and  religious  unification  was 
the  first  step   toward  political   reunion.    Such  a 
plan  he  might  hope  to  carry  through  as  a  loyal  vas- 
sal of  Babylonia,  especially  in  withstanding  the  at- 
tempts of  £)gypt  to  gain  new  position  as  a  world 
power.    But  the  issue  did  not  correspond  to  his 
hopes,  and  Josiah  was  defeated  and  killed,  and 
brought  back  for  burial  to  Jerusalem.    Some  de- 
bate has  arisen  over  the  place  of  the  battle,  since 
Herodotus  (ii.  159)  names  instead  of  the  Biblical 
Megiddo  Magdolus,  which  corresponds  to  the  mod- 
em al-Majdal,  two  miles  west  of  Carmel  or  (Winck- 
ler,  in  Benzinger,  Die  Backer  der  Kdmge,  p.  207, 
TObingen,  1899)  Strato's  Tower.    Possibly  Megiddo 
appears  in  the  Biblical  narrative  because  it  was 
the  place  to  which  the  wounded  king  was  carried 
and  where  he  died.    Yet  it  hardly  seems  as  though 
the  Jews  could  have  completely  lost  the  correct 


289 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Joshua 
JoTlaniia 


tradition.  Another  and  somewhat  variant  report 
appears  in  II  Chron.  xxxv.  22  sqq.,  according  to 
which  the  remonstrance  of  Necho  takes  the  form 
of  an  oracle  from  God,  makes  Josiah  put  on  a  duEh 
guise,  and  when  wounded  has  him  carried  to  Jeru- 
salem with  the  implication  that  he  died  there  (on 
holy  ground?);  the  Chronicler  tells  also  of  a  lament 
of  Jeremiah  for  Josiah  and  a  collection  of  diiges  in 
his  memory,  with  which  Jer.  zxii.  10  and  Zech. 
xii.  11  may  be  brought  into  connection,  perhaps  as 
indicating  a  yearly  memorial  celebration. 

(E.  Kautzsch.) 

Bxbuoorapht:  The  pertinent  ■eotions  in  the  literature 
mentioned  under  Ahab;  the  articles  in  the  Bible  diction- 
ariea;  the  literature  under  Hxxateucb,  ainoe  the  discus- 
eions  of  Deuteronomy  and  of  the  Pentateuch  involve  dia- 
cusrions  of  Joeiah's  reform  and  ita  legal  baas. 

JOST,  yest,  ISAAK  MARCUS:  German  Jew- 
ish historian;  b.  at  Bembuig  (23  m.  s.  of  Magde- 
burg) Feb.  22,  1793;  d.  at  Frankfort  Nov.  22,  1860. 
He  studied  at  the  Samson  school  at  WolfenbQttel, 
at  the  gymnasium  at  Brunswick,  and  at  the  uni- 
versities of  Gottingen  and  Berlin  (PhD.,  1816), 
became  principal  of  the  Bock  school  in  Berlin  in 
1826,  and  in  1835  was  called  to  the  Jewish  Real- 
schule  (Philanthropin)  at  Frankfort.  His  princi- 
pal works  are,  Geechichte  der  Israeliten  8eU  der  Zeii 
der  Maccabder  bis  auf  unaere  Tage  (10  vols.,  Berlin, 
1820-47);  AUgemeine  GeachichU  des  israditiachen 
VoUcea  (2  vols.,  1831-32);  a  German  translation  of 
the  Mishnah,  with  Hebrew  conunentary  (6  vols., 
1832-34);  and  Oeachichte  des  Jvdenthuma  und 
seiner  Sekten  (3  vols.,  Leipsic,  1857-59).  He  also 
prepared  school  text^books,  wrote  political  tracts 
in  the  interest  of  Judaism,  made  many  contribu- 
tions to  the  Jewish  press,  and  to  almanacs  and 
yeai^books,  edited  the  leraelitisehe  Annalen,  1839- 
1841,  and,  in  collaboration  with  Michael  Creisenach, 
edited  Zion,  1841-42.  He  holds  high  rank  as  his- 
torian, though  he  has  been  criticised  for  his  ration- 
alistic attitude  toward  the  narratives  in  the  Tal- 
mudic  sources. 

Bibuogbapbt:  JB^  vii.  296-297.  where  further  literature 
is  siven. 

JOTHAM,  jd'tham:  1.  The  youngest  son  of 
Gideon  (Jerubbaal),  who  alone  escaped  the  mas- 
sacre of  the  Gideon  family  by  his  half-brother 
Abimelech,  uttered  his  famous  parable  of  the  trees 
which  sought  a  king,  and  then  fled  to  Beer  (Judges 
ix.  5-21). 

2.  Tenth  king  of  Judah,  son  and  successor  of 
Uzziah  His  dates,  according  to  the  old  chronol- 
ogy, are  756-740  B.C.,  according  to  Peake 
(DB,  ii.  789)  751-735  B.C.  Ck)nfusion  in  the 
chronology  of  Israel  is  marked  about  this  period, 
since  II  Kings  xv.  30  assigns  to  Jotham  at 
least  twenty  years,  while  data  from  the  Assyrian 
annals  allow  only  twelve  years  for  his  reign  and 
that  of  Ahas.  It  is  supposed  that  the  regnal  years 
accredited  to  Jotham  include  those  of  his  regency 
during  his  father's  disability.  Of  his  reign  little  is 
reported  in  the  Book  of  Kings  except  that  he ''  built 
the  higher  gate  of  the  house  of  the  Lord."  The 
Chronicler  adds  that  he  built  much  of  the  wall  of 
Ophel,  also  cities  and  fortresses;  and  that  he  sub- 


dued the  Ammonites  and  imposed  a  heavy  tribute 
upon  them.  The  Book  of  Kings  notes  also  that  in 
his  days  the  coalition  between  Sym  and  Israel 
against  Judah  began  to  be  effective,  the  object  be- 
ing apparently  to  force  Judah  into  the  combina- 
tion against  the  Assyrians,  who  were  beginning  to 
press  heavily  upon  the  Mediterranean  region.  The 
time  seemed  ripe  for  such  plans,  since  Tiglath-Pi- 
leser  was  at  the  time  engifged  in  the  East.  The 
great  prophet  of  the  times  was  Isaiah,  and  the  pio- 
txire  in  Isa.  ii.  5  indicates  that,  in  spite  of  apparent 
prosperity  in  the  land,  the  internal  conditions  were 
not  favorable.  (E.  Kautzsch.) 

Bibuoorapht:  1.  The  oommenUiiM  on  Judces,  iwrtiou- 
larly  thooe  by  Moore  and  Budde. 

2.  Sources  are:  II  Kings  xv.  6.  32-38;  II  Chron.  xzyu. 
Consult  the  pertinent  sections  in  the  literature  given  under 
Ahab,  and  the  articles  in  the  Bible  dictionaries. 

JOVIAHUS,  jyM-tt'nus,  FLAVIUS  CLAUDIUS: 
Roman  emperor;  b.  at  Singidunum  (the  modem 
Belgrade,  Servia)  about  331;  d.  at  Dadastana, 
Bithynia  (125  m.  e.s.e.  of  Constantinople)  in  the 
night  between  Feb.  16  and  17,  364.  Taking  part 
in  the  campaign  against  the  Persians,  as  ranlung 
officer  of  the  palace  troops,  in  the  crisis  foUowing 
the  death  of  Julian  he  was  hastily  elected  emperor 
by  the  army  in  sight  of  the  enemy,  June  27,  363. 
Tlie  fact  that  Jovian  was  a  Christian  and  had  with- 
stood attempts  during  the  reign  of  Julian  to  render 
him  apostate  seems  to  have  played  no  part  in  his 
election.  The  newly  elected  emperor,  in  view  of 
the  military  and  political  situation  of  the  time,  was 
induced  to  conclude  an  inglorious  peace  with  the 
Persians,  giving  up  to  them  the  eastern  outskirts 
of  the  empire,  including  the  important  city  of  Nisi- 
bis.  On  his  return  from  the  East  at  Antioch  Jo- 
vian publicly  stated  his  attitude  in  regard  to  the 
controversies  in  the  Church.  He  took  the  side  of 
the  Nicene  party  and  their  leader  Athanasius,  urg- 
ing the  latter  in  a  written  appeal  to  resume  his 
episcopal  see  at  Alexandria  and  asking  to  be  re- 
membered in  his  prajrers.  He  commanded  Athar 
nasius,  who  visited  hhn  at  Antioch,  to  issue  a  new 
statement  of  the  orthodox  creed,  and  thus  his  au- 
thority certainly  influenced  the  controversies  re- 
garding the  nature  of  Christ,  although  he  tried  to 
hold  aloof  from  them  officially.  His  aim  was  to 
restore  matters  as  they  were  before  the  reign  of 
Julian,  and  so  he  replaced  on  the  army  standards 
and  on  the  coins  the  monogram  of  Christ,  recalled 
the  bishops  from  exile,  renewed  the  privileges  of 
the  Churdi  and  of  the  deigy,  widows,  and  virgins, 
and  restored  the  donations  of  com.  He  imposed 
the  death  penalty  on  whosoever  married  a  virgin 
or  a  widow  who  had  taken  the  vows,  even  with  the 
woman's  consent,  and  forbade  the  inheritance  of 
their  parents'  property  by  the  children  of  such  an 
imion.  Yet  he  also  showed  much  tolerance  toward 
pagans.  Victor  ScHni/rsEB. 

Bxbuoobapht:  V.  Sohultse.  Oeiehichia  de§  UnUrganoM  dea 
gn0M§ek-r3miteh9n  HwUntuma,  i.  176  aqq..  Jena,  1887; 
H.  Riehter.  Dot  teeair&miaek*  Reid^  pp.  108  aqq.,  Beriin, 
1866;  H.  SehiUer,  GMchiehit  der  rMuecAen  KaiaerMtU,  ii. 
344  aqq..  1887:  Gibbon,  DeeUne  and  FaU,  ii.  606,  617  sqq.; 
Ne«nder,  Chrialian  Church,  ii.  87-89  et  passim;  Sehaff, 
ChritUan  Churdi,  iii  60;  the  literature  under  Jotxnianub, 
and  De  la  Bleterie,  Hiat.  d«  Vempereur  Jovien,  2  vols., 
Amsterdam,  1740. 


JxMlme 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


MO 


JOVnVIAN:  A  "heretic"  who  became  oonspio- 
U0U8  in  Rome  after  385  aa  a  polemical  writer  against 
undue  valuation  of  the  celibate  and  ascetic  life. 
Prior  to  this  time  he  had  lived  in  celibacy  as  a 
strict  ascetic,  but  coincidently  with  his  appearance 
in  public  he  modified  his  ascetic  living,  allowing 
himself  indulgence  in  flesh  food,  wearing  better 
clothing,  visiting  the  baths,  and  by  no  means  shun- 
ning association  with  youths  and  women.  Never- 
theless he  stayed  single,  deeming  this  estate  the 
one  divinely  enjoined  for  him.  He  lived  quite 
after  the  manner  of  the  pre-monastic,  Western  as- 
cetics, and  may  be  considered  an  advocate  of  the 
ancient  ascetic  regime,  which  waged  a  desperate 
battle  in  Rome  against  the  new  and  intensified 
forms  of  Oriental  monasticism.  In  this  process  he 
came  to  certain  fundamental  conclusions  that  stood 
opposed  to  theories  which  had  long  been  shared  by 
the  Church.  As  a  consequence  of  his  agitation 
against  monasticism,  many  men  and  women  gave 
up  the  celibate  life.  That  frivolous  natures  also 
attached  themselves  to  Jovinian,  considering  him 
an  advocate  of  relaxed  Christian  morality,  may 
easily  be  believed  on  the  testimony  of  Jerome.  The 
Roman  Bishop  Siricius,  in  deference  to  denunciation 
by  the  monastic  circle  at  Rome,  excommunicated 
Jovinian  and  his  followers  in  390,  and  forwarded 
the  decision  to  foreign  bishops,  in  particular  to 
Ambrose  of  Milan.  Jovinian  having  betaken  him- 
self with  his  most  loyal  adherents  to  Milan,  Am- 
brose made  haste  to  excommunicate  him  in  391; 
and  Jerome,  about  392,  by  instigation  of  his  Roman 
friends,  wrote  two  books  against  him.  Since  these, 
however,  were  considered  somewhat  too  polemical, 
Jerome  sought  to  soften  their  tone  without  really 
yielding  ( Epiet. ,  xlviii.-li) .  The  strife  revived  again 
at  Milui,  and  Ambrose  wrote  a  warning  against 
Jovinian 's  heretical  doctrines  (EpUt.,  bnodii.). 
Augustine  wrote  the  tract  De  bono  conjugalx  against 
the  Jovinian  heresy,  but  without  expressly  naming 
Jovinian.  He  was  dead  in  406  (Jerome,  Adv,  Vigi- 
lantium,  i.). 

Jovinian's  doctrinal  views  are  known  only  through 
the  writings  of  his  opponents,  who  have  transmitted 
some  of  his  theses  verbatim,  but  as  regards  the  inner 
connection  of  thought,  we  are  limited  to  hypothet- 
ical constructions.  He  wrote  a  work  which  Jerome 
calls  commenlarioifi,  seeking  to  adduce  Scriptural 
evidences  for  his  theses,  but  by  no  means  exclud- 
ing support  from  profane  literature.  His  doctrines 
all  converge  upon  opposition  to  monasticism.  In 
the  letters  of  Siricius  two  erroneous  teachings  of 
Jovinian  are  named.  According  to  the  first,  vir- 
gins, widows,  and  married  people,  baptized  in 
Christ,  have  equal  merit,  save  in  so  far  as  other- 
wise they  differ  in  respect  to  their  works;  and,  sec- 
ondly, fasting  is  nowise  better,  more  meritorious 
and  pleasing  to  God  than  the  enjoyment  of  food, 
observed  with  thanksgiving.  In  the  synodal  de- 
cision of  Ambrose  at  Milan,  two  other  erroneous 
teachings  are  attributed  to  Jovinian;  viz.,  that  he 
denied  the  inviolate  virginity  of  Mary,  and  a  differ- 
ence in  the  celestial  reward  of  the  righteous.  In 
combating  the  growing  dogma  of  the  unimpaired 
virifinity  of  Mary,  wherein  the  monks  were  espe- 
cially interested    for  the  glorification  of  celibacy. 


Jovinian  desired  to  deal  a  stinging  blow  on  the  fol- 
lowers of  monasticism.    He  adhered  to  the  virgin 
birth  of  Jesus,  but  aflbmed  that  by  bringing  to 
birth,  Mary  ceased  to  be  virgin.    As  a  deduction 
from  the  parity  of  marriage  and  virginity,  Jovinian 
appears   to   have   advanced   another   proposition 
transmitted  by  Jerome;   viz.,  that  all  the  regener- 
ate who  have  preserved  their  baptismal  grace  re- 
ceive the  same  recompense  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven, 
irrespectively  of  their  having  lived  in  the  married 
estate  or  as  virgins.    In  the  light  of  these  thoughts, 
the  last  and  most  difficult  proposition  of  Jovinian 
becomes    intelligible.    He    affirmed    the   essential 
sinlessness  of  the  regenerate.    How  he  expanded 
this  proposition  in  detail  is  not  known.     On  the 
strength  of  this  tenet,  Jerome  related  him  theo- 
logically to  Pelagius;    Julian  of  Eclanum  classed 
him  with  Augustine;  and  Augustine,  in  turn,  asso- 
ciated him  with  Pelagianism.    G.  GrOtzmachsr. 
BiBUOOKArar:  Sources  are:  Jerome,  Advermu  /optnianttfi^ 
and  BpiH,,  xlvui.-!..  Enc.  tranel.  in  NPNF,  2d  eer.,  vi. 
66-82,  834-345;    Augustine.  Hatr.,  chap.  Ixxzii.;    Siri- 
cius, Epiai,  a.  ad  diveno9  epiaoopoa,  in  Mansi,  ConeUia, 
iii.  668  sqq.;    Ambrose,  EpUt.,  viii..  IxTxiii.,  in  Mansi, 
ConeUia,  i.  660  sqq.,  v.  664  sqq.     Consult:  G.  B.  Undner, 
De  Jcviniano  H  Vt^iiantio,  Leipsie,  1839;    J.  H.  Blunt, 
Dittumarv  of  SuU  and  Hereaist,  pp.  242-244,  Phiiadel- 
phia,   1874;    W.   Halter,  Jovinianut,   Leipsic,    1887;    G. 
Grfltsmaeher.    ^isronyimis,    ii.    146-172,    BerUn,    1006; 
DCS,  iil  466-466. 

JOWBTT,  jau'et,  BEHJAMIH:  English  educa- 
tor and  author;  b.  in  the  parish  of  Gamberwell, 
London,  Apr.  15,  1817;  d.  at  Headley  Park,  Lip- 
hook  (22  m.  e.  of  Winchester),  Hampshire,  Oct.  1. 
1893.  He  studied  at  St.  Paul's  School,  London,  and 
at  Balliol  College,  Oxford  (B.A.,  1839;  M.A.,  1842), 
where  he  was  elected  fellow  in  1838.  In  1837  he 
won  the  Hertford  university  scholarship  for  Latin, 
and  in  1841  the  chancellor's  prise  for  the  Latin 
essay.  He  was  ordained  deacon  in  1842,  priest  in 
1845.  In  1842  he  was  appointed  to  a  tutorship  at 
Balliol,  which  he  held  till  he  became  master  of  the 
college  in  1870.  He  was  public  examiner  in  classics 
1849-51,  and  1853.  At  Oxford  he  had  fallen  into 
the  very  midst  of  the  Tractarian  movement,  and  his 
Evangelical  views  were  shaken  by  daily  intercourse 
with  his  friend  William  George  Ward  (q.v.).  In 
after  years  he  said,  "  But  for  the  providence  of  God, 
I  might  have  become  a  Roman  Catholic."  A  more 
lasting  influence,  however,  was  that  of  A.  P.  Stan- 
ley, the  leader  of  the  Broad  Church  school,  with 
whom  Jowett  traveled  and  studied  in  Germany  in 
the  siunmers  of  1845  and  1846.  On  being  defeated 
for  the  mastership  of  Balliol  in  1854,  Jowett,  in  his 
disappointment,  took  up  with  renewed  energy  a 
work  that  he  and  Stanley  had  projected  on  St.  Paul, 
and  published  The  Epiiles  of  SL  Paul  to  the  Thes- 
acdoniana,  OalatianSf  and  Romans:  with  Critical 
Notes  and  Dissertations  (2  vols.,  London,  1855). 
This  work  brought  forth  a  storm  of  protest  from 
conservative  quarters;  and  when,  in  the  same  year, 
Jowett  was  appointed  regius  professor  of  Greek  at 
Oxford,  those  who  condemned  his  views  at  once 
began  to  oppose  him.  He  was  denounced  to  the 
vice-chancellor,  who  required  him  to  sign  the  Arti- 
cles anew  in  his  presence,  Jowett's  opponents 
kept  up  the  agitation  against  him  for  ten  years, 
preventing  him  from  receiving  the  full  emoluments 


Ml 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jovinifta 
JabUeo 


of  his  chair  till  1865.  Meanwhile  he  had  reiterated 
his  objectionable  views  in  a  second  edition  of  the 
EpMe8  (2  vols.,  1859)  and  confirmed  the  suspi- 
cions of  his  heresy  by  his  essay  On  the  IrUerpretO' 
turn  qf  Scripture,  published  in  1860  in  the  famous 
Esaaya  and  Reviews,  A  prosecution  begun  against 
him  in  the  vice-chancellor's  court  at  Oxford,  Feb. 
20,  1863,  was  soon  dropped  (see  Essays  and  "Re- 
views), Henceforth  Jowett  refrained  from  pub- 
lishing anything  of  a  theological  nature.  Though 
he  preached  frequently  in  the  college  chapel  and 
in  the  university  pulpit,  and  preacheid  annually  in 
Westminster  Abbey  from  1866  till  the  year  of  his 
death,  he  would  not  allow  any  of  his  sermons  to  be 
printed;  nor  would  he  permit  a  third  edition  of 
the  Epudee  to  be  issued  during  his  lifetime  (pub- 
lished after  his  death,  condensed  by  Lewis  Camp- 
bell, 2  vols.,  1894).  He  was  waiting  to  attain  to 
greater  clearness  and  certainty,  hoping  that  these 
would  oome  with  time;  but  the  exhausting  labors 
which  he  took  upon  himself  as  master  of  Balliol 
after  1870,  and  as  vice-chancellor  of  the  university 
1882-86,  left  him  no  leisure  for  elaborating  his 
views. 

Jowett  was  an  indefatigable  worker.  For  years 
he  made  it  a  rule  to  see  every  undergraduate  in  the 
college  once  a  week.  He  spared  himself  no  efforts 
in  tuition.  Even  as  master  of  Balliol  he  continued 
the  custom,  b^gtm  in  1848,  of  taking  a  few  pupils 
with  him  on  tlii  summer  vacation.  After  1866  his 
authority  at  Oxford  was  predominant  in  matters 
of  university  organization.  He  effected  many 
needed  reforms  at  Oxford,  and  exerted  a  laiige  in- 
fluence over  the  life  and  thought  of  his  time.  If  he 
formed  no  school  of  philosophy  or  theology,  by 
launching  T.  H.  Green  upon  the  study  of  Hegel  he 
affected  indirectly  the  whole  development  of  recent 
speculation  in  England  and  America.  As  early  as 
1839  he  had  joined  Stanley  and  Tait  in  the  move- 
ment for  university  reform  which  led  to  the  Com- 
mission of  1850  and  the  Act  of  1854.  He  also  took 
part  in  the  educational  reform  which  threw  open 
the  Indian  civil  service  to  competition  and  was  a 
member  of  Lord  Macaulay's  committee,  which  re- 
ported in  1854.  He  was  largely  responsible  for  the 
University  Tests  Act  of  1871,  abolishing  the  theo- 
logical test,  which  had  been  required  for  the  vari- 
ous degrees,  and  for  college  and  university  offices. 

The  literary  achievement  that  made  Jowett 
famous  was  hLs  translation  of  Plato's  Dialogues  (4 
vols.,  London,  1871;  2d  ed.,  5  vols.,  1875),  which 
has  become  an  English  classic,  and,  with  the  intro- 
ductory essay  to  the  several  dialogues,  secures 
Jowett  a  permanent  place  in  the  history  of  English 
literature.  He  also  translated  Thucydides  (2  vols., 
1881),  and  Aristotle's  Politics  (2  vols.,  1885),  and 
spent  many  years  on  an  edition  of  the  Greek  text 
of  the  "  Republic  "  (completed  by  L.  Campbell,  3 
vols.,  Oxford,  1894).  Though  his  work  in  theology 
was  important,  it  was  rather  of  a  transitional  nar 
ture.  Three  volumes  of  his  sermons  have  been 
edited  by  W.  H.  Fremantle,  vis..  College  Sermons 
(London,  1895),  Sermons^  Biographical  and  Mis- 
edlaneous  (1899),  and  Sermons  on  Faith  and  Doc- 
trine (1901).  Evelyn  Abbott  and  Lewis  Campbell 
have  edited  his  Letters  (1899),  and  the  latter  a  vol- 
VT.— 16 


ume   of   Theological  Essays   (1906).    The  famous 
essay  of  Essays  and  Reviews,  with  the  Dissertations 
from  The  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  and  a  sketch  of  Jow- 
ett's  life  by  Sir  Leslie  Stephen  from  the  National 
Review,  1897,  is  reprinted  in  The  Interpretation  of 
Scripture  and  Other  Essays  (1906)  and  also  in  Scrip- 
ture and  Truth,  Dissertations,  ed.  Lewis  Campbell 
(1907).     Note  also  Sdect  Passages  from  the  Theologi- 
cal Writings  of  B.  JoweU,  ed.  L.  Campbell  (1909). 
Bibliography:     E.    Abbott   and   L.    Campbell.    Benjamin 
JoweU:    Life  and  Letiert  of  the  Maater  qf  Balliol  CoUege 
Oxford,  3  vols.,  London,  1897-09;   L.  A.  ToUemache,  Benr 
jamin  Joteett,  Matter  of  Balliol  CoUege,  ib.  1895;    DNB, 
Supplement,  iii.  49-56. 

JOWETT,  JOHN  HENRY:  English  Ck>ngrega- 
tionalist;  b.  at  Halifax,  Yorkshire,  Aug.  25,  1864. 
He  was  educated  in  Hipperholme  grammar-school 
and  in  the  universities  of  Edinburgh  (1883-87) 
and  Oxford  (1888-89).  His  first  ministerial  charge 
was  as  minister  of  St.  James'  Congregational  Church 
in  Newcastle-on-Tyne,  where  he  was  settled  from 
1889  till  1895,  when  he  was  called  to  succeed 
Robert  William  Dale  (q.v.)  as  minister  of  Carr's 
Lane  Congregational  Church  in  Birmingham,  and 
has  ever  since  ministered  to  that  people.  In  the 
summer  of  1909  he  visited  the  United  States  and 
was  a  prominent  speaker  in  the  Northfield  Con- 
ference. His  publications  embrace:  From  Strength 
to  Strength  (London,  1898);  Meditations  far  Quiet 
Moments  (1899);  Brooks  by  the  Traveller's  Way: 
26  Week-night  Addresses  (1902);  Thirsting  for 
Souls:  26  Week-night  Meditations  (1902);  Yet 
Another  Day:  a  Prayer  for  Every  Day  in  tie  Year 
(1904);  The  Passion  for  Souls  (1905);  The  Epistles 
of  Peter  (1905);  The  Silver  Lining  (1907);  The  High 
Calling:  Meditations  on  St,  Paul's  Letter  to  the  Phi- 
lippians  (1909). 

JUAN  DB  TORQUEMADA  See  Tohqxtemada, 
Juan  db. 

JUBILEE,  YEAR  OF:  An  institution  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church  the  origin  of  which  is  very 
closely  connected  with  the  tendency  increasingly 
prevalent  throughout  the  Middle  Ages  to  make  pil- 
grimages to  the  tombs  of  the  apostles  in  Rome. 
Toward  the  end  of  the  thirteenth  century  this  tend- 
ency was  stronger  than  ever,  and  the  throng  of 
pilgrims  was  increased  by  the  rumor  that  on  the 
first  day  of  the  new  century  a  plenary  indulgence 
might  be  obtained,  and  throughout  the  remainder 
of  that  year  one  valid  for  a  hundred  years.  It  was 
found  impossible  to  trace  the  rumor  to  any  authori- 
tative source;  but  an  aged  peasant  professed  to 
remember  that  his  father  had  gone  to  Rome  a  hun- 
dred years  before  to  win  a  great  indulgence,  and 
had  admonished  him  to  look,  if  he  were  alive,  for 
the  recurrence  of  the  opportunity  a  century  later. 
Finally,  Feb.  22,  1300,  by  the  bull  Antiguorum  habet 
fidemf  Boniface  VIII.  officially  proclaimed  a  ple- 
nary indulgence  that  might  be  gained  from  Christ- 
mas throughout  the  next  year,  on  condition  of 
visits  paid  during  thirty  days  by  Romans,  fifteen 
by  strangers,  to  the  basilicas  of  Saints  Peter  and 
Paul.  Such  indulgences  had  never  previously 
been  granted  for  more  than  seven  years,  and  this 
liberal  extension  caused  immense  crowds  to  throng 
to  Rome.    If  there  had  been  no  other  cause  for 


Jublle«,  Tear  of 
JudMofOaUlee 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0Q 


242 


the  maintenanoe  of  the  izifltitutton,  the  laiige  rev- 
enues which  flowed  from  it  into  not  only  the  papal 
coffers  but  the  pockets  of  the  townspeople  would 
have  been  a  reason  to  await  eagerly  the  time  of  its 
recurrence.  In  1342  the  Romans  sent  a  deputa- 
tion to  Clement  VI.  at  Avignon  to  ask  him  to 
shorten  the  interval  to  fifty  years.  The  request 
was  supported  by  St.  Bridget  of  Sweden  and  by 
Petrarch,  and  in  response  to  it  the  pope  proclaimed 
a  similar  indulgence  for  1350.  In  spite  of  the 
Black  Death  and  the  obstacles  offered  by  the  Hun- 
dred Years'  War,  a  greater  multitude  visited  Rome 
than  on  the  first  occasion.  The  pilgrimage  was 
rendered  more  desirable  by  the  suspension  for  the 
year  of  all  the  ordinary  indulgences,  and  easier  by 
the  permission  given  to  all  conditions  of  men  to 
make  it  without  obtaining  the  leave  of  their  imme- 
diate superiors;  while  those  who  were  lawfully 
hindered  from  taking  the  journey  might  gain  the 
indulgence  by  proxy.  An  innovation  to  be  later 
of  great  importance  was  the  granting  of  the  indul- 
gence to  certain  royalties  without  pilgrimage;  the 
same  privilege  was  conceded  to  the  Augustinians 
assembled  in  chapter  at  Basel,  and  to  the  arch- 
bishop of  Brindisi  for  thirty  persons,  these  latter 
paying  a  sum  equivalent  to  the  cost  of  the  visit  to 
Rome.  Urban  VI.  in  the  bull  Salvator  noster  (Apr. 
8, 1389)  altered  the  period  to  thirty-three  years,  in 
honor  of  the  earthly  life  of  Christ.  The  thhxi  jubi- 
lee was  thus  held  in  1390,  and  the  fourth  in  1423 
imder  Martin  V.,  this  time  with  diminished  num- 
bers and  not  without  protests  such  as  had  been 
heard  at  the  councils  of  Pisa  and  Constance  against 
the  impoverishment  of  the  nations  by  the  avarice 
of  the  Curia.  Nicholas  V.,  returning  to  the  older 
period,  proclaimed  the  fifth  jubilee  for  1450. 

Through  the  bull  IneffabUia  (Apr.  19,  1470),  hav- 
ing regard  to  the  shortness  of  himian  life,  Paul  II. 
established  the  interval  at  twenty-five  years.  The 
sixth  jubilee  under  Sixtus  IV.  in  1475  was  com- 
paratively poorly  attended.  The  seventh,  under 
Alexander  VI.  (1500),  was  more  important,  and  in 
connection  with  it  the  ritual  since  in  the  main  ob- 
served for  the  opening  and  closing  of  the  **  golden 
door  "  in  the  vestibule  of  St.  Peter's  was  settled. 
The  eighth,  under  Clement  VII.  (1525),  was  only 
notable  for  the  sharp  criticisms  of  Luther  on  the 
"  bull  of  indiction."  The  ninth,  proclaimed  by 
Paul  III.  in  1549,  shortly  before  his  death,  could  not 
be  inaugurated  until  the  coronation  of  his  successor 
Julius  III.,  Feb.  22,  1550.  The  tenth,  under  Greg- 
ory XIII.  (1575),  was  rendered  notable  by  the  lav- 
ish hospitiJity  offered  to  the  pilgrims  by  the  Ro- 
man sodalities,  and  by  the  fact  that  the  influence 
of  the  Reformation  is  seen  in  there  being  no  men- 
tion of  money  payments.  The  succeeding  jubilees, 
at  regular  intervals  of  twenty-five  years  from  1600 
to  1775,  present  no  special  features.  The  troublous 
situation  did  not  allow  one  to  be  held  in  1800,  and 
the  nineteenth,  proclaimed  by  Leo  XII.  in  1825, 
found  few  participants  from  outside  of  Italy.  After 
a  break  of  seventy-five  years,  the  twentieth  was 
held  with  all  the  traditional  ceremonies  under  Leo 
XIII.  in  1900.  For  the  Year  of  Jubilee  among  the 
Hebrews,  see  Sabbatical  Year  and  Year  of 
Jubilee.  (T.  Koldb.) 


Biblioobapht:  H.  C.  Lea,  HUtory  f4  Auricular  ConfMsiot 
and  IndulgeruM,  vol.  iii.,  Philadelphia.  1806;  F.  Beringer 
Die  Ablaue,  ihr  Weaen  und  Oebrauch,  Paderbom,  1895j 
Craicfaton.  Papacy,  I  30.  103.  113.  166-167.  ii.  116.  iv.  7» 
T.  8-9.  vi.  68-75;  V.  Prinnvalli.  Oli  anni  aanfi.  Romq 
1890;  A  de  Waal.  Dot  heUioe  Jahr  in  Rom,  Frankfort, 
1899;  J.  C.  Hedley,  Th^  Holy  Year,  London,  1900;  H 
Thunton.  Ths  Holy  Year  of  Jubilee,  ib.  1900. 

JUBILBES,  BOOK  OF:    See  Pseudepiobafha, 
Old  TEflTAMBNT,  IV.,  33. 

JUD,  LEO:    The  most   prominent  associate  oi 
Zwingli  and  after  him  of  Bullinger;  b.  at  Genuu 
(30  m.  s.w.  of  Strasbuzg),  Alsaoe,  1482;  d.  at  Zuricb 
June  19,  1542.    He  received  excellent  humanistic 
instruction  at  Schlettstadt,  and  in  1499  entered  the 
University  of  Basel  where  he  first  studied  medicine. 
Influenced  by  the  lectures  of  Thomas  Wyttenbach 
on  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  he  devoted  himself 
to  theology,  together  with  Zwingli,  whose  intimate 
friend  he  became.    In  the  second  decade  of  the 
sixteenth  oentuiy  he  was  preacher  at  St.  Pilt  in 
Alsace.    In  1518  he  succeeded  Zwingli  in  Einsiedeb, 
where  he  worked  for  the  Refomoation  in  the  spirit  of 
ZwinglL    In  1523  he  became  pastor  of  St.  Peter's 
in  Zurich.    On  the  occasion  of  Zwingli's  first  dis- 
putation with  the  papists,  Jud  openly  expressed  hia 
determination  to  preach  the  pure  Gospel,  and  in  the 
autumn  of  1523  he  married  a  mm.     He  assisted 
Zwingli  much  as  Melanchthon  did  Luther,  support' 
ing  1^  in  his  struggle  against  the  Anabaptists,  in 
the  controversy  on  the  Lord's  Supper,  and  in  his 
literary  labors  by  editing  his  expositions  of  Scrip- 
ture and  translating  his  publish^  works  into  Ger- 
man or  Latin.    On  the  death  of  Zwingli  after  the 
battle  of  Cappel  he  stood  temporarily  at  the  head 
of  the  Zurich  Church,  but  the  opposition  party 
turned  against  him  as  one  of  the  chief  instigators 
of  the  war.    Heinrich  Bullinger,  the  successor  of 
Zwingli,  was  assisted  by  him  in  the  same  unselfish 
and  successful  manner  as  was  Zwingli. 

Leo  demanded  the  mutual  independence  of 
Church  and  State.  The  Church,  be  maintained, 
should  not  be  hindered  in  the  execution  of  its  pe- 
culiar tasks,  especially  of  discipline,  to  which,  like 
Calvin,  he  attached  great  value.  At  the  same  time 
all  compulsion  in  matters  of  faith  should  be  abol- 
ished. In  the  efforts  for  imion  of  the  Lutherans 
and  Reformed  he  defended  Zwingli  and  Oecolam- 
padius  against  Luther  and  warned  the  Strasbuig 
theologians  of  the  "  new  pope."  He  took  a  prom- 
inent part  in  the  discussions  on  the  formulation  of 
the  first  Helvetic  Confession,  in  Aarau  and  Base), 
and  his  German  translation  of  the  Latin  original 
was  declared  the  authentic  text.  He  laid  the  foun- 
dation of  the  Zurich  litmgy  by  his  compilation  of 
a  formula  of  baptism  (1523)  and  other  parts  of  the 
church  service.  He  possessed  extraordinary  gifts 
as  a  translator  and  was  the  leading  spirit  in  the 
translation  of  the  Zurich  Bible,  which,  beginning 
in  1538,  he  compared  word  by  word  with  the  orig- 
inal text,  being  assisted  by  Michael  Adam,  a  con- 
verted Jew  (see  Bible  Versions,  B,  VII.,  §  5). 
Besides  this  German  translation  of  the  Bible  Leo 
rendered  great  services  by  his  famous  and  careful 
Latin  translation  of  the  Old  Testament  which  may 
be  considered  the  principal  work  of  his  life.  He 
published  also  a  larger  (1534)  and  a  smaller  cate- 


248 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jubilee,  Tear  of 
Judas  of  OalUee 


chism  (1534)  in  German  and  a  Latin  catechism 
(1538).    He  translated  the  *'  Imitation  of  Chnat/* 
Augustine's  De  spiriiu  d  UUera,  and  works  of  con- 
temporaneous authors.  (Emil  Eouf.) 
Bibuoorapht:    A  VHa  was  written  by  his  aon  Johannea, 
printed  in  Af MoaOafMo  Tiourina^  Zurich,  1724;    the  later 
life  is  by  C.  Festaloxii.  Elberfeld,  1800.    Consult  also: 
XL,  vt  1911-14;    J.  J.  Meiger.  GMAidUe  <Ur  deuiaehen 
Uebenetgunoefit  PP.  67  tqq.,  Basel,  1870;   8.  M.  Jackson, 
HuUr^ieh  Zwingli,  New  York.  1003. 

JXJDAH  (Hebr.  Yekudhah;  LXX,  loudaa, 
"  praise/'  originally  combined  with  the  name  of  a 
deity,  later  a  very  common  name  among  the  Jews) : 
Fotirth  son  of  Jacob  and  Leah,  coming,  however,  to 
occupy  the  place  of  the  first-bom;  also  the  leading 
tribe  of  the  Hebrews,  tracing  descent  from  him. 
His  character,  in  the  combined  narratives  of  J  and 
E,  while  not  without  its  faults,  is  on  the  whole 
noble,  energetic  and  trustworthy,  in  spite  of  Gen. 
xxxviii.,  which  is  regarded  as  Ephraimitic  in 
origin  and  consequently  written  with  a  bias.  Later 
writers  incline  to  the  view  that  the  name  is  not 
that  of  an  individual  but  of  a  clan,  and  explain  the 
Hirah  of  xxxviii.  1  as  also  that  of  a  dan,  extend- 
ing the  same  notion  to  the  names  Er,  Onan,  Shelah, 
Pharez,  and  2Sarah.  But  the  narratives  suggest 
rather  the  traits  of  an  individual  from  whom  the 
tribe  inherited  its  energy  and  faithful  adherence 
to  law.  Jacob's  blessing  (Gen.  xlix.  8-12)  trans- 
fers the  birthright  of  Reuben  to  Judah,  passing 
over  Simeon  and  Levi,  and  describes  the  lion- 
hearted  tribe  of  the  future  in  its  land  of  wine  and 
milk.  In  E^gypt  the  tribe  became  the  largest  in 
numbers,  including  three  principal  dans  and  two 
lesser  dans  (Num.  xxvi.  20-21;  cf.  I  Chron.  iv.  1), 
while  in  Caleb  (q.v.)  there  is  seen  a  non-Israelitic 
tribe  which  coalesced  with  Judah.  The  genealogy 
in  I  Chron.  ii.  3  sqq.,  is  given  with  especial  refer- 
ence to  the  descent  of  David  through  Nahshon 
(verse  10,  cf.  Num.  i.  7).  The  two  censuses  in  the 
wandering  give  respectively  74,600  and  76,500  men 
(Num.  i.  27,  xxvi.  22),  and  the  arrangement  of  the 
camp  gives  the  primacy  to  Judah  (Num.  ii.  3), 
which  the  energetic  Caleb  led  (Num.  xiii.  6).  After 
Joshua's  death,  the  tribe  took  the  leadership  in  the 
conflict  with  the  Canaanites  (Judges  i.,  cf.  xx.  18), 
though  confining  its  operations  to  its  own  territory 
and  that  of  Simeon,  in  the  south. 

The  tribal  possessions,  described  in  Josh.  xv.  1- 
12,  were  divided  into  four  parts:  the  mountains  of 
Judah,  the  eastern  declivity  down  to  the  Dead  Sea, 
the  southern  slope  toward  Edom,  and  the  plain 
toward  the  Mediterranean,  which  last,  however,  re- 
mained in  the  hand  of  the  Philistines  (see  Judba). 
During  the  period  of  the  Judges,  the  tribe  took 
little  part  in  the  conflicts  of  its  northern  neighbors 
(Judges  iii.  9,  xii.  8,  cf.  x.  9,  xv.  9  sqq.).  It  had 
no  share  in  the  campaign  against  Sisera  or  in  Gid- 
eon's struggle  with  Midian;  in  the  former  case 
because  it  was  politically  isolated  from  the  Joseph 
tribes,  though  not  to  the  extent  asserted  by  Stade. 
Even  in  Saul's  time  it  was  not  prominent  in  the 
army  (I  Sam.  xi.  8,  xv.  4),  but  with  the  accession 
of  David  its  eminence  began  (II  Sam.  ii.  4).  The 
capture  of  Jerusalem  gave  it  increased  prestige 
through  its  possession  of  a  center  of  strength.  Its 
fidelity  was  constant,  and  even  in  the  return  the 


greater  number  of  the  returning  exiles  belonged  to 
this  tribe.  Its  greatest  honor,  however,  consisted 
in  its  giving  to  the  world  the  Messiah  who,  as  the 
"  lion  of  the  tribe  of  Juda "  (Rev.  v.  6),  overcame 
the  world  and  established  an  eternal  kingdom. 

For  the  history  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah,  see 
Israel,  Hibtobt  of.  (C.  von  Orelli.) 

Biblioobapbt:  In  addition  to  the  literature  given  under 
Ahab;  Israbl,  Hibtobt  of;  and  Judba,  consult:  L.  B. 
FBton,  Early  Hiatory  of  Syria  and  PaletHne,  New  York, 
1901;  a.  A.  Barton,  Semitic  Origina,  pp.  271-286,  ib.  1902; 
DB,  ii  792-794;  EB,  ii  2617-2623;  JE,  vii.  826-330. 

JUDAS,  ja'dos:  One  of  the  twdve  Apostles. 
The  name  occurs  in  the  New  Testament  only  in 
the  lists  of  the  Apostles,  yet,  including  the  matter 
of  the  reading  of  the  text,  it  raises  several  knotty 
problems.  This  Judas  is  to  be  distinguished  from 
Judas  Iscariot  on  the  basis  of  John  xiv.  22;  and 
from  Jude  (Judas,  Juda),  the  brother  of  our  Lord 
(Matt.  xiii.  55;  Mark  vi.  3),  on  the  basis  of  Luke 
vi.  16  and  Acts  i.  13  ("  the  brother  [better,  the  eon] 
of  James  ").  The  chief  difficulty  is  raised  by  the 
fact  that  in  two  of  the  lists  of  Apostles  the  name 
of  this  Judas  is  omitted  and  apparently  in  its  place 
is  found  either  "  Lebbeus,  whose  surname  was 
Thaddeus  "  (Matt.  x.  3  A.  V.,  a  conflate  reading, 
cf.  R.  v.,  which,  following  the  leading  textual  crit^ 
ics,  omits  "  Lebbeus,  whose  surname  was  "),  or 
''Thaddeus"  (Mark  iii.  18).  Accordingly  most 
scholars  accept  the  identification  of  this  Judas  with 
Lebbeus  and  Thaddeus,  though  some  have  sup- 
posed that  James  had  died  and  that  his  place  was 
taken  by  LebbeiuhThaddeus.  Of  the  career  of 
Judas  nothing  is  known  except  that  he  asked  the 
question  recorded  in  John  xiv.  22.  Yet  a  consid- 
erable mass  of  legend  grew  up  (cf.  Acta  Thaddaei; 
see  Apocrypha,  B,  II.,  12)  in  connectipn  with  his 
mission  (as  Thaddeus)  to  Abgar  (q.v.),  in  which 
confusion  is  apparent  as  to  bis  relation  to  Jesus 
or  perhaps  as  to  his  identity.  Eusebius  {Hist, 
eccl.f  I.,  xii.,  NPNF,  1  ser.,  i.  99)  makes  him  one 
of  the  Seventy  (not  of  the  Twelve),  while  Jerome 
(on  Matt.  X.  4,  MPL,  xxvi.  61)  calls  him  an  apos- 
tle. The  later  accounts  professing  to  tell  the  story 
of  his  life  and  work  have  no  historical  value. 

Geo.  W.  Gilmorb. 

JUDAS:  A  chronographer  mentioned  by  Eusebius 
(Hist,  eccl,,  vi.  7,  iVPJVF, 2ser.,  i. 254).  In  thispas- 
sage  Eusebius  speaks  of  a  certain  Judas,  otherwise 
unknown,  who,  in  a  tract  on  the  "  Seventy  Weeks 
of  Daniel,"  put  forth  some  chronological  reckon- 
ings on  the  basis  of  Daniel's  prophecies,  coming 
down  to  the  tenth  year  of  Septimius  Severus  (202), 
and  predicting  the  speedy  return  of  the  Lord. 
Closer  identification  of  the  author  is  impossible. 

G.  Kat^OBR. 
Bibuography:  A.  Schlatter,  in  TU,  xii.  1  (1894);  K.  Erbea, 

in  TLZ,  1896.  pp.  415-418. 

JUDAS  OF  GALILEE:  The  leader  of  a  Jewish 
insurrection  against  the  Romans,  mentioned  in 
Acts  V.  37.  According  to  Josephus  (An/.,  XVIIL, 
i  6;  War,  II.,  viii.  1;  cf.  ArU.,  XX.,  v.  2;  War, 
II.,  xvii.  8),  when  the  taxing  of  the  Jewish  people 
in  the  governorship  of  Quirinius  (q.v.)  under  Augus- 
tus aroused  strong  opposition,  a  certain  Judas,  bom 
in  Gamala  but  generally  called  ''  the  Galilean," 


i\ 


udas  Xaoariot 
rude,  Bpiatle  of 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


244 


with  the  help  of  a  Pharisee  named  Zadok,  organ- 
iied  an  insurrection  which  was  based  on  reli^^ous 
motives.  The  taxation  emphasised  the  loss  of 
Jewish  independence  under  Roman  rule  and  of 
their  theociacy.  The  two  sources  (Gamaliel  in 
Acts,  and  Josephus)  agree  in  viewing  the  insurreo- 
tion  from  a  religious  standpoint,  though  differences 
of  another  sort  appear.  Gamaliel  reports  the  de- 
struction of  Judas  and  of  his  following,  of  which 
Josephus  says  nothing.  The  latter  connects  the 
outbreak  with  the  fermenting  sealotism  manifested 
later,  in  the  outbreak  under  Gessius  Florus,  and 
he  is  corroborated  in  this  by  the  prominent  part 
taken  by  the  sons  of  Judas  in  that  outbreak.  Of 
this  nothing  is  manifest  in  the  speech  of  Gamaliel. 
The  chronological  datum  is  the  relation  of  the  in- 
surrection to  the  taxing,  put  by  Zahn  in  4-3  B.C. 
(Neue  kirehliche  ZeUachrift,  iv.  1803,  633-664,  and 
EinleUung  in  das  Neue  Teetameni,  ii.,  Leipsic,  1900, 
395  sqq.).  The  differences  in  the  two  accounts 
prove  that  the  author  of  Acts  was  here  independent 
of  Josephus  and  drew  from  other  sources. 

(K.  Schmidt.) 
BnuooRArar:   DB,   u.  71)6-790;    EB,   iL    2828-30;   JB, 

▼iL  870-371;    SchOrBr,  OeaekiekU,  I  420-421,  et  pMiim. 

Eng.  tniul.,  L,  iL  4,  et  pMrim. 

JUDAS  ISCARIOT,  is^sar'i-et:  One  of  the  twelve 
disciples,  and  the  betrayer  of  Jesus.  The  references 
to  Judas  in  the  New  Testament  are:  (1)  Mention 
in  the  list  of  the  disciples,  Matt.  x.  4;  Mark  iii.  19; 
Luke  vi.  16.  (2)  Occasional  allusions,  John  vi.  70, 
71,  xii.  4,  xvii.  12.  (3)  History  of  the  betrayal. 
Matt.  xxvi.  14-16,  21-25,  46-60;  Mark  xiv.  10,  11, 
1&-21,  42-46;  Luke  xxii.  3-6,  21-23,  47-48;  John 
xiu.  2-11, 18, 21-30,  xviii.  2-9.  (4)  Account  of  his 
death,  Matt,  xxvii.  3-10;  Acts  i.  16-25.  OnfyJohn 
writes  the  full  name,  "  Judas  Iscariot  the  son  of 
Simon."  The  ordinary  surname  is  Iscariot  (Hebr. 
lahkeriyyoih),  "  Man  of  [the  village]  Keriyyoth  " 
(Kerioth,  Josh.  xv.  25),  a  place  in  northern  Judea, 
the  modem  al-Karyatain,  south  of  Hebron. 

The  synoptic  tradition  is  limited  to  a  few  chief 
details.  It  gives  nothing  from  the  earlier  life  of 
Judas,  but  begins  about  the  time  when  the  author^ 
ities  in  Jeruasklem  had  determined  to  kill  Jesus, 
and  Judas  engaged  to  betray  him  into  their  hands. 
Matthew  and  Luke  do  not  imply  that  the  betrayal 
was  induced  by  anything  more  than  the  money 
offered  or  that  opposition  to  Jesus  was  Judas'  mo- 
tive; indeed  Judas  appears  as  the  instrument  of 
higher  powers — notice  the  words  of  Luke,  "  Satan 
entered  into  Judas."  The  event  was  not  unex- 
pected to  Jesus,  since  at  the  Last  Supper  he  an- 
nounced his  coming  betrayal  by  one  of  the  twelve. 
While  to  the  twelve  this  event  seemed  at  the  time 
most  improbable,  to  Jesus  it  was  not  so  and  in- 
deed was  in  keeping,  in  his  view,  with  the  divine 
purpose  as  expressed  in  the  Scriptures  and  was  a 
necessary  means  for  the  accomplishment  of  the 
divine  plan.  Consequently  results  followed  not 
without  the  assistance  of  Jesus  himself.  While 
the  leaders  out  of  fear  of  a  popular  uprising  would 
have  let  the  feast  go  by,  immediately  after  the  Last 
Supper,  at  which  Jesus  had  predicted  the  betrayal, 
Judas  appeared  at  the  head  of  a  force  furnished  by 
the  authorities.    As  Judas'  question  at  the  supper 


had  been  answered  with  a  categorical  "  yes,"  it 
appeared  that  Judas  was  fearful  that  his  purpose 
was  fully  known  to  Jesus  and  might  be  thwarted; 
the  action  of  Judas  was  therefore  hastened,  while 
Jesus  went  to  the  place  where  he  would  be  ex- 
pected to  go  (Luke:  *'  as  his  custom  was  ").  It 
was  then  by  the  cooperation  of  Jesus  that  he  was 
delivered  to  his  enemies.  The  mildness  with  which 
Jesus  received  the  betraying  Idss  suggests  that  the 
method  of  betrayal  proceeded  not  from  shameless 
effrontery,  but  from  fear  of  an  outbreak  from  Judas' 
oodisdples.  Even  here  Judas  appears  not  as  a 
consunomate  villain  but  as  one  who  in  oonsequenoe 
of  an  unhappy  fraOty  was  constrained  to  accom- 
plish a  revolting  deed. 

Compared  with  the  synoptic  narrative,  the  Jo- 
hannine  report  seems  to  have  been  intended  to 
siq>plement  and  add  coloring;   thus  John  does  not 
report  how  Judas  came  to  put  himself  at  the  dis- 
posal of  the  enemies  of  Jesus,  but  in  the  account  of 
the  anointing  of  Jesus  (x.  1  sqq.)  remarks  that 
Judas  was  a  thief.    John  (xiii.  27)  and  Luke  (xxii. 
3)  both  testify  to  the  entrance  of  Satan  into  Judas, 
but  John  (xiiL  2)  teaches  that  the  way  had  been 
prepared  though  the  height  of  evil  conception  hsd 
not  been  reached  till  tl^  supper,  that  Judas  was 
already  predisposed  to  evil  before  the  actual  re- 
ception of  the  Satanic  influence.    John  notes  also 
that  when,  at  the  betrayal,  Jesus  met  the  force  sent 
against  him,  Judas  stood  with  that  force  and  was 
affected  as  they  were  at  the  words  of  Jesus.    John 
brings  out  into  strong  relief  the  thought  that  Jesus 
foreimew  the  treachery  of  Judas,  that  indeed  in 
the  choice  of  Judas  as  a  disciple  the  fulfilment  of 
Scripture  by  this  means  had  been  in  mind,  that  the 
loss  of  this  one  from  those  whom  the  Father  had 
given  Jesus  was  also  a  matter  of  fulfilment  of  proph- 
ecy (xvii.  12),  and  that  all  this  was  but  the  cany- 
ing  out  of  the  will  of  God.    Similarly  John  empha- 
sises the  self-surrender  of  Jesus  in  his  cooperation 
with  the  plans  of  Judas. 

The  Gospel  of  Matthew  in  its  interest  in  Mes- 
sianic prediction  carries  the  history  of  Judas  fur- 
ther, but  fully  in  accord  with  the  supposition  that 
Judas  was  not  animated  with  hostility  to  Jesus, 
so  that  he  attempted  to  return  the  price  of  the  be- 
trayal, and  when  it  was  not  received,  threw  it  on 
the  ground  and  went  away  and  hanged  himself. 
This  relation  is  to  be  brought  into  connection  with 
the  narrative  in  II  Sam.  xvii.  and  with  another 
Old-Testament  passage  regarded  as  Messianic.  A 
variant  account  of  the  end  of  Judas  is  given  in 
Acts  i.  18-19,  which  furnishes  one  of  the  problems 
of  New-Testament  criticism  to  be  solved  by  re- 
calling that  the  central  point  in  the  speech  of  Peter 
was  that  a  vacancy  had  occurred  in  the  apostolic 
college  which  was  to  be  filled.  The  essential  dif- 
ference in  the  two  accounts  is  that  in  one  case  the 
purchase  of  the  field  is  attributed  to  Judas,  in  the 
other  case  to  the  authorities.  The  narration  by 
Papias  of  the  story  of  the  end  of  Judas  (cf.  Zahn 
in  TSK,  1866,  pp.  680-689)  had  as  ite  purpose  the 
reconciliation  of  the  two  accounts. 

(K.  Schmidt.) 

Bibuoobapht:    Excellent  oritioal  dieeuanona  are  fouod  in 
DB,  U.  796  sqq.;   BB,  ii.  2628-2028.     The  older  litei»tiirp 


M5 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Judas  iMariot 
Jvda,  BpUtle  of 


is  fhran  in  G.  B.  Winar.  BiUtadbM  B§ahD»ltHntek,  i.  636, 
Le^MC  1847-48.  Consult  furthw:  Abraham  •  Saaota 
Chn,  yudoa  <i«r  Bruehdm,  in  Us  1F«r«w.  Paaaau.  1836- 
1837;  Zandt.  Conmwniaiio  deJudayndilor;  Leipric  1760; 
E.  Daub.  Jwdam  laehanoi,  Heideiben.  1816-18;  JE,  tiL 
371;  and  thn  litarature  on  the  life  and  passion  of  Jesus 
•ad  wnnumtaries  on  the  Gospeb  and  Acts. 

JUDAS  MACCABEUS.    See  Hasmonsamb. 
JUDS,  EPISTLE  OF:    One  of  the  seven  Gen- 
eral Epistles.     The  title  ascribes  it  to  Jude  the 
brother  of  James,  and  nowhere  does  the  epistle 
diim  to  be  by  an  apostle;  on  the  contrary,  veree 
17  giyes  the  impresuon  that  the  author  was  not  of 
the  Twelve.     The  James  who  is  mentioned  can 
hardly  be  any  other  than  James  the  brother  of  the 
Lord,  one  of  the  three  pillars  of  the  Jewish-Chris- 
tian Church,   while  the  Jude  must  be  the  Judas 
(Juda)  of  Matt.  xiiL  65;  Mark  vi.  3,  a  son  of  Mary 
and  therefore  not  an  apostle.    It  is  noticeable  that 
neither  Jude  nor  his  brother  James  in  their  epistles 
daima  other  than  a  spiritual  relationship  to  Christ 
("  servant  of  Jesus  Christ " — and  in  a  subordinate 
sense  solely   the  mark  of  a  becoming  modesty). 
Between  the  epistles  of  James  and  of  Jude  there  are 
many  points  of  contact.    The  titles  are  ao  similar 
that  the  first  verae  of  Jude  seems  a  reminiscence 
of  Jaa.  i.  1;  both  lack  personal  greetings  and  neither 
is  directed  to  a  local  community,  but  rather  each 
is  meant  for  a  wide  circle  of  the  Church  and  has 
the  character  of  an  encyclical,  though  of  the  two 
the  epistle  of  Jude  seems  to  have  the  larger  scope, 
not  being  directed  to  "  the  twelve  tribes  "  (Jas. 
i.  1).    With  this  large  circle  of  readers  ("  them  that 
are  sanctified  by  God  the  Father,  and  preserved 
in  Jeaus  Christ ")  everything  in  the  epistle  agrees. 
The  matters  discusaed  are  those  in  which  the  whole 
Church  has  interest;   while  the  occasion  might  be 
bcal,  the  theme  is  general — salvation  (verae  3). 
The  epiatle,  like  that  of  James,  is  directed  against 
a  form  of  worldliness  which  might  arise  either  from 
Jewish  or  heathen  surroundings,  and  may  have  in 
mind  a  developed  form  of  antinomianism.    Jude 
has  also  in  mind  actual  moral  depravity  against 
which  he  gives  warning.    The  persons  addressed 
live  m  carnal  impurity,  perhaps  in  unnatural  sin, 
are  sensual,  behave  unseemly  at  the  love  feasts, 
and  are  guided  by  their  own  lusts  (verses  8,  10,  12, 
16).    While  these  are  practical  irregularities  of  life, 
^alse  teaching  is  in  view,  and  the  hearers  are  ex- 
iKMted  to  hoki  the  faith  (verses  a^),  against  those 
who  turn  grace  into  lasdviousness  and  deny  God 
a^  Jesus  Christ.    The  evils  are  also  of  a  specula- 
tive nature  ("  dreamers,"  verse  8),  out  of  which 
ethical  evils  arise.    The  teaching  here  guarded 
against  is  neither  the  Gnosticism  of  the  second  cen- 
tury nor  Carpocratianism,  though  a  sort  of  dual- 
>™»  is  evidently  put  forward  (verse  19),  but  evi- 
dently of  the  same  sort  as  that  in  Paul's  mind  in 
^  distinction  between  spiritual  and  carnal  ex- 
Praased  m  I  Cor.  ii.  14-15.    It  is  to  be  noted  that 
^he  errors  against  which  the  writer  speaks  appear 
in  the  communities;  they  do  not  constitute  a  sep- 
arate mevement.    They  may  be  regarded  as  the 
^cipient  stages  of  what  beoame  types  of  Gnosti- 
cinQ.    The  reports  of  Hegesippus  of  error  which 
ATOtt  in  the  CSiristlan  communities  of  Palestine, 


the  heresy  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians,  of  the 
pastoral  letters,  and  the  teaching  of  Cerinthus, 
having  a  tinge  of  libertinism  with  its  spirituahstio- 
dualistic  Jewish  Christianity,  all  suggest  a  relation- 
ship with  the  errant  teaching  against  which  Jude 
spcuaks.  While,  then,  error  of  a  Jewish  origin  is 
suggested,  there  is  also  a  reminder  of  a  chancter- 
istically  heathen  form  of  sin  as  shown  in  the  Cor^ 
inthian  libertinism  denounced  by  Paul.  And,  once 
more,  the  error  of  the  Nicolaitans  (q.v.)  is  recalled 
by  the  deeds  of  the  people  against  whom  Jude  gives 
warning.  Such  manifestations  were  a  danger  to 
the  whole  Church,  and  the  epistle  directs  itself  to 
this  peril. 

After  the  greeting  (1-2)  and  the  preface  (3-4), 
follows  the  argument,  which  condemns  teachers  of 
error  (5-19);  three  examples  of  gross  sin  are  cited 
from  history  and  the  punishment  recalled  (5-7), 
the  similarity  of  these  historic  cases  with  the  pres- 
ent error  is  asserted  (8),  an  example  of  moderation 
is  given  (9),  and  with  it  a  description  of  the  errant 
course  (10-13);  punishment  was  predicted  as  long 
ago  as  Enoch's  period  and  later  by  the  Apostles 
(14-19).  An  exhortation  follows  and  then  a  mag- 
nificent doxology  (20-25).  For  the  date  of  the  epis- 
tle the  employment  of  the  Assumption  of  Moses 
(44  A.D.)  and  acquaintance  with  the  Epistle  to 
the  Romans  (cf.  24-25  with  Rom.  xvi.  25-27)  set 
the  higher  limit.  The  tenmnuM  ad  quern  is  not  so 
easily  fixed,  but  the  time  just  prior  to  Domitian 
is  the  latest  date  to  which  it  can  be  postponed, 
since  according  to  Hegesippus  Jude  was  not  alive 
during  Domitian's  reign  (Eusebius,  Hist,  ecd,,  III., 
XX.).  This  assumes  the  genuineness  of  the  letter, 
which  is  not  strongly  attested.  The  Muratorian 
Canon  names  the  epistle,  but  not  as  written  by 
Jude;  Origen  knows  that  it  has  been  questioned; 
the  early  Feschito  did  not  receive  it  and  Eusebius 
reckons  it  among  the  ArUtisgomefia;  Jerome  notes 
that  it  was  rejected  by  most  on  accoimt  of  its 
citation  of  apocryphal  books.  Yet  it  is  diffi- 
cult to  account  for  an  ungenuine  letter  being 
put  forth  in  the  name  of  a  man  whose  repute 
was  so  small  as  that  of  Jude,  the  brother  of 
our  Lord,  and  it  is  noteworthy  that  the  writer 
makes  no  pretension  of  being  an  apostle. 

(F.  SlEFPBRT.) 
BnuGOSAnnr:  Possibly  the  best  eommentaries  are  by 
J.  B.  Mayor  (with  II  F^ter).  London,  1907;  and  H.  yon 
Soden,  GAttinflsn.  1899.  Others  are  by:  W.  Jenkyn 
(I612-«6).  ed.  J.  Sherman.  London.  1839;  R.  Stier.  Ber- 
lin.  1850;  M.  F.  Rampf,  Sulsbaeh.  1854;  F.  Gardiner. 
Boston.  1856;  J.  T.  Demarest  (on  the  GathoUo  Epistles). 
New  York.  1879;  E.  H.  Flumptre  (on  Peter  and  Jude), 
in  CamMdo9  BihU,  Ckmbridce.  1879;  K.  F.  Keil  (Peter 
and  Jade).  Leipsio.  1883;  F.  Spitta  (on  Peter  and  Jude), 
Halle,  1885;  A.  F.  Manoury  (on  the  Catholic  Epistles). 
Bar-le-Due,  1888;  A.  Plummer.  in  Expositor's  Bible,  Lon- 
don, 1891;  C.  Bigg  (on  Peter  and  Jude).  Edinburgh.  1901. 
Questions  of  introduction  are  treated  in  the  works  on 
Biblical  Introduction  (q.v.)  and  on  N.  T.  theology  (e.g.. 
W.  Beyschlag,  Edinburgh,  1896).  Consult  further:  F. 
Maier,  Der  Judaabritf,  9ein§  EMteil,  AbfaBMungueU  und 
Leter,  Freiburg,  1906;  E.  Amaud.  Reeherehet  erUiquM 
9ur  P^ptin  ds  JvtU,  Strasburg.  1851;  P.  J.  Gloag.  Intro- 
dvetion  to  Ou  CaOioKe  BpiatUo,  Edinburgh.  1887;  A.  C. 
MoGiffert,  Hitt,  <^  ChruHanUif  in  fibs  iipostolte  Ago,  pp. 
586-«88.  New  York,  1897;  Hamaek.  ZAtloratur,  U.  1.  pp. 
465-469;  DB.  iL  799-806  (minute  and  searching);  SB, 
iL  2680-32. 


Judea 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0Q 


946 


L  The  Name  and  the  Territory. 
Hutory  (f  1). 

Boundariee  of  Judea  Proper  (f  2). 
IL  Detailed  DeMription. 
1.  The  Territory  of  Judah. 

Limits,    Population   and   DiviaionB 

(ID. 
The  Shephelah  (f  2). 


JUDEAp   ju-dt'(L 

The  HUl  Country  (|  3). 
Hebron  (f  4). 
Mamie  (|  5). 

Other  Cities  of  Josh.  zr.  (|  0). 
Places  Named  in  Later  Records  (|  7). 
2.  The  Territory  of  Benjamin. 
General  Description;  Jeri<^  (f  1). 
The  First  Group  of  Benjamite  Cities  (|2). 


L  The  Name  and  the  Territoiy:  Judea  is  the 
term  applied  from  about  300  b.c.  by  Greeks  and 
Romans  to  the  land  inhabited  by  the  Jews.  The 
limits  of  the  country  are  to  be  gathered  from  pas- 
sages in  Nehemiah  (iii.  and  vii.)  and  in  I  and 
II  Maccabees.  These  reports,  while  not  entirely 
accordant,  yet  supplement  each  other,  and  start 
from  the  point  of  view  either  of  governmental  rule, 
of  tribal  possession,  or  of  relationship  to  the  relig- 
ious community.  The  boundaries  are 
I.  History,  fairly  well  indicated  in  Neh.  iii.;  on 
the  south  Bethzur  marked  the  border, 
in  the  north  Bethhoron,  and  on  the  west  Emmaus, 
and  these  are  approximately  the  limits  implied  in 
the  Books  of  Maccabees  (cf.  the  list  of  fortresses 
"  in  Judea  "  in  I  Mace.  ix.  50  sqq.).  Under  the  Per- 
sians, as  under  the  Greeks,  this  region  shared  the 
fate  of  southern  Syria.  After  the  death  of  Alexander 
the  Great  it  fell  into  the  hand  of  the  Ptolemies  (q.v.), 
who  held  control  of  it  almost  continuously  till  198 
B.C.  It  was  a  part  of  the  province  of  "  Gelesyria  " 
(I  Macd.  X.  69)  or  of  ''Gelesyria  and  Phenice  " 
(II  Mace.  iii.  5).  The  inhabitants,  on  account  of 
their  religion,  were  granted  many  privileges  until 
the  time  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  but  the  pajrment 
of  tribute  was  enforced,  if  necessary,  by  the  pres- 
ence of  garrisons,  a  situation  which  the  Maccabean 
revolution  brought  to  an  end  (I  Mace.  x.  25-^5). 
The  Greek  name  for  this  territory,  loudatOf  as  well 
as  the  adjective  laudaioSf  ia  not  to  be  derived  from 
the  Hebrew  YehtMi  but  from  the  Aramaic  Ye- 
hudhay  (Ezra  iv.  12;  Dan.  iii.  8).  The  earliest  sure 
traces  of  the  use  of  this  name  are  found  at  the  end 
of  the  fourth  century  B.C.,  contemporaneously  with 
the  beginning  of  Greek  control  of  the  Orient.  In 
I  Maccabees  the  usage  is  divided  between  the  nor- 
mal Greek  form  and  a  Hebraizing  form  louda, 
with  a  preference  for  the  latter.  As  a  result  of  the 
Hasmonean  uprising  (see  Hasmoneams)  the  territory 
was  enlarged  and  the  name  had  both  a  narrow  and  a 
wider  content.  The  extension  of  territory  was  be- 
gun by  Jonathan,  when  in  147  b.c.  Alexander 
Balas  gave  to  him  the  city  of  Ekron  with  its  sui^ 
rounding  territory.  In  145  b.c.  Demetrius  II. 
added  three  districts  in  the  north  and  west  which 
had  belonged  to  Samaria  (I  Mace.  xi.  28,  34,  57), 
named  "  Apherema,  Lydda,  and  Ramathem  "  after 
the  names  of  their  chief  cities.  Apherema  is  prob- 
ably the  Ephraeim  or  Efraea  of  the  OnoTnasticon 
(cchv.  118,  cclvii.  121),  about  twenty  Roman  miles 
north  of  Jerusalem;  Lydda  corresponds  to  the  Lod 
of  the  Old  Testament  (Ezra  ii.  33);  and  Ramathem 
was  about  nine  miles  northeast  of  Lydda  and  six 
west  of  Thamna.  The  probable  reason  for  this 
grant  was  that  the  population  was  largely  Jewish. 
Boon  after,  Bethzur  was  taken  away  from  the  Sel- 
eudds  (I  Mace.  xi.  66),  and  in  142  b.c.  Joppa  was 


Ths  Seoond  Group  (|  3). 
Other  Places  of  Note  (|  4). 

3.  The  Judean  Territory  of  Dan. 

4.  Ths   Judean  Territory  of 
raim. 

6.  Citiss  on  the  Western  Plain. 
6.  The  Eleven  Toparchies  of  Judea 
According  to  Josephus. 

taken  and  then  Judaised  (I  Mace.  xii.  33),  and  the 
same  happened  to  Gezer  (I  Maoc.  xiii.  43  sqq.). 
John  Hyrcanus  took  Medaba  and  Samega  across 
the  Jordan,  also  Samaria  and  Scythopolis,  and  in 
the  south  the  territory  of  the  Idumeans.  Aristo- 
bulus  conquered  from  the  Itiu'eans  a  part  of  their 
territory.  Alexander  Jannsus  annexed  consider- 
able territory  across  the  Jordan  and  Raphia,  An- 
thedon,  and  Gaza  on  the  Mediterranean.  In  63 
B.C.  Pompey  restricted  Judea  to  strictly  Jewish 
territory.  Herod  came  into  possession  of  Samaria, 
Batanea,  Auranitis,  Trachonitis,  and  the  region  of 
the  Jordan  sources.  During  the  first  oentuiy  of 
the  Christian  era  the  changes  in  apportionment  of 
the  territory  were  numerous.  In  the  second  cen- 
tury Judea  came  to  be  called  Syria  Palettina,  and 
after  the  fourth  century  simply  Palestina.  Jose- 
phus distinguishes  Judea  from  Samaria,  makes  Ju- 
dea stand  for  the  region  under  Hyrcanus  or  Herod, 
or  for  the  district  ruled  by  procurators  after  6  a.d., 
or  for  the  region  granted  to  Vespasian.  When  he 
extends  the  use  of  the  word,  he  uses  the  phrase 
"  all  Judea,"  equivalent  to  the  ''  Canaan  "  of  the 
Old  Testament. 

Judea  as  treated  in  this  article  is  the  smaller  re- 
gion as  distinguished  from  Samaria,  Galilee,  and 
Perea,  defined  partly  in  Josephus  and  in  the  Tal- 
mud. Josephus  (Ant,  XIV.,  iii.  4)  makes  Kores, 
the  modem  Karawa,  the  most  northern  city,  and  in- 
cludes the  regions  of  Thamna,  Gophna, 

2.  Boon-   and  Akrabattine  (that  is,  the  Akrab- 

daries  of  bein  of  the  Onomastieon  ccxiv.),  while 
Judea      Josephus  draws  the  line  of  the  northern 

Proper,  boundary  through  Anuath  Borkaio9^ 
possibly  the  'Othnay  of  the  Tahnud. 
The  Talmud  also  locates  Antipatris  as  a  boundary 
city,  possibly  the  modem  Kalat  Ras  al-Ain  north- 
west of  Jaffa  and  north  of  Lydda.  Whether  Judea 
at  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  era  included  a 
part  of  the  coast  is  doubtful.  Joppa  had  been  in 
the  possession  of  the  Jews  and  Jamnia  had  a  laige 
Jewish  population,  but  the  way  in  which  Josephus 
mentions  these  places  {War,  III.,  iii.  5)  implies  that 
they  were  not  regarded  as  strictly  Judean.  The 
fact  that  the  seat  of  Roman  government  was  at 
Cffisarea  does  not  involve  that  any  portion  of  the 
seaooast  was  properly  within  the  territory  of  Ju- 
dea. The  western  boundary  was  not  stable,  vary- 
ing in  different  periods.  Only  at  times  was  any 
part  of  the  Philistine  territory  under  the  Jews,  as 
when  Gaza  or  Ekron  or  Ashdod  was  under  Jona- 
than or  Herod.  On  the  south,  Judea  was  bounded 
by  the  toparchies  of  Idumea  and  Engedi,  but  the 
exact  limits  fluctuated.  The  eastern  boundary 
was  the  Dead  Sea  and  the  Jordan. 

n.  Deteiled  Description. — 1.  The  Territory  of 
Judah:    According  to  the  Old  Testament  this  re- 


d47 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


^odeA 


gion  was  inhabited  by  the  tribes  of  Judah,  Benjamin, 
Dan,  and  a  part  of  Ephraim.  In  spite  of  the  exact 
details  given  in  Josh.  xv.  1-12,  the  limits  assigned 
to  the  tribe  of  Judah  can  not  be  determined  for 
lack  of  identification  of  many  places  named  in  the 
passage.  It  is  probable  also  that  the  boundary 
there  given  was  not  one  which  re- 

1.  liimits,  mained    constant    as   separating    the 
2^^' tribes,  and  the  limits  assigned  to  the 

Di'viflions.  tribe  and  those  of  the  kingdom  of 
Judah  may  not  be  taken  as  equiva- 
lents. Still  further,  it  must  be  remembered  that  in 
Joshua  the  limits  are  rather  ideal  than  actual,  as 
when  the  Mediterranean  is  given  as  the  western 
boundary,  a  condition  which  was  realized  only  in 
small  part  and  not  till  the  time  of  Alexander  Jan- 
nseus  and  of  Herod  the  Great,  though  the  Philis- 
tines were  at  times  tributary.  The  northeast  comer, 
according  to  the  passage,  was  where  the  Jordan 
enters  the  Dead  Sea,  and  the  boimdary  passed  by 
Beth-hoglah  (Easr  Hajla)  to  Adimunim  (Talat  al- 
Danmi),  then  by  En-rogel  through  the  Hinnom 
valley  on  the  west  down  to  Kirjath-jearim,  and 
thence  westward  to  the  seacoast.  In  this  Old- 
Testament  territory  of  Judah  dwelt  others  than  the 
members  of  the  tribe,  the  chief  city  of  which  was 
Bethlehem.  The  three  great  families  of  the  tribe, 
Shelah,  Perez,  and  Zerah  (Gen.  xlvi.  12)  are  in  part 
connected  with  the  Canaanitic  Shua  and  partly 
with  Tamar  (Gen.  xxxviii.),  which  is  perhaps 
identical  with  the  city  (or  region)  of  Tamar 
on  the  border  of  the  Negeb,  inhabited  by 
Kenizzite  or  Jerahmeelite  affiliations — ^the  stock 
which  furnished  new  life  to  the  waning  tribe 
of  Judah.  A  part  of  the  Danites  which  re- 
mained in  the  south  became  incorporated  into 
the  tribe  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  33,  xix.  41). 
Farther  south  dwelt  the  numerous  families  of  the 
Calebites  and  Kenizzites  in  the  region  of  Hebron, 
and  still  to  the  south  the  Kenites  and  Jerahmeelites. 
While  the  Calebites  appear  in  early  times  to  have 
been  a  dominant  family,  this  dominance  was  lost 
under  David  and  the  whole  territory  received  its 
name  from  the  principal  element  of  the  population 
at  that  time,  though  still  later  the  Calebites  came 
to  the  front  again,  \mtil  in  the  Exile  the  inroads  of 
the  Edomites  pressed  them  northward  and  com- 
pelled them  to  seek  homes  in  the  neighborhood  of 
the  depopulated  Jerusalem,  where  they  became 
fully  identified  with  the  Judaic  element.  From 
the  Edomitic  intruders  into  the  southern  region 
that  part  received  the  new  name  of  Idumea,  and 
in  Maccabean' times  Bethzur  was  on  the  boundary 
between  the  two  regions. 

The  passage  in  Joshua  divides  the  whole  region 
into  four  parts:  the  Negeb  (q.v.),  the  Shephelah, 
the  hill  country,  and  the  desert  (see  Palestine). 
According  to  the  original  text  of  Josh,  xv.,  the 
Shephelah  had  three  groups  of  cities,  according  to 
the  extended  text,  four  groups,  and  a  distinction  is 
made  between  towns  (protected  by  a  wall),  forty- 
2  _^        four  in   nimiber,   and   villages.    The 

Sh^heUh.  ^*  group  (Josh.  xv.  33-36)  includes 

'  fifteen  towns,  of  which  the  following 

are  known:    Eshtaol,   identified  by  Gu^rin  with 

Ashu'a  on  the  basis  of  its  earlier  name  Aahtu'al; 


Zorah,  possibly  the  Zarha  of  the  Amama  Tablets; 
2^noah,  the  modem  Zanu'a;  Adullam,  identified 
by  Clermont-Ganneau  with  Ehirbat  'Id  al-Miya; 
Soooh  is  Shuwaika,  on  the  south  bank  of  the  Wadi 
al-Sant.  The  second  group,  of  sixteen  towns,  is 
located  to  the  west  and  southwest  of  the  first, 
toward  Gaza  (verses  37-41).  Mizpeh  is  placed  at 
the  foot  of  the  hills  near  the  Wadi  al-Sant,  west^ 
ward  from  Shuwaika.  Tiachish  is  identified  with 
Tell  el-Hesy,  recently  excavated,  mentioned  in  the 
Amama  Tablets  as  an  important  Canaanitic  cen- 
ter, and  appearing  in  the  Assyrian  records  and  in 
the  Books  of  Kings.  Eglon  is  the  modem  Ajlan, 
and  Lahmas  or  Lahmam  is  the  modem  Lahm.  The 
third  group  (verses  42-44)  of  nine  (Septuagint,  ten) 
cities  includes  Libnah  (known  to  Eusebius  as  Lobna 
in  the  neighborhood  of  Eleutheropolis);  Keilah, 
located  by  the  Onomasticon  seven  Roman  miles  east 
of  Eleutheropolis  on  the  Wadi  al-Sur  (but  this  is 
in  the  highland,  not  in  the  Shephelah);  Achzib, 
placed  by  the  same  authority  near  Eleutheropolis 
and  possibly  the  modem  Ain  el-Kazba;  and  Mar- 
esha,  located  two  Roman  miles  from  Eleutheropolis, 
possibly  at  Merash.  On  the  fourth  group,  includ- 
ing Ekron,  Ashdod,  and  Gaza,  see  Phiustinbs. 

The  towns  of  the  hill  country  of  Judah  are  in  the 
Hebrew  text  (verses  48-60)  divided  into  five  groups, 
to  which  the  Septuagint  adds  a  sixth.  The  first 
group  of  eleven  cities  lay  south  from  Hebron,  south- 
east of  Jibrin.  Shamir  b  placed  by  Gu^rin  at 
Somara  southwest  of  Hebron.  The 
mS*      Onomasticon  locates  Jattir  twenty  Ro- 

OonxLtrv.  '^'^^  miles  from  Eleutheropolis,  the 
modem  Attir;  Socoh  is  Shuwaika 
north  of  Attir;  Debir  (Kirjath-sannah  or  Kirjath- 
sepher)  was  a  royal  Canaanitic  city  of  some  import- 
ance, possibly  the  modem  al-Dahariya;  Anab  is 
the  present  Anab,  about  three  miles  southwest  of 
Debir;  Eshtemoah  may  be  al-Samua  east  of  Shu- 
waika; Anim  is  put  by  the  Onomasticon  nine  Roman 
miles  south  of  Hebron.  The  second  group  of  nine 
cities  lay  north  of  the  first  group  and  includes 
Hebron  (verses  52-54).  Arab  appears  in  the  Septu- 
agint as  Airem,  but  its  location  is  doubtful;  Du- 
mah  is  represented  by  the  modem  al-Doma  north 
of  aJ-Dahariya,  and  is  placed  by  Eusebius  and 
Jerome  seventeen  Roman  miles  from  Eleutherop- 
olis; Beth-tappuah  is  the  elevated  village  Taffuh, 
six  miles  west  of  Hebron  in  a  wine-growing  country. 
It  was  in  early  times  a  fortress  and  was  fortified  in 
the  Maccabean  war  (I  Mace.  ix.  50).  The  Onomas- 
ticon makes  it  a  boimdary  city  between  Palestine 
and  Egypt. 

Hebron  was  regarded  as  of  considerable  antiq- 
uity, built  seven  years  earlier  than  Zoan  (Tanis)  in 
Egypt  (Num.  xiii.  22),  and  with  this  corresponds 
the  notable  part  Hebron  takes  in  the  narratives 
.   ^  .  concerning  the  patriarchs.    It  appears 

•  •  ^^'  as  a  city  of  the  Anakites,  who  were  of 
the  race  of  the  giants  (Num.  xiii.  33),  and  its  old 
name  was  Kirjath-arba,  "  fourfold  city,"  explained 
in  Jewish  legend  as  the  place  of  settlement  of  Abra- 
ham, Isaac,  Jacob,  and  Adam  or  Caleb.  P  in  sev- 
eral passages  locates  the  Hittites  there.  The  Idu- 
mean  inhabitants  of  the  time  of  Josephus  said  that 
the  city  was  older  than  Memphis  in  Egypt.    The 


Jndea 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


248 


ooncurrenoe  of  tradition  makes  it  possible  that 
Hebron  was  the  oldest  of  the  southern  cities  of 
Judah.  Its  situation  in  a  defensible  location  and 
in  a  comparatively  fruitful  region  makes  the  tra- 
dition of  its  age  still  more  probable,  and  to  this  is 
added  that  its  site  was  on  the  principal  roads  which 
traverse  the  region,  making  it  a  center  of  commerce 
also.  Hommel  would  connect  the  name  Hebron 
with  the  HaJbiri  of  the  Amama  Tablets  (q.v.)  as 
originally  Habiran^  i.e.,  town  of  the  Habiri.  Ac- 
cording to  Josh.  X.  36  it  was  conquered  by  Joshua 
when  at  the  head  of  all  the  people  after  the  cam- 
paign against  the  five  kings,  but  Judges  i.  10 
ascribes  its  conquest  to  the  tribe  of  Judah  alone. 
It  was  the  home  of  the  Galebites,  and  the  narrative 
in  Josh.  XV.  13-19  attributes  to  Joshua  the  gift  of 
the  region  to  them.  The  later  history  of  Hebron 
is  little  known.  It  became  the  home  of  David  and 
his  company,  where  he  was  sought  by  the  Judah- 
ites,  and  was  his  capital  until  the  capture  of  Jeru- 
salem, after  which  it  lost  its  importance.  The 
rebellion  of  Absalom  began  there,  Rehoboam  forti- 
fied it,  in  the  time  of  the  exile  the  Edomites  re- 
duced it  and  held  possession  of  it  till  Judas  Macca- 
beus took  it  in  164  B.C.  The  priest  code  made  it 
one  of  the  cities  of  refuge  and  the  Chronicler  re- 
gards it  as  Jewish  at  the  time  of  Zerubbabel.  The 
place  on  the  site  now  identified  as  that  of  Hebron 
is  called  al-Halil  or  Halil  al-Rahman,  ''  Friend  of 
the  Merciful,"  in  memory  of  Abraham,  whose  tomb 
is  still  pointed  out  in  the  neighborhood.  Accord- 
ing to  Gen.  xxiii.  9  sqq.,  the  tomb  was  in  a  cave 
in  Machpelah  "  before  Mamre,"  and  Mamre  is  iden- 
tified with  Hebron  in  Gen.  xxiii.  19;  consequently 
the  cave  was  to  the  east  of  the  city.  But  this  does 
not  correspond  with  the  present  situation,  since 
the  greater  part  of  the  city  is  to  the  east  of  the 
tomb.  But  there  are  clear  evidences  that  a  hill 
to  the  west  of  the  present  city  was  in  early  times 
thickly  populated,  and  that  would  correspond  with 
the  old  Mamre.  The  tomb  is  said  to  have  received 
the  bodies  of  Sarah,  Abraham,  Isaac,  Rebecca,  Leah 
and  Jacob.  Josephus  speaks  of  a  monument  of  the 
Abrahamic  family  in  Hebron,  of  marble  and  beau- 
tifully worked,  while  the  tomb  was  hewn  out  of 
the  rock — a  description  which  agrees  well  with  the 
Genesis  account  of  the  cave.  The  Pilgrim  of  Bor- 
deaux (c.  333  A.D.)  mentions  a  monument  there, 
Antoninus  Martyr  (570  a.d.)  notes  a  basilica  with 
a  court  in  the  middle,  which  in  the  seventh  century 
passed  into  the  possession  of  the  Mohammedans, 
the  haram  of  the  present  city,  the  lower  walls  of 
which  are  old  and  built  of  large  stones.  The  en- 
trance is  on  the  east,  and  between  the  inner  and 
outer  walls  are  two  octagonal  chapels  in  which 
stand  the  cenotaphs  of  Abraham  and  Sarah.  The 
mosque  itself  measures  some  ninety  feet  by  sixty- 
eight,  and  is  divided  into  three  aisles  with  nine 
vaults,  the  middle  one  containing  the  monument 
of  Isaac  and  Rebecca.  The  cave  in  which  were  the 
graves  of  the  patriarchs  is  asserted  to  be  under  the 
mosque,  and  it  is  regarded  as  double  in  form  and 
has  two  entrances.  The  northern  part  of  the 
haram  area  contains  a  nmnber  of  modem  grave 
monuments,  and  one  of  them  contains  the  ceno- 
taph of  Jacob  and  Leah.     What  is  called  the  tomb 


of  Joseph  is  in  an  addition  built  against  the  encir- 
cling wall  at  some  time  later  than  the  crusadet^. 
The  description  of  the  interior  is  gathered  from  the 
observations  of  notables  to  whom  the  privil^e  of 
entrance  has  in  recent  years  been  granted  through 
the  special  favor  of  the  sultan,  since  adnuasion  to 
"  unbelievers  "  is  refused  by  the  fanatical  Moslems 
of  Hebron.    This  favor  was  granted  to  the  Prince 
of  Wales  (1862),  the  Maiquis  of  Bute  (1866),  the 
Crown  Prince  of  Prussia  (1869),  and  Prince  Albert 
Victor  and  Prince  (5eorge  of  Wales  (1882).     The 
report  based  on  examination  next  preceding  that 
of  these  later  observations  was  made  by  monks  of 
the  Latin  Church  in  1119  a.d.,  and  stated  that  there 
were  chambers  under  the  mosque.    The  oldest  part 
of  the  entire  structure  is  the  splendid  encircling 
wall,  and  De  Voga^  remarks  upon  the  resemblance 
of  the  stones  which  compose  it  to  those  of  the  south 
wall  of  the  haram  in  Jerusalem,  rightly  attributed 
to  Herod  the  Great;  the  Pilgrim  of  Bordeaux  knew 
such  a  wall,  though  Josephus  says  nothing  about 
it.    Some  of  the  capitals  of  the  columns  have  a 
Byzantine  character  and  the  inclusion  of  old  parts 
in  what  is  evidently  more  modem  agrees  with  the 
statement  of  Samuel  bar  Simson  (c.  1210  a.d.)  to 
the  effect  that  the  sanctuary  at  Hebron  was  built 
600  years  before  his  time.    The  present  Hebron, 
divided  into  seven  quarters,  has  a  population  of 
some  19,000,  of  whom  1,500  are  Jews  having  three 
synagogues,  and  the  rest  Moslems  who  display  a 
specially  fanatical  spirit  against  all  foreigners.  The 
inunediate  region  is  fruitful,  and  some  industries 
and  considerable  conmierce  are  conducted  there. 

In  connection  with  the  Mamre  of  Abraham  are 
mentioned  oaks  or  terebinths  where  the  patriarch 
built  an  altar  (Gen.  xiii.  18);  if  Mamre  is  a  location 
opposite  the  tombs  of  the  patriarchs  (Gen.  xxiii.  19, 
XXXV.  27),  there  is  a  connection  with  a  holy  place. 
Gen.  xiv.  13  speaks  of  Mamre  as  a  man,  an  Amorite 
^  and  brother  of  Eshcol  and  Aner.    Esh- 

.  mamre.  ^  .^  mentioned  as  a  place  (Num.  xiii. 
23  and  elsewhere),  possibly  the  modem  Iskahal  six 
miles  northwest  of  Hebron.    This  representation 
in  Gen.  xiv.  is  now  regarded  as  that  of  a  later  and 
special  source,  and  is  taken  as  less  reliable  thao 
those  which  make  these  names  apply  to  places  and 
not  individuals,  especially  as  Aner  is  identified  with 
the  hill  Na'ir  in  West  Hebron  and  Mamre  with 
Nimra  in  the  northern  part  of  the  city.    Yet  it 
must  be  said  that  these  identifications  are  unoei^ 
tain  and  do  not  fit  the  data  of  the  Old  Testament. 
The  Septuagint  of  Gen.  xiii.  18  uses  the  singular 
in  speaking  of  the  oak,  and  this  agrees  with  Jose- 
phus, Avd.  I.,  X.  4,  though  the  latter  suggests  the 
weaving  of  a  myth  about  the  place,  and  in  Joaephiu, 
War,  IV.,  ix.  7,  mention  is  made  of  a  laige  tere- 
binth as  old  as  the  world  situated  six  stadia  from 
Hebron.     Echoes  of  this  sacred  tree  with  its  sanc- 
tuary come  from  the  times  of  Hadrian  and  of  Con- 
stantine;    possibly  the  tree  was  destroyed  under 
the  latter  emperor,  as  Jerome  says  that  it  was  in 
existence  while  he  was  still  a  youth.     A  place  which 
corresponds  well  is  mentioned  in  itineraries,  and 
this  agrees  with  the  present  Ramat  al-Halil  ("  ^ 
mah  of  Abraham")  two  miles  north  of  Hebron 
east  of  the  road  to  Jerusalem,  where  ruins  eogg^ 


d'lQ 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Judaa 


an  old  sanctuary.  Farther  to  the  east  are  the  re- 
mains of  a  large  church,  possibly  those  of  the  basil- 
ica built  by  Constantine.  Traces  of  recollection  of 
the  tree  in  this  locality  were  found  as  late  as  1856. 
Since  the  thirteenth  century  there  have  been  traces 
of  a  tradition  of  an  Abraham's  oak  to  the  south, 
on  a  site  possessed  by  the  Russians.  The  differ- 
encses  in  the  traditions  and  locations  assigned 
may  be  due  to  the  fact  that  a  grove  or  groves 
existed  in  the  earlier  times,  which  dwindled  to  a 
single  tree  perhaps  as  early  as  the  time  of  the 
Septuagint. 

The  third  group  of  cities  of  the  hill  country  in- 
cludes ten  cities  (Septuagint,  nine),  located  east  of 
the  second  and  north  of  the  first  group.  Maon,  the 
modem  Ma'in,  appears  as  the  home  of  the  Calebite 
Nabal  (I  Sam.  xzv.  2),  and  on  the  site 
&t?***S  ***  remains  of  waUs,  caves,  and  cis- 
^3u*i^.  *®™"-  '^®  "wilderness  of  Maon" 
(I  Sam.  xxiii.  24)  was  probably  the 
region  to  the  southeast.  Carmel,  a  possession  of 
Nabal,  is  the  modem  al-Karmal,  about  seven  miles 
south  of  Hebron.  Ziph  (I  Chron.  u.  42;  I  Sam. 
xxiii.  19)  corresponds  with  the  present  Tell  Zif 
southeast  of  Hebron,  while  Josh.  zv.  24  refers  to  an- 
other place  in  the  Negeb.  Juttah  (Josh.  xxi.  16) 
retains  its  name  and  lies  south  of  Hebron,  a  large 
village  whose  inhabitants  possess  great  herds  of 
sheep.  Jesreel  is  treated  in  a  special  article.  Of 
the  Gibea  of  this  region  no  traces  remain,  though 
the  Orumuutican  names  it.  The  fourth  group  (Josh. 
XV.  58-50)  includes  six  cities  situated  north  of  Heb- 
ron. Halhul  retains  its  old  name,  an  important 
village  five  and  a  half  miles  distant  from  Hebron. 
Betb-sur  is  regarded  (I  Chron.  ii.  45)  as  Calebite, 
and  in  Neh.  iii.  16  as  a  double  district.  It  was  an 
important  fortress  in  the  Biaccabean  wars,  lying  a 
little  west  of  the  road  to  Jerusalem,  near  a  good 
spring  where  ruins  attest  the  situation.  Gedor,  the 
modem  Jedur,  north  of  Beth-zur,  is  mentioned  in 

I  Chron.  xii.  7  and  after  the  exile  was  inhabited  by 
Galebites.  Beth-anoth  (probably  meaning  ''  sanc- 
tuary of  the  goddess  Anath  ")  is  possibly  the  mod- 
em Bat  Ainun,  southeast  of  Halhul,  where  ruins 
still  exist.  The  other  places  are  unidentified.  The 
fifth  group  is  known  only  through  the  text  of  the 
Septuagint,  and  includes  eleven  places  of  which 
eight  can  be  placed.    Tekoa  appears  in  Amos  i.  1; 

II  Sam.  xiv.  2  sqq.,  xxiii.  26,  and  was  often  men- 
tioned in  the  regal  and  post-exilic  periods.  The 
present  Tekua,  nearly  ten  miles  south  of  Jerusa- 
lem, contains  ruins  of  a  Christian  church  and  cis- 
terns and  tombs.  Ephrathah  is  in  the  Greek  text 
equated  with  Bethlehem  (cf.  Gen.  xxxv.  19),  though 
there  is  doubt  whether  Ephrathah  was  not  the  name 
of  a  district.  Peor,  in  the  neighborhood  of  Bethle- 
hem, corresponds  with  the  present  Faghur.  Etam 
appears  in  I  Chron.  iv.  3  and  II  Chron.  xi.  6,  and 
corresponds  with  the  modem  'Ain  Atan.  Kulon 
may  be  the  present  Kaluniyeh,  northwest  of  Jerusa- 
lem, on  the  road  to  Jaffa.  Sores  may  be  the  present 
Saris,  west  of  Jerusalem,  south  of  the  same  road. 
Karem  is  possibly  'Ain  Karim,  four  and  a  half  miles 
west  of  Jerusalem.  Bether  is  regarded  as  the  tme 
name  for  the  Gibeon  of  Neh.  vii.  25,  the  modem 
Bittir,  six  miles  southwest  of  Jerusalem.    The  sixth 


group  (Josh.  XV.  60)  includes  only  two  cities,  Kir- 
jath-baal  (Kirjath-jearim)  and  Kabbah,  clearly  west 
of  Jerusalem.  The  name  of  the  first  varies  in  dif- 
erent  passages.  It  was  one  of  the  cities  of  the 
Gibeonites,  the  ark  remained  there  a  long  time,  it 
was  the  home  of  the  prophet  Uriah,  and  after  the 
exile  was  reckoned  among  the  possessions  of  the  Jew- 
ish community.  While  its  direction  from  various 
places  is  in  different  passages  given  with  apparent 
exactness  upon  the  boundary  between  Judah  and 
Benjamin,  and  according  to  the  Ononuulicon  some 
nine  or  ten  Roman  miles  from  Jerusalem  along  the 
old  road  to  Diospolis  (Lydda),  the  exact  location  is 
still  disputed.  The  last  portion  of  the  Judaic  ter- 
ritory (Josh.  XV.  61-62)  takes  in  ''  the  wildemess," 
i.e.,  the  eastern  slope  of  the  hills  toward  the  Dead 
Sea.  The  Hebrew  text  mentions  six  cities,  the  Sep- 
tuagint seven  with  very  different  names.  Two  of 
these  are  identified.  The  City  of  Salt  lay  probably 
in  the  Valley  of  Salt  (II  Sam.  viii.  13),  therefore  to 
the  south  corresponding  to  Tell  al-Milh,  about  fif- 
teen miles  east  of  Beersheba.  En-gedi  lay  on  the 
Dead  Sea  (Ezek.  xlvii.  10),  and,  according  to  the 
OnamasUcon,  was  a  large  village.  The  name  coiv 
responds  with  that  of  the  present  Ain  Jidi  on  a 
terrace  above  the  sea,  near  which  are  the  remains 
of  an  old  wall.  It  is  identified  with  Hazazon-tamar 
in  II  Chron.  xx.  2,  and  was  one  of  the  places  of 
refuge  of  David  (I  Sam.  xxiv.  1). 

This  list  of  places  belonging  to  Judah  includes 
ninety-four  "  cities,"  apart  from  those  in  the  Ne- 
geb, but  can  not  be  supposed  to  be  exhaustive. 
Thus  the  Adoraim  of  II  Chron.  xi.  9  does  not  ap- 
pear, though  it  receives  frequent  mention  in  the 
later  records.  It  is  the  modem  Dura, 
Z'  ^^.S^*  about  six  miles  southwest  of  Hebron. 
"^!r«  Another  is  the  Cozeba  of  I  Chron.  iv. 
22.  Later  in  the  history  other  cities 
appear,  like  the  Herodia  of  Herod  the 
Great,  sixty  stadia  south  of  Jerusalem,  with  its 
splendid  buildings  and  its  Herodium  or  tower.  Im- 
mediately above  the  coast  of  the  Dead  Sea  and  not 
quite  ten  miles  south  of  En-gedi  was  the  fortress 
Masada,  of  great  importance  in  Herodian  times  and 
in  the  first  century,  the  site  of  which  is  placed  at 
al-Sabba,  the  ruins  of  which  indicate  partly  He- 
rodian origins  and  partly  Roman.  The  northem 
part  of  the  wildemess  of  Judea  was  from  the  fourth 
till  the  seventh  century  inhabited  by  thousands  of 
recluses  and  monks,  but  to-day  has  only  the  single 
monastery  of  Mar  Saba  (founded  by  Sabas  c.  478 
A.D.),  where  are  some  fifty  Greek  monks.  The 
names  of  fifty  or  sixty  establishments  for  recluses 
or  ascetics  have  been  preserved  which  were  located 
between  the  Dead  Sca  and  the  watershed  to  the 
west.  On  the  west  slope  of  the  hill  country  the  city 
of  Eleutheropolis,  very  often  mentioned  in  the  Ono- 
maMicon,  becomes  known  under  its  earlier  name  of 
Bethgubrin,  known  still  as  Bet-Jibrin.  This  city 
became  somewhat  celebrated  under  Christian  rule, 
and  the  names  of  many  of  its  bishops  are  on  rec- 
ord. Its  position  was  at  the  crossing  of  several 
roads  between  Gaza  and  Jerusalem,  west  of  Heb- 
ron, near  the  ancient  Marasha.  After  the  Arabian 
conquest  it  lost  its  significance,  though  it  is  men- 
tioned several  times  afterward. 


i:«ater 
Becords. 


Jndaa 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


250 


9.  The  Territory  of  Benjamin :  The  port  of 
Judea  which  belonged  to  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  is 
described  in  Josh,  zviii.  11  sqq.  Its  southern 
boundary  coincided  with  the  northern  boundary  of 
Judah  from  the  Jordan  in  the  east  to  Kirjath- 
jearim  in  the  west,  its  western  boundary  ran  from 
^^  Eiijath-jearim  to  Beth-horon,  its 
^TrSnr?       northern  boundary  from  Beth-horon 

^^^^    to  the  Jordan  by  Bethel  and  Jericho, 

Jevloho.  vlule  the  Jordan  limited  it  on  the  east, 
thus  including  a  territory  not  quite 
twelve  miles  by  thirty-one.  The  region  about 
Jericho  was  very  fruitful,  the  eastern  slope  unpro- 
ductive, the  upland  poor  in  water  and  infertile  ex- 
cept the  strip  between  Bethel  and  Beth-horon. 
From  the  west  and  the  north  the  country  is  not 
easOy  reached,  and  naturally  its  population  was 
regarded  as  warlike  and  inclined  to  brigandage 
(Gen.  xliz.  27).  The  account  in  Josh,  xviii.  em- 
ploys earlier  sources,  but,  when  considered  his- 
torically, raises  many  difficulties,  especially  in  con- 
nection with  political  relations.  The  boundary 
between  the  two  kingdoms  fluctuated  with  the  foi^ 
tunes  of  the  kingdoms  themselves;  probably  the 
picture  in  Joshua  registers  the  conditions  after 
the  time  when  the  northern  kingdom  fell.  Jerusa- 
lem seems  to  have  been  connected  with  the  terri- 
tory of  Benjamin,  not  that  of  Judah.  The  cities 
as  described  in  the  Joshua  passage  fall  into  two 
groups,  one  to  the  east  of  twelve  cities  (verses  21- 
24)  and  one  to  the  west  of  fourteen  (verses  25-28). 
The  chief  city  of  the  first  group  is  Jericho,  called 
also  in  some  passages  "  the  city  of  palm-trees  " 
(Deut.  xxziv.  3).  The  book  of  Joshua  tells  of  the 
miraculous  capture  of  the  city  and  of  its  complete 
destruction  by  Joshua,  as  well  as  of  his  impreca- 
tion upon  the  man  that  should  rebuild  it.  This 
last  item  does  not  agree  with  statements  in  Judges 
iii.  13;  II  Sam.  x.  5;  but  I  Kings  xvi.  34  tells  of 
its  rebuilding  and  the  realisation  of  the  curse  by 
Hiel.  A  company  of  prophets  made  it  their  home 
in  the  time  of  Elijah  and  Elisha.  It  was  inhabited 
after  the  return  (Neh.  iii.  2),  Bacchides  fortified  it 
against  Jonathan  (I  Mace.  ix.  50),  and  in  a  fortress 
near  by  Simon  the  Maocabee  was  treacherously 
murdered.  Herod  secured  possession  of  the  city 
and  beautified  it,  placing  there  one  of  his  palaces, 
though  his  buildings  seem  to  have  been  south  of 
the  ancient  city  site.  In  the  time  of  Josephus  the 
region  was  a  very  garden  for  fertility,  watered  as  it 
was  by  the  streams  of  the  wady  which  debouched 
upon  its  plain.  It  was  Herod's  city  at  which  Jesus 
rested  on  his  last  journey  to  Jerusalem  (Matt.  xx. 
29),  and  the  Onoinaslicon  implies  that  it  was  des- 
troyed at  the  fall  of  Jerusalem.  A  new  city  arose 
near  by,  where  Justinian  built  a  church,  and  this 
was  destroyed  either  by  the  Persians  or  the  Arabs. 
The  Crusaders  erected  a  city  which  soon  fell  into 
disrepair.  In  recent  times  a  new  era  has  come  to 
it.  The  Jordan  valley  from  the  Sea  of  Tiberias  to 
the  Dead  Sea  belongs  to  the  sultan  personally,  and 
one  of  his  representatives  resides  at  Jericho.  The 
Russians  have  a  church  and  a  hospice  there. 

A  second  city  in  this  group  was  Beth-hoglah,  on 
the  boundary  line,  three  Roman  miles  from  Jericho 
and  two  from  the  Jordan,  according  to  the  OnomoB- 


ticon,  Betharaba  lay  on  the  plain  of  the  Jordan, 
but  its  site  is  not  recovered.  Zemaraim  is  prob- 
ably to  be  sought  on  the  highland  south  of  Bethel 
(II   Chron.   xiii.   4).     Bethel   is   the   well-known 

Betin,   and   the   outlook   corresponds 

2.  The     entirely  with  the  requirements  of  Gen. 

'"*  ^   xii.  8,  xiii.  3-10,  xxviii.  18,  22,  though 

BenJamite  *^  ^^^  ^^  ^^  name  was  necessarily 

Oltiea.      &P&i^  from  the  sanctuary  situated  there 

from  which  the  city  to<^  its  name. 
It  appears  as  on  the  boundary  between  Joseph  and 
Judah,  and  near  it  was  the  oak  of  weeping  by 
the  grave  of  Deborah  (Gen.  xxxv.  8).  This  may 
have  been  one  of  the  oldest  Yahweh  sanctuaries  in 
the  highland,  and  it  was  selected  by  Jeroboam  as 
one  of  the  two  great  sacred  places  of  his  realm. 
There  or  near  by  a  company  of  the  prophets  had 
its  settlement  (II  Kings  ii.  3  sqq.),  and  the  priests 
sent  by  the  Assyrians  to  teach  the  people  religion 
dwelt  there  (II  Kings  xvii.  24  sqq.);  Josiah  des- 
troyed the  sanctuary  (II  Kings  xxiii.  15),  and  Bac- 
chides fortified  the  place  in  the  Maccabean  wars. 
North  of  it  is  a  singular  group  of  stones  which  is 
recognized  by  some  scholars  as  a  cromlech  (Hebr. 
QUgaJ).  Awim  is  sometimes  identified  with  Ai, 
but  without  certainty.  Para  is  identified  with  Fara, 
a  little  over  nine  miles  west  of  Jericho  in  Wadi  Fara. 
Ophra,  probably  the  same  as  the  place  mentioned 
I  Sam.  xiii.  17,  the  Ephron  of  II  Chron.  xiii.  19, 
and  the  Ephraim  of  II  Sam.  xiii.  23,  is  mentioned  in 
John  xi.  54  and  Josephus,  War^  IV.,  ix.  9.  Geba  is 
the  Gibeah  of  I  Sam.  xiii.  16,  the  present  Jeba,  to 
be  distingmshed  from  the  Gibeath  of  Josh,  xviii.  28. 
The  second  group  of  Benjamite  cities  includes, 
according  to  the  Hebrew,  fourteen  places,  accord- 
ing to  the  Septuagint,  thirteen  (not  all  the  same 
as  the  Hebrew).  Gibeon  comes  very  often  into 
notice  in  the  history  of  the  people.  It  formed  one 
of  a  league  of  cities  at  the  time  of  the  conquest, 

and  its  inhabitants  are  called  Hivites 
*•  ™J  (Josh.  ix.  7).  It  had  a  notable  sanc- 
Qy^^         tuary  (I  Kings  iii.  4  sqq.),  became  one 

of  the  priestly  cities,  and  by  indications 
from  the  OnomoBticon  is  placed  at  al-Jib  about  five 
and  a  half  miles  north  of  Jerusalem,  occupying  the 
northern  peak  of  a  twin  hill.  Ramah  lay  north  of 
Jerusalem  and  Gibeath,  on  the  road  that  leads 
northward,  a  border  town  between  Israel  and 
Judah  in  the  time  of  Asa.  The  tomb  of  Rachel 
seems  to  have  been  in  the  vicinity  (Jer.  xxxi.  15). 
The  Onomasticon  places  it  six  Roman  miles  north 
of  Jerusalem,  opposite  Bethel,  the  modem  al-Ram, 
the  site  of  old  ruins.  Beeroth  ("  wells  ")  was  one 
of  the  places  which  joined  in  the  league  with  Gibeon 
(Josh.  ix.  17),  but  was  evacuated  before  the  Ben- 
jamit:3  (II  Sam.  iv.  3).  The  Onomatiicon  locates 
it  sevca  Roman  miles  from  Jerusalem  on  the  road 
to  Nicopolis  which  leads  from  Jerusalem  by  Gibeon 
and  Beth-horon  to  the  western  plain.  This  suits  bet- 
ter than  the  location  of  al-Bira,  eleven  Roman  miles 
north  of  Jerusalem  near  Bethel.  Mizpeh  was  forti- 
fied by  Asa  against  the  northern  kingdom,  and  was 
the  residence  of  Gedaliah  after  586  b.c.  (I  Kings 
XV.  22;  II  Kings  xxv.  23).  It  is  frequently  men- 
tioned in  both  the  earlier  and  the  later  annals  of 
the  people,  and  lay  on  the  road  from  Jerusalem  to 


201 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDU 


JudM 


Sbecbem,  and,  according  to  the  OnomasHcon,  near 
Kirjath-jearim.  Robinson  places  it  at  the  lofty 
Xabi  Samwil,  two  miles  south  of  Gibeon,  where  is 
a  village  and  a  mosque  said  to  contain  the  tomb 
of  Samuel.  In  Byzantine  times  this  was  the  site 
assigned  to  Rama  or  Ramathaim,  and  the  Crusaders 
built  here  a  church  of  St.  Samuel,  changed  into  a 
raoeque  by  the  Mohammedans.  Chephirah  is  the 
modem  Kafira,  north  of  Kirjath-jearim.  Mozah 
is  placed  by  the  Talmud  at  the  modem  Kaloniye, 
near  which  is  a  Bet  Mizza,  which,  however,  does 
not  fit  the  situation.  Zelah  is  given  (II  Sam.  xxi. 
14)  as  the  place  of  Saul's  burial,  but  is  imidentified. 
The  Gibeath  of  Josh,  xviii.  28  is  not  to  be  confused 
with  the  Geba  of  verse  24,  but  is  to  be  placed  near 
Ramah  (ut  sup.).  The  Kirjath  of  Josh,  xviii.  28 
is  probably  shortened  from  Kirjathjearim. 

This  list  does  not  include  all  the  cities  which  be- 
longed to  Benjamin.  In  the  plain  of  the  Jordan 
lay  the  sanctuary  of  Gilgal,  often  mentioned  in 
both  early  and  late  annals.  The  Hebrew  gener- 
ally uses  the  article  with  the  word,  hence  it  is  not 
a  proper  name,  but  signifies  merely  a  **  circle  "  (of 
stones).  It  was  a  locus  of  significant  historical 
events  at  the  conquest  (Josh,  iv.-v.),  and,  accord- 
ing to  the  Onomasticon,  lay  two  Roman  miles  from 
Jericho,  between  it  and  the  Jordan. 

iiJ^^t  '^^  name  lingers  in  the  vicinity  as 
Vote.  "^^^  ^'  Jiljuliye.  Dok  (Docus),  a 
fortress  of  Maccabean  times  (I  Mace, 
xvi.  15)  seems  to  be  Ain  Duk  at  the  northeast  foot 
of  Jebel  Karantal,  preserved  also  in  the  accounts  of 
the  early  Christian  monasteries  and  as  a  Templar's 
fortress.  I  Sam.  xiii.-xiv.  brings  into  prominence  a 
Michmash  which  reappears  in  post-exilic  times 
(Ezra  ii.  27;  I  Mace.  ix.  73);  the  name  is  preserved 
in  the  present  Mahmas.  North  of  this  is  the  mod- 
em Makrun,  which  recalls  the  Migron  of  Isa.  x.  28. 
Near  the  large  village  of  Der  Diwan  is  the  site  of 
Ai  (Josh,  vii.-viii.),  which  reappears  in  history  as 
Aiath  or  Ai  (Isa.  x.  28;  Ezra  ii.  28);  the  exact 
location  is  disputed.  Northeast  of  Der  Diwan  is 
a  rocky  height  called  Rammon,  which  recalls  the 
old  Rimmon  (Judges  xx.  45).  South  of  Jeba  (ut 
sup.)  is  a  village,  Hizma,  the  name  of  which  re- 
minds of  Azmaveth  (Ezra  ii.  24;  Neh.  xii.  29,  cf. 
vii.  28,  Beth-azmaveth).  Anata,  an  hour  north- 
east of  Jerusalem,  suggests  Anathoth  (Jer.  i.  1). 
Other  place-names  are  Laishah  (Isa.  x.  30),  Almon 
(Josh.  xxi.  18),  and  Bahurim  (II  Sam.  xvi.  5). 
Two  places  on  the  Mount  of  Olives  are  often  men- 
tioned in  the  history  of  Jesus.  Bethany  was  two 
and  a  half  miles  from  Jerusalem,  on  the  road  to 
Jericho,  on  the  eastern  slope  of  the  mountain,  the 
modem  al-Azariya  ("  Plao^  of  Lazarus  "),  where 
the  grave  of  Lazarus  and  the  house  of  Martha  and 
Mary  are  still  shown.  Not  far  from  Bethany  lay 
Bethphage  (Matt.  xxi.  1),  the  site  of  which  was 
shown  in  the  time  of  the  Crusades  between  Beth- 
any and  the  simimit  of  the  mountain.  To  the  west 
or  northwest  must  have  lain  Emmaus,  the  scene  of 
the  events  told  in  Luke  xxi  v.  13  sqq.,  which  the 
tcxtits  receptus  places  sixty  furlongs  from  Jerusalem 
but  Codex  Sinaiticua  160  furlongs.  Josephus  (War, 
VTI.,  vi.  6)  mentions  a  place  of  the  name  thirty 
furlongs  from  the  city,  while  the  Ousaders  in  1099 


knew  of  a  Castle  of  Emmaus  which  is  identified 
with  the  modem  al-Kubaba,  about  sixty-three  fuiv 
longs  from  Jerusalem.  Hitzig  and  Sepp  located 
Enmiaus  at  Kaluniyeh,  called  in  the  Talmud  Mosa, 
thirty-four  furlongs  from  the  capital.  Somewhere 
within  the  territory  of  Benjamin  shotdd  be  placed 
the  grave  of  Rachel.  Gen.  xxxv.  16,  21  reports 
that  Rachel  died  between  Bethel  and  the  tower  of 
Eder  (Jerusalem)  on  the  road  to  Bethel,  north  of 
Jerusalem,  with  which  agrees  Jer.  xxxi.  15.  On 
the  other  hand,  Gen.  xxxv.  19,  xlviii.  7  connect  the 
grave  with  Ephrath  or  Bethlehem,  where  the  tomb 
is  still  shown.  But  Schick  has  shown  that  the 
Mohammedan  sanctuary  Kubbat  Abd  al-Aziz,  north- 
west of  Jersualem,  is  also  called  Kubbat  Rahil  and 
corresponds  better  with  the  earlier  data. 

8.  The  Jndean  Territory  of  Dan  (Josh.  xix.  40- 
46):  Though  the  boundaries  are  not  given,  it  Lb 
known  that  the  eastem  boundary  coincided  with 
the  westem  boundary  of  Benjamin,  its  southem 
border  with  the  westem  part  of  the  north  boundary 
of  Judah,  and  its  northem  limits  extended  to  the 
southem  boimdary  of  Ephraim  from  Beth-horon 
by  Gezer  to  the  sea,  reckoning  Joppa  as  part  of  the 
territory  of  Dan.  Judges  v.  17  places  Dan  on  the 
coast,  i.  34  states  that  the  Amorites  forced  them 
back,  and  chap,  xviii.  tells  of  a  migration  of  600 
men  to  near  the  sources  of  the  Jordan,  while  else- 
where places  are  assigned  to  Dan  which  some  other 
parts  of  Scripture  give  to  Judah  or  Ephraim.  This 
is  the  case  with  the  first  two  towns  on  the  list, 
Zorah  and  Eshtaol.  Ir-shemesh  is  the  same  as 
Beth-shemesh,  a  place  which  is  often  named  in  the 
history,  is  put  by  the  Onomcuticon  east  of  the  tenth 
milestone  on  the  road  to  Eleutheropolis,  and  agrees 
with  the  modem  iminhabited  Ain  Shams,  where 
ruins  are  still  to  be  found,  on  the  south  side  of  the 
Wadi  al-Surar.  Shaalabin  (Shaalbim,  Judges  i. 
35)  has  been  located,  probably  wrongly,  at  Selbit, 
southwest  of  Beth-horon.  Aijalon  appears  in  the  his- 
tory often  as  a  fortress,  also  as  a  city  of  refuge  and 
Levitical  city,  and  as  belonging  either  to  Ephraim 
or  Benjamin.  The  OnomasUcon  locates  it  two  Ro- 
man miles  east  of  Enmiaus-Nicopolis,  the  mod- 
em Jalu  two  miles  east  of  Amwas.  The  plain  of 
Aijalon  lies  to  the  north  of  the  village.  Timnah  is 
probably  the  same  as  the  Tinmah  of  Josh.  xv.  10, 
west  of  Bethrshemesh,  and  in  the  history  is  con- 
nected with  the  Philistines  and  with  the  campaign 
of  Sennacherib  in  701  b.c.  Ekron  is  the  well- 
known  city  of  the  Philistines,  which  in  Josh.  xv. 
45  is  reckoned  to  Judah.  Eltekeh,  a  Levitical  city 
(Josh.  xxi.  23),  corresponds  to  the  Altaku,  where 
Sennacherib  overthrew  a  hostile  army,  but  its  site 
is  not  known.  Gibbethon,  also  a  Levitical  city,  is 
not  identified.  Jehud  is  located  at  al-Yehudiya, 
north  of  Lydda  and  east  of  Jaffa,  while  Bene-berak 
is  Ibn  Ibrak  near  Jaffa.  Westward  of  Jalu  is  the 
little  village  Amwas,  the  name  of  which  corresponds 
to  Enmiaus,  a  place  often  in  question  in  the  Mac- 
cabean wars,  situated  on  the  westem  edge  of  the 
highland,  known  as  Nicopolis  about  250,  often  men- 
tioned in  the  Onomasticon.  Gezer  (q.v.)  is  named 
Josh.  X.  33;  Judges  i.  29;  I  Kings  ix.  15-17,  and 
often  elsewhere,  is  called  one  of  the  border  cities 
of  Joseph,  and  appears  as  belonging  to  Ephraim, 


Judcwi 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


86a 


as  a  Levitieal  city,  of  importanoe  during  the  Da- 
vidio  and  Maccabean  wan,  and  is  located  by 
Clennont-Ganneau  four  miles  west  of  Amwas  at 
Tell  al-Jesar. 

4.  The  Jvdean  Territory  of  Bphralm:  The  most 
northern  part  of  Judea  as  already  defined  took  in 
a  part  of  the  territory  of  Ephraim,  the  rest  of  which 
was  reckoned  to  Samaria.  There  is  no  list  of  the 
places  in  this  region,  but  of  many  cities  there  is  in- 
cidental mention.  Joeephus  mentions  Phasaelis,  a 
town  in  the  Jordan  valley  built  by  Herod  in  honor 
of  his  brother  Phasael,  the  name  of  which  survives 
in  that  of  the  village  Fasail,  south  of  the  hill  Kam 
Sartaba.  The  fortress  Alezandrium  crowned  the 
summit  of  this  hill  and  was  of  importance  in  the 
war  of  Pompey.  Akrabatta  is  mentioned  by  Jo- 
eephus (War,  III.,  iii.  6)  and  in  the  OnamatUoon:  it 
is  the  modem  Akraba.  Janoah  of  Josh.  xvi.  6  cor- 
responds to  the  present  Janun,  north  of  Akraba. 
Borkaios,  mentioned  by  Josephus  (War,  III.,  iii. 
6)  as  on  the  boundary  between  Judea  and  Galilee, 
is  possibly  the  heap  of  ruins  at  Barkit,  in  Wadi  Ishar. 
To  the  southwest  of  this  is  al-Lubban,  correspond- 
ing to  the  Lebonah  of  Judges  xxi.  19.  Farther 
southeast  is  Sailun,  which  points  to  the  old  sanc- 
tuary of  Shiloh,  apparently  destroyed  in  the  Philis- 
tine war,  since  the  descendants  of  Eli  (II  Sam. 
xxL)  went  to  Nob;  yet  the  priestly  document  re- 
gards Shiloh  as  the  place  of  the  Tabernacle.  The 
Onomaitieon  locates  Shiloh  ten  Roman  miles  from 
Nei4X>lis:  it  was  north  of  Bethel  and  east  of  the 
road  to  Shechem.  To  the  west  of  the  road  and 
southwest  from  al-Lubban  lies  Jiljilya,  recalling 
another  of  the  places  called  in  the  history  Gilgal. 
Farther  to  the  south  lies  Ain  Sinya,  the  Jeshanah 
of  II  Chron.  ziii.  19,  and  near  by  is  Jifna,  which 
suggests  the  Gophna  of  Josephus,  War,  I.,  xi.  2. 
To  the  northwest  is  the  heap  of  ruins  called  Tibna, 
perhaps  the  Thamnatha  of  I  Mace.  iz.  50,  known 
also  from  the  Onomagtiam,  which  locates  there  the 
tomb  of  Joshua  (the  Timnath-heres  of  Judges  ii. 
9).  Not  far  to  the  north  of  this  is  Rima,  possibly 
the  Ramah  of  I  Sam.  xvi.  13,  the  Ramathaim  of 
I  Sam.  i.  1,  the  Ramathem  of  I  Mace.  xi.  34,  and 
the  Arimathea  of  Blark  xv.  43.  But  the  OnomasU- 
eon  locates  it  toward  the  modem  Rentis  (6  m.  w. 
of  Tibnah).  The  two  Beth-horons  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament (Josh.  xvi.  3,  6)  are  located  farther  to  the 
south  at  Bait  Ur  al-Fuka  and  Bait  Ur  al-TahU. 
The  upper  Beth-horon,  by  reason  of  its  command- 
ing the  road  from  JeruMlem  to  Oesarea  and  the 
coast,  was  of  high  importance  in  all  periods  and  is 
mentioned  prominently  in  the  accounts  of  the  wars 
from  the  time  of  Joshua  to  the  Roman  period.  At 
al-Midya,  on  the  plain  northwest  of  Beth-horon,  is 
ordinarily  located  the  home  of  the  Maccabees,  the 
Modin  of  I  Mace.  ii.  1,  xiii.  25,  with  its  seven 
pyramids  to  the  memory  of  the  members  of  that 
family. 

6.  Olttes  on  the  Western  Plain:  There  were  other 
places  in  the  plain  west  of  the  highland  which  in 
later  times  were  reckoned  to  Judah,  but  do  not  ap- 
pear in  the  lists  of  places  given  in  Joshua.  Indeed, 
the  assignment  of  the  pliuses  named  in  the  Joshua 
lists  is  not  entirely  concordant  with  that  of  other 
passages.    Doubtless  the  possession  of  these  places 


on  the  plain  was  often  contested  with  the  Philis- 
tines. So  was  it  with  Gimjso  (II  Chron.  xxviii. 
18),  the  modem  Jimzu  north  of  Geter.  TheHadid 
of  Esra  ii.  33  may  be  the  Aditha  of  the  Onomaati' 
con,  east  of  Diospolis,  the  present  al-Hadithe,  and 
perhaps  the  Adida  of  I  Mace.  xii.  38.  Lod,  men- 
tioned with  Hadid  in  the  Esra  passage,  is  the  Greek 
Lydda,  is  often  assigned  in  the  Old  Testament  to 
the  Benjamites,  was  ceded  with  its  outlying  re- 
gion to  Jonathan  the  Maccabee  by  Demetrius 
(I  Mace.  xi.  34),  and  was  an  object  of  strife  between 
the  Jews  and  the  Romans.  It  is  mentioned  in 
Acts  ix.  32  sqq.,  and  after  the  destmction  of  Jeru- 
salem became  tfaue  residence  of  Jewish  scholars,  for 
example,  of  Rabbi  Eliezer.  In  the  third  century 
it  took  the  name  of  Diospolis  and  became  there- 
after the  seat  of  a  bishopric.  The  legend  of  St. 
George  was  localised  here.  The  present  Ludd  is  a 
town  inhabited  by  Mohammedans  and  Greeks,  not 
far  from  the  road  from  Jerusalem  to  Jaffa.  Ono, 
also  mentioned  in  the  Esra  passage,  may  be  the 
modem  Kafr  Ana,  five  and  a  half  miles  northwest 
of  Ludd.  On  the  northem  boundary  of  the  later 
Judea  lay  Antipatris,  a  city  built  and  named  by 
Herod  in  honor  of  his  father:  it  is  mentioned  Acts 
xxiii.  31.  The  pilgrim  of  Bordeaux  locates  it  ten 
Roman  miles  north  of  Lydda,  the  Onamaaiieon  mx 
miles  south  of  GalguUs,  the  modem  Jiljuliya  in  the 
plain  northeast  of  Jaffa.  A  passsge  in  Joeephus 
would  suggest  Kalat  Ras  al-Ain  as  the  site.  Ten 
miles  north  of  this  is  Kafr  Saba,  recalling  the  Chsp 
bersaba  of  Josephus  (ArU.  XIII.,  xv.  1). 

6.  The  Blevea  Toparohies  of  Judea  Acoordinff  to 
Joeephus:  In  War,  III.,  iii.  5  Josephus  names  ss 
the  first  district  of  Judea  Jerusalem  with  its  vicin- 
ity. The  others  are  (2)  Gc^hna,  (3)  Akrabatta, 
(4)  Thaoma,  (5)  Lydda,  (6)  Enunaus,  (7)  Pella, 
(8)  Idumea,  (9)  Engedi,  (10)  Herodium,  and  (11) 
Jericho.  Pliny  (Hist,  naturalii,  V.,  xiv.  70)  names 
ten,  including  2-6  and  10-11  above,  and  gives  in 
addition  to  these  Jopica  (Jaffa),  Betholethephene, 
and  Orine.  The  last  includes  the  district  of  the 
capital.  Josephus  mentions  a  Betholethepha  (War, 
IV.,  viii.  1),  which  is  probably  the  present  Bait  Nat- 
tif  west  of  Bethlehem  on  the  edge  of  the  highland 
and  the  Netophah  of  Ezra  ii.  22  and  other  Old- 
Testament  passages.  Therefore  Fella  above  seems 
to  be  replaced  by  Betholethepha.  Pliny  was  in 
error  in  assigning  the  r^on  of  Joppa  to  Judea, 
since  it  was  independent.  For  the  coast  region 
which  abutted  on  Judean  territory  see  Phiubtines; 
and  Prbnicia,  Phenicianb.  (H.  Guthb.) 

Bibuoobaprt:  Ltteratura  on  the  history  is  gxTen  under 
Arab;  Isbabl,  Hibtobt  of;  to  which  add:  H.  Koaten, 
Htl  Hm-tUl  pan  Itrael,  Leyd«n.  1803;  H.  Willrieh.  Jwien 
uni  Orieekgn  vor  dmr  makkdbdxHhen  Brhebuno,  GAttingen, 
1805;  E.  Meyer.  Die  BnMekuno  de9  JimImiIimu.  Halie. 
1806.  For  the  geography  much  of  the  litetatuie  given 
under  Jenualem  is  available.  Of  peculiar  value  are  the 
works  of  Rfthricht.  Tobler.  O.  A.  Smith.  E.  Robinson, 
W.  M.  Thomson,  and  Raland,  as  well  as  the  publioatioiu 
of  the  Palestine  PUgrims'  Text  Society,  described  in  vol. 
i.,  p.  13  of  this  work,  and  the  publications  of  the  BooiM 
de  I'orient  Latin,  ed.  T.  Tobler  and  A.  Ifolinier,  Qeneva. 
1877-80.  The  following  publications  of  the  PEF  are  of 
importance:  The  Survey  ef  WuUm  PaleeHne:  Mtmmn, 
vols.  ii.-iU..  1882-^:  Tkirtv  Yean*  Work,  1805;  C.  Glef^ 
mont-Qanneau.  Arehaohgieal  Reeearchee,  1806-00;  Q. 
Armstrong.  Namee  and  Plaeee  in  Oie  Old  and  New  Tettor 


a58 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Judcwi 


metUB  and  ApoarypKa;  the  QuarUrly  StatemmUt:  and,  of 
their  niftiM,  the  Great  Map  c/  WuUm  PaUttine,  the  Photo- 
ReH^  Map  of  PaUtUnt,  and  the  Raited  Map  of  PaleeHne. 
Indispensable  are:  OnomaeHca  eaera^  ed.  P.  de  Lagarde. 
Gottingen,  1887;  A.  Neubauer,  La  Oiographie  du  Tabnud, 
Pairie,  1868:  V.  Gu^rin.  DeacripHon  de  la  PaUetine,  i.-ii., 
P^aria,  1868-75.  A  very  convenient  cheek-Iiet  of  plaoe- 
namee  is  giTen  in  P.  Thomsen,  Loea  eancta.  VerMeiehnie 
d€r  im  1.-6.  Jahrhundert  enoOhrUen  Orteduiften  PaldatinoMt 
▼ol.  i,  Halle,  1907;  cf .  idem,  Svetematiaohe  Bibliographxe 
der  PaUUtina-IAterahir,  Leipsic,  1908.  A  oonriderable  lit- 
erature of  travel  may  be  found  in  J.  F.  Huret,  Literature  of 
Thmdogy,  pp.  119-130.  New  York,  1896.  Consult  further: 
C.  Ritter,  Comparative  Oeoffraphy  ofPaUeHne  and  ifte  8inai~ 
tie  PentfMula.  iiL.  174-350.  Edinburgh,  1866;  G.  Ebersand 
H.  Guthe,  PaUUHna  in  Bitd  und  Wort,  2  vols..  Stuttgart. 
1881-83;  F.  Buhl,  Oeoffraphie  dee  alten  PalAeHna,  TQbin- 
Cea,  1896;  F.  J.  Bliss,  Development  of  PaleeHne  Explorw- 
Uon.  New  York.  1906:  DB,  iL  791-792;  BE,  ii.  2dl(^ 
2623;   K.  Baedeker,  Palettine  and  Syria,  Leipsic.  1906. 

On  Hebron  consult:  M.  de  VogO^.  Afocp^  ou  tombeau 
dee  patiarchea  h  Hebron,  Lausanna.  1869;  E.  Pierotti, 
MocpHa  cu  tomibeau  dee  pairiarcKee  h  Hebron,  ib.  1869; 
E.  Rosen,  in  BerHner  Zeiteehrift  fiir  aUoemeine  Erdku-de, 
ziv  (1863),  369-429,  zv  (1864).  160-162;  idem,  in  ZDMG, 
xii  (1858),  477-^13;  H.  Guthe.  in  ZDPV,  xvU  (1894), 
238  mn-  On  Gilgal:  H.  Zschokke,  Beitrdge  tur  Topo- 
grapkie  der  loMtficAsn  Jordaneau,  Jerusalem,  1866.  On 
Bethphage:  C.  CSermont-Ganneau.  in  Revue  ardUo- 
looique,  December,  1877.  On  Emmaus:  H.  Zschokke, 
Dae  neuteetamentliche  Emmaue,  Sohaffhausen,  1865;  M.  J. 
Sehiffers,  Amwae,  dae  Emmaue  dee  heUigen  Lucas.  Frei- 
burg. 1890;  H.  Guthe,  in  ZDPV,  zvi  (1893),  298  sqq. 
On  Ifispeh:  P.  A.  Raboisson.  Lee  Maepeh.  £tude  de 
giographie  exigiUque  touehant  lee  diffh^ntee  locaUiie  de  oe 
nam,  Paris,  1897.    Also  see  Gasaa. 

JUDGES. 

I.  The  Office.  1.  Omservative  View. 

General  Concept  (|  1).  Divisions;    the    Narrative 

Character  of    the   Period  (|  1). 

(I  2).  CHtical  View  Rejected  (|  2). 

History  of  the  Ptoriod  (|  3).  2.  Critical  View. 
Chronology  of  the  Judges      Analysis  (fi  1). 
(I  4).  Ideslising  (|  2). 

IL  The  Book.  The  History  (|  3). 

L  The  Office:  Judges  (Hebr.  ahophepim)  was 
the  name  applied  to  the  rulers  of  Israel  at  the  time 
described  in  the  book  of  Judges  (see  II.  below). 
They  find  their  analogues  in  the  "  judges  "  of  the 
Tyrians  (Joeephus,  Apian,  i.  21)  and  in  the  Cartha- 
ginian sirfetea  (Livy,  xxviii.  37,  xxx. 
z.  General  7);  they  must  not  be  regarded,  how- 
Concept  ever,  as  heads  of  regularly  oiganized 
states,  but  rather  as  dictators  who, 
having  first  evidenced  their  capabilities  by  their 
prowess,  naturally  became  the  leaders  of  a  tribe 
or  group  of  tribes.  In  time  of  peace  their  function 
was  primarily  the  decision  of  cases  which  could  not 
be  settled  by  the  "  elders  ";  and  some  of  them, 
such  as  Deborah  (Judges  iv.  4)  and  Samuel  (I  Sam. 
vii.  6),  were  judges  by  virtue  of  their  prophetic  gifts 
even  before  they  became  the  liberators  of  their 
countr3nnen;  while  others,  as  Samson,  seem  never 
to  have  delivered  judgment.  The  name,  however, 
was  borne  by  the  rulers  of  the  Israelites  from  the 
conquest  of  Canaan  by  Joshua  to  the  establish- 
ment of  the  kingdom,  with  the  exception  of  Abime- 
lech,  the  son  of  Gideon,  who  seems  to  have  had  the 
title  of  king  (Judges  ix.). 

The  character  of  the  period  of  the  Judges  is  out- 
lined in  the  introduction  to  the  book  of  Judges, 
especially  ii.  10  sqq.  After  the  subjection  of  the 
chief  Canaanitic  peoples,  the  Israelites  had  relaxed 
their  energies,  and  had  entered  into  friendly  rela- 


tions in  many  cases  with  their  former  foes.    The 
result  was  an  oppressive  subjugation  of  the  Israel- 
ites, until  they  remembered  God,  who 
3.  Chaiac-  raised    up    judges  .to    deliver  them. 

tar  of  the  Nevertheless,  as  soon  as  a  judge  passed 
Period,  away,  his  influence  vanished,  and  the 
people  returned  to  their  coquetry  with 
the  surrounding  nations,  again  falling  into  political 
and  spiritual  bondage.  The  period  was  also  char- 
acterized by  a  centrifugal  tendency  both  in  national 
and  religious  life.  It  was  the  time  when  the  tribes 
enjoyed  the  greatest  freedom,  and  only  when  mu- 
tual perils  united  them  did  they  recollect  their  com- 
mon origin  and  invoke  their  common  God.  The 
tendencies  of  the  time  thus  powerfully  favored  the 
confusion  of  the  worship  of  Yahweh  and  Baal,  as 
well  as  of  other  gods  whose  symbols,  oracles,  and 
cult  were  openly  adopted;  but,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  horrors  resulting  from  gentile  immorality  were 
washed  out  in  blood  (Judges  xix.-xx.),  and  faith 
prompted  the  vows  of  mighty  sacrifices  (Judges 
xi.  31;  I  Sam.  i.  11).  In  like  manner,  low  though 
the  culture  of  the  Israelites  sank  during  this  period 
of  storm  and  stress,  the  power  of  the  nation  was 
still  strong  and  unbroken.  It  was  an  age  of  heroes, 
not  only  physical  but  moral,  finding  exemplifica- 
tion in  the  Song  of  Deborah,  the  fable  of  Jotham, 
and  the  humor  of  Samson.  Nor  was  the  disunion 
of  the  Israelites  at  this  period,  as  some  maintain,  a 
preliminary  to  their  development  as  a  nation,  for 
the  Song  of  Deborah  itself  clearly  shows  a  strong 
consciousness  of  the  religious  and  national  homo- 
geneity of  the  tribes. 

The  period  of  the  Judges  was  opened  by  an  eight 

years'  subjugation  of  Israel  by  Chushan-rishathaim 

of  Aram-naharaim  (Judges  iii.  8),  apparently  a  king 

of  the  Mitanni  (A.  H.  Sayce,  The  Higher  Crilicum 

and  the  Monuments,  pp.  207,  304,  London,  1894) 

who  repeatedly  sought  to  establish  themselves  in 

Canaan  against  Egypt.    The  Israel- 

3.  History  ites  were  delivered  from  this  yoke  by 

of  the      Othniel,  the  son  of  Kenas,  who  dwelt 

Period,  in  the  south  (Judges  i.  12-13),  after 
which  there  followed  forty  years  of 
peace  (Judges  iii.  ^11).  During  this  period  of  re- 
pose, two  events  happened  which,  although  related 
at  the  end  of  the  book  of  Judges,  can  not  have 
taken  place  long  after  Joshua's  death:  the  migra- 
tion of  a  portion  of  the  tribe  of  Dan,  prevented  by 
the  hostile  Amorites  from  occupying  their  territory 
along  the  sea  (Judges  i.  34),  to  the  north,  where 
they  founded  the  city  of  Laish,  or  Dan  (the  mod- 
em Tell  al-Kadi,  west  of  Banias),  and  introduced 
an  idolatrous  cult  (Judges  xviii.);  and  the  war  of 
revenge  on  Benjamin  for  the  outrage  committed 
in  Gibeah  (Judges  xix.-xx.).  Others,  however, 
place  both  these  events  before  the  Mesopotamian 
invasion  (cf.  Joeephus,  Ant.  V.,  ii.  8  sqq.,  iii.  1); 
but  there  is  no  ground  for  the  view  that  these  epi- 
sodes are  later  interpolations.  After  the  death  of 
Othniel  at  the  expiration  of  the  forty  years'  peace, 
the  Israelites  were  again  subjugated  for  eighteen 
years  by  the  combined  Moabites,  Anmionites,  and 
Amalekites,  until  the  Benjamite  Ehud  killed  the 
Moabite  King  Eglon  (Judges  iii.  12  sqq.).  Eighty 
years  of  peace  followed,  after  which  the  laraelites 


Judffea 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZOG 


254 


were  subject  for  twenty  years  to  the  Ganaanitic 
Jabin  and  Sisera,  to  which  period  belongs  the  heroic 
deed  of  Shamgar,  which  freed  a  portion  of  the  land 
from  the  oppression  of  the  Philistines  (Judges  iii. 
31;  cf.  ▼.  6).  Relief  from  their  bondage,  which  by 
some  is  held  to  be  Hittite,  was  brought  to  Israel, 
especially  in  the  north,  by  the  prophetess  and 
judge  Deborah,  who  roused  Barak  to  war  against 
Jabin  and  Sisera  (Judges  iv.  2  sqq.);  though  the 
tribes  east  of  the  Jordan,  as  well  as  Dan  and  some 
on  the  sea,  took  no  part  in  the  struggle  for  free- 
dom (Judges  V.  15  sqq.);  while  Judah  seems  to 
have  been  prevented  from  cooperating  by  its  own 
war  with  the  Philistines.  Another  forty  years  of 
peace  ensued;  but  then  the  Midianites  and  other 
nomadic  tribes  invaded  the  plain  of  Jezreel,  op- 
pressing the  Israelites  for  seven  years,  until  they 
were  driven  out  by  Gideon  (Judges  vi.-vii.).  Gid- 
eon piously  declined  the  proffered  kingship  (Judges 
viii.  22  sqq. ;  but  after  his  death  his  unworthy  son 
Abimelech  brought  misfortune  on  his  house  (Judges 
ix.).  Abimelech  was  followed  by  Tola,  of  the  tribe 
of  Issachar,  who  ruled  twenty-three  years  (Judges 
X.  1  sqq.),  and  by  Jair,  a  Gileadite,  who  was  judge 
twenty-two  years  (x.  3-6).  With  the  death  of 
Jair,  Israel  was  oppressed  on  the  east  by  the  Am- 
monites and  on  the  west  by  the  Philistines.  The 
former,  after  oppressing  Israel  eighteen  years,  were 
conquered  by  Jephthah  (Judges  x.-xi.),  who  was 
also  later  involved  in  a  civil  war  with  the  tribe  of 
Ephraim  (Judges  xii.  1  sqq.).  He  ruled  in  peace 
only  seven  years,  and  was  succeeded  by  Izban  of 
Bethlehem  (seven  years),  Elon,  a  Zebulonite  (ten 
years),  and  Abdon,  an  Ephraimite  (eight  years; 
Judges  xii.  8  sqq.).  After  their  rule,  the  Philis- 
tines oppressed  Israel  forty  years  (Judges  xiii.  1), 
their  deliverer  being  the  hero  Samson  (Judges  xiii.- 
xvi.).  The  power  of  the  Philistines  revived,  how- 
ever, in  the  latter  part  of  the  judgeship  of  Eli,  who 
ruled  forty  years  (I  Sam.  iv.  18),  and  they  were 
crushed  only  by  Samuel  and  the  kings  anointed  by 
him.  The  thread  of  the  book  of  Judges  breaks  off 
with  the  death  of  Samson,  and,  although  Eli  is  said 
to  have  ''  judged  '*  Israel,  and  the  same  is  stated 
concerning  Samuel  (I  Sam.  vii.  6,  viii.  1  sqq.,  xii. 
1  sqq.),  they  form  the  transition  from  the  judges 
to  the  kings. 

The  chronology  of  this  period  is  diffictdt.  The 
period  given  by  the  book  of  Judges  from  the  sub- 
jugation by  Chushan-rishathaim  (Judges  iii.  8)  to 

the  death  of  Samson  (xvi.  31)  is  410 

4.  Chronol-  years;    but  this  is  far  too  long  when 

ogy  of  the    compared  with  I  Kings  vi.  1,  which 

Judges.       gives  only  480  years  for  the  time  from 

the  Exodus  to  the  commencement  of 
the  Temple  in  the  fourth  year  of  the  reign  of  Solo- 
mon, including  the  forty  years  in  the  wilderness, 
the  equal  length  of  David's  reign,  and  the  imknown 
duration  of  the  rule  of  Samuel,  Saul,  etc.  The  best 
explanation  of  these  conflicting  data  seems  to  be  the 
synchronization  of  Judges  x.  8  sqq.  with  xiii.  1  sqq., 
thus  placing  the  oppression  by  the  Philistines  at  the 
same  time  as  that  by  the  Ammonites,  and  regarding 
Samson  as  the  contemporary  of  Jephthah,  Ibzan, 
Elon,  and  Abdon;  with  a  resultant  reduction  of 
the  140  years  to  about  360  (cf.  Judges  x.  6  sqq.; 


the  figures  in  Judges  xi.  26  would  then  be  round 
numbers).  It  is  ako  tempting  to  assume  a  further 
synchronism  between  the  forty  years'  oppression 
by  the  Philistines  (Judges  xiii.  1)  and  the  rule  of 
Eli  and  the  early  part  of  Samuel's  judgeship,  thus 
reducing  the  period  to  about  340  years.  See  Time, 
Biblical  Rkcxonino  of. 

XL  The  Book:  1.  ConaerTatiTe  Vlefw:  In  its  pres- 
ent form  this  book  is  relatively  late,  although  its 
oldest  sources  date  from  the  events  they  describe. 
It  falls  into  three  parts:  an  introduction  (i.-iii.6); 

the  main  piortion,  a  unified  narrative  (iii. 

1.  Dlvi-     7-xvi.);  and  twoadditioii8(xvii.-xxi.). 

■ions;  the   The  introduction  treats  of  the  general 

NarratiTe.  condition  of  Israel  after  the  death  of 

Joshua  and  gives  the  underlying  re- 
lation of  the  stormy  events  of  the  period,  together 
with  the  occupation  of  the  land  by  the  tribes  (i.) 
and  their  impious  toleration  of  the  former  inhabi- 
tants (ii.  1-^).     In  ii.  6  the  thread  of  the  narrative 
is  taken  up,  with  a  preliminary  prophetic  descrip- 
tion of  the  period  (ii.  6-23).    A  list  of  the  peopies 
still  unsubdued  is  given  in  iii.  1-6,  this  passage  be- 
ing by  another  hand.    Nevertheless,  it  is  clear  that 
the  redactor  deliberately  planned  the  introduction 
in  its  present  form,  and  that  he  interwove  fragments 
of  other  historical  writings  wherever  he  thought 
best,  doubtless  drawing  from  some  source  common 
to  Judges  and  Joshua  (cf.  Judges  i.   10-15  with 
Josh.  XV.  14-19;    Ju(^ges  i.  20  with  Josh.  xv.  13; 
Judges  i.  21  with  Josh.  xv.  63;  Judges  i.  27-28  with 
Josh.  xvii.  11  sqq.;    Judges  i.  29  with  Josh.  xvi. 
10).    The  main  portion  narrates  six  great  events. 
the  heroes  of  which  are  Othniel,  the  conqueror  of 
the  Arameans  (iii.  7  sqq.);    Ehud,  the  liberator 
from  the  Moabites  (iii.  12  sqq.);    the  victory  of 
Deborah  and  Barak  over  Jabin  and  Sisera  (iv.-v.); 
Gideon  and  his  sons  (vi.-ix.);   Jephthah 's  victory 
over  the  Anunonites  (x.  6  sqq.,  xi.-xii.);  and  Sam- 
son, the  hero  against  the  Philistines  (xiii.-z^'i  )• 
Six  other  judges  are  also  briefly  mentioned.    The 
two  additions  on  the  sanctuary  at   Dan  (xvii.- 
xviii.)  and  the  war  against  Benjamin  (xix.-xxi.) 
seem  to  have  been  written  by  one  who  lived  in  the 
flourishing  period  of  the  kings  (cf.  xviii.  1,  xix.  1, 
xxi.  25). 

It  is  assumed  by  the  majority  of  modem  scholars 
that  the  redactor  of  the  book  of  Judges  had  two 
systems  of  chronology  before  him:  one  of  genera- 
tions of  forty  years  each;  and  the  other  of  smaller, 

but    more    accurate,    figures.    These 

2.  Oritioal  two  systems   were   then   interwoven. 

View       the  smaller  being  assumed  to  refer  to 

B^eotad.    the  periods  of  subjugation,  and  the 

laiger  to  the  rules  of  the  judges.  But 
the  problem  is  still  unsolved,  although  it  would 
seem  that  the  apparently  over-long  period  arose 
from  the  addition  of  contemporaneous  periods,  and 
that  the  number  forty  is  only  approximate.  The 
critical  school  has  assailed  not  only  the  cbroDolpgy> 
but  also  the  historicity  of  the  book  of  Judges. 
Thus  Othniel,  Ehud,  Tola,  Jair,  and  Elon  arc  re- 
solved into  "  eponymous  heroes  ";  but  in  no  case 
is  the  evidence  favorable  to  the  theories  of  this 
school.  On  the  contrary,  the  book  gives  an  ixor 
pression  of  relative  imity  and  independence;  nor 


266 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDU 


JndffeB 


is  it  to  be  r^^rded  as  an  extract  from  some  laiger 
work,  extending  from  Joshua's  death  (or  from  the 
Creation)  to  the  Exile.  Equally  untenable  is  a 
derivation  of  the  book  from  J  and  E,  and  their 
combination  into  JE.  Since,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  Deuteronomic  redactor  was  not  the  first  to 
combine  the  accoimts  given  in  the  book,  the  ques- 
tion of  its  date  admits  of  no  single  answer.  The 
redactor  doubtless  lived  in  the  period  of  the  later 
kings;  but  there  is  no  evidence  to  show  that  the 
book  belongs  to  the  exilic  or  post-exilic  period. 
Textually  the  book  of  Judges  is  one  of  the  best 
preserved  of  all  the  historical  writings.  Never- 
theless, a  comparison  with  the  versions,  especially 
the  Septuagint,  shows  noteworthy  variants,  espe- 
cially in  proper  names.  So  ancient  a  fragment  as 
the  Song  of  Deborah  naturally  gives  more  scope 
to  textual  criticism,  although  here  also  great  cau- 
tion is  necessary.  ,  C.  von  Orelli. 

2.  Orltioal  View:  A  cursory  reading  of  the  book 
of  Judges  shows  that  it  consists  of  two  main  ele- 
ments, one  of  these  containing  stories  and  histor- 
1  Anal  '^  notices  without  conmient,  and  the 
^^  ^"  other  comprising  detailed  narratives 
with  an  explicit  or  implicit  commen- 
tary on  the  events  described.  The  latter,  com- 
prising most  of  the  book,  extends  from  ill.  7  to 
xvi.  31,  and  has  a  prefatory  note  containing  the 
moral  of  the  history  (ii.  6-iii.  6).  It  is  this  main 
portion  which  not  only  gives  character  to  the  book 
as  a  whole  but  also  explains  its  aim  and  motive. 
It  is  written  to  show,  in  the  Deuteronomic  spirit, 
the  course  of  Israel's  history  before  the  movement 
began  which  ended  in  the  founding  of  the  king- 
dom— ^how  fideUty  to  Yahweh  and  his  command- 
ments was  invariably  attended  by  prosperity,  and 
how  calamity,  especially  by  the  inroads  and  op- 
pressions of  national  enemies,  surely  followed  false 
worship  and  impiety,  according  to  the  principles 
laid  down  in  Deut.  xxviii.  AU  the  lives  of  the 
**  Judges  "  are  narrated  in  this  principal  section. 
The  introduction  (i.  l~ii.  5)  is  quite  different  in 
character  and  style,  not  only  running  parallel  to 
portions  of  the  book  of  Joshua  (see  Joshua,  Book 
of)  but  actually  giving  a  diveigent  account  of  the 
conquest  of  the  Canaanites.  Quite  different  also, 
and  falling  as  clearly  without  the  sphere  of  the 
Deuteronomistic  compiler,  are  the  last  five  chap- 
ters (xvii.-xxi.)  which  narrate  important  events 
belonging  to  the  early  period  of  the  occupation  of 
Canaan,  and  therefore  out  of  the  chronological 
order  followed  by  the  author  of  the  main  part  of 
the  book.  Both  the  introduction  and  the  conclu- 
sion are  lacking  in  the  religious  and  homiletic  com- 
ments which  dominate  chaps,  iii.  7-xvi.  31. 

The  most  important  question  for  the  Bible  stu- 
dent is  the  amount  and  degree  of  the  idealizing  of 
history  which  are  employed  in  the  book  in  its  pres- 
ent form.    The  introduction  (i.   1-ii. 

2.  Ideal-  5)  contains  a  plain  narrative  of  facts 
idnff.  of  the  highest  value;  only  the  fact 
must  be  noted  that  the  words  in  i.  1 
"  after  the  death  of  Joshua  "  are  a  late  gloss  due 
to  a  misunderstanding  of  the  historical  situation, 
for,  as  ii.  6-9  shows,  the  events  described  here  took 
place  during  the  life  of  Joshua.    Chaps,  xvii.-xviii. 


are  also  of  great  importance  for  the  early  political 
and  religious  condition  of  Israel  and  contain  merely 
a  statement  of  facts,  which  set  forth  the  causes 
and  incidents  connected  with  the  migration  north- 
ward of  the  tribe  of  Dan  and  the  founding  of  the 
city  of  that  name  at  the  point  which  became  the 
northerly  limit  of  Israel  and  the  seat  of  a  famous 
sanctuary,  dhaps.  xix.-xxi.  are  a  highly  embel- 
lished account  of  some  incidents  which  occurred  in 
the  early  days  of  the  settlement,  an  outrage  peiv 
petrated  by  some  members  of  the  tribe  of  Benja- 
min (chap,  xix.)  and  avenged  by  the  other  tribes 
(xx.,  xxi.).  Chap.  xix.  would  appear  to  rest  on  a 
considerable  basis  of  fact,  but  tlMe  last  two  chap- 
ters are  full  of  numerical  exaggerations;  they  rep- 
resent Israel  as  forming  a  political  and  religious  unit 
at  a  very  early  date,  and  they  give  other  evidences 
of  a  priestly  authorship.  Thus  it  must  be  assumed 
that  certain  old  traditions  were  worked  over  in 
them  at  a  late  date  in  conformity  with  the  spirit  of 
the  priest  code. 

The  stories  which  make  the  main  part  of  the 
book  so  readable  are  at  the  same  time  the  source 
of  nearly  all  direct  knowledge  of  the  period  between 

the  settlement  and  the  founding  of 

8.  The      the  kingdom.    They  belong  in  their 

History,    original  form  to  some  of  the  earliest 

collections  of  prose  compositions  in 
the  literature  of  Israel.  Beginning  with  the  de- 
liverances effected  by  Othniel  (iii.  7-11)  and  Ehud 
(iii.  12-30),  the  motive  of  the  collection  comes  out 
more  clearly  in  the  story  of  the  final  suppression 
of  the  Canaanites  under  Deborah  and  Barak.  This 
is  given  in  its  original  f orin  in  the  oldest  long  poem 
of  the  Bible  (chap,  v.),  the  prose  version  which 
was  of  coiuse  later  being  found  in  chap.  iv.  The 
poem  is  our  best  authority  for  the  condition  and 
activity  of  the  tribes  of  Israel  about  1130  b.c.  Of 
equal  importance  is  the  great  story  of  Gideon  and 
his  deliverance  of  his  tribesmen  from  the  oppres- 
sion of  the  Midianites  (chaps.  vi.-viii.).  The  se- 
quel of  their  expulsion  is  specially  instructive  since 
it  shows  how  the  tribes  felt  themselves  helpless  in 
their  disunion  and  were  conscious  of  their  need  of 
hereditary  ''  judges  "  or  kings.  The  fact  that  here 
as  elsewhere  in  the  book  more  than  one  version  of 
the  original  tradition  was  drawn  upon  is  illustrated 
by  the  variations  of  vii.  24-viii.  3  and  viii.  4-21, 
the  latter  being  the  briefer  or  earlier  account.  The 
history  of  Samson  (xiii.-xvi.)  dealing  as  it  does 
with  the  period  of  Philistine  domination  over  west- 
em  Judah  brings  the  account  one  step  nearer  to 
the  epoch  of  the  monarchy;  but  the  subject  lent 
itself  so  much  to  romance  and  legend  that  it  is  more 
difficidt  to  learn  the  real  facts  behind  this  story 
than  elsewhere  in  the  book.  In  any  case  the  Sam- 
son episodes  form,  from  the  historical  point  of  view, 
merely  a  preparation  to  the  history  of  Eli  and 
Samuel,  who  carried  on  the  contest  with  the  Philis- 
tines till  the  crowning  of  King  SauL  Thus  the 
closing  of  the  original  book  of  Judges  was  really 
the  beginning  of  a  history  which  began  with  Sam- 
son (cf.  xiii.  5)  and  ended  with  I  Sam.  xii.  It  was 
then  a  Deuteronomistic  editor  who  compiled  the 
first  edition  of  the  book,  beginning  with  ii.  6  and 
unifying  the  whole  by  his  **  pragmatic  "  treatment 


JndirM 
Judaon 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


266 


of  the  stories  and  his  assumption  of  the  solidarity 
of  "  Israel "  under  the  regime  of  the  successive 
judges,  each  of  whom  actually  "  judged  "  only  a 
portion  of  the  country  occupied  by  the  disunited 
tribes.  The  post-exilic  priestly  redactor  prefixed 
chaps,  i.  1-ii.  5,  added  chaps.  xvii.-xxi.,  and  the 
allusions  to  the  minor  judges,  six  in  number  (iii.  31, 
X.  1-5,  xii.  8-15).  These  wiUi  the  six  judges  of  the 
original  work  (Othniel,  Ehud,  Barak,  Gideon,  Sam- 
son, Jephthah)  make  up  the  ideal  number  twelve. 
The  story  of  Abimelech  (chap,  ix.),  which  is  an 
episode  in  the  history  of  the  old  Ganaanitic  city  of 
Shechem,  lies  without  the  general  scheme  of  the 
book  and  is  probably  a  later  addition.  It  is  valuable 
as  showing  how  readily  the  idea  of  kingship  was 
embraced  by  the  common  people,  and  still  more 
valuable  for  the  parable  of  Jotham  (verses  8-15) 
which  shows  that  despotic  rule  was  estimated  at 
its  real  worth  even  in  those  early  times. 

As  to  the  chronology  of  the  book  it  is  hopeless 
to  attempt  to  reduce  the  given  numbers  of  years 
to  any  reasonable  scheme  (see  Time,  Biblical 
RxcKONiNO  of).  The  best  that  can  be  done  is  to 
take  the  probable  date  of  the  eastern  invasion 
(about  1170  B.C.)  and  the  accession  of  David  (about 
1000  B.C.)  as  two  working  extremes,  within  which 
approximation  to  the  facts  may  be  reached  by 
placing  Deborah  and  Barak  about  1130,  Gideon 
about  1100,  Jephthah  about  1080,  Samuel  about 
1050,  Saul  about  1030  b.c.  J.  F.  McGurdt. 

BiauoaBAFHT:  On  the  history  of  the  Judges  consult  the 
literature  under  Ahab:  the  oommentaries  named  below; 
C.  Piepenbring.  HiH.  du  peupU  d'lmuO,  Paris.  1808.  The 
three  indispensable  commentaries  are:  G.  F.  Moore,  New 
York,  1805  (high-water  mark  in  critical  exegesis);  K. 
Budde.  TQbingen,  1807  (thorough);  and  W.  Nowaok,  QOt- 
tingen,10(X)  (also  excellent).  Other  commentaries  are:  G. 
L.  Studer.  Bern.  1842;  C.  F.  Keil  and  F.  Delitssch.  Edin- 
burgh, 18A5;  J.  Bachmann.  Berlin,  1868-60;  Hervey.  in 
BihU  CommstUary,  London.  1872;  P.  Cassel,  in  Lange, 
New  York,  1876;  E.  Reuss,  Paris.  1877;  J.  J.  Lias,  in 
Cambridge  Bible,  Cambridge.  1882;  E.  Bertheau,  Leipsic. 
1883;  A.  R.  Fausset.  London.  1886;  8.  Oettli.  Munich. 
1803;  G.  H.  8.  Walpole.  London,  1001;  M.  J.  Lagrange. 
Paris,  1003. 

On  questions  of  introduction  consult  the  works  men- 
tioned in  and  under  Biblical  Introduction;  T.  Ndldeke, 
Uniereuehungen  eur  KHtik  dee  A.  T.,  pp.  173-108,  Kiel. 
1860;  E.  Meyer,  in  ZATW,  i  (1881),  117-146;  J.  C.  A. 
Kessler,  Chronologia  judicum  et  pri,nurum  regum,  Leipsic. 
1886;  8.  R.  Driver,  in  JQR,  i  (1880),  pp.  268-270;  G.  A. 
Cooke.  Hiet.  and  Song  of  Deborah,  London.  1802;  R.  Kit- 
tel.  in  TSK,  Ixv  (1802).  44-71;  P.  de  Lagarde.  Septuon 
gifUaetudien,  pp.  1-72.  Gdttingen.  1802;  W.  Franken- 
berg.  Die  Compoeition  dee  .  .  .  RicfUerbuehe,  Marburg, 
1806;  F.  Peries.  Analekten  gur  TextkriUk  dee  A,  T..  Mu- 
nich, 1806;  C.  Bruston.  Le  CanHque  de  Deborah.  Paris, 
1001;  DB.  ii.  807-820;   EB,  u.  2633-42;  JE,  vil  376-381. 

JUDGMENT,    DIVUVE:     The    final    expression 
of  God's  will  respecting  man's  future  destiny.    The 
idea  of  judgment  in  the  Old  Testament  presupposes 
a  transcendent  God  and  a  divine  interest  in  the 
moral  order  of  the  world,  and  was  drawn  from  the 
analogy  of  human  justice.    The  divine  judgment 
which  precedes  the  Messianic  kingdom 
Scriptural   is  concerned  with  guilty  angels,  with 
Idea.       Gentiles  to  be  destroyed  or  to  become 
subject  to  Israel,  with  Israel  and  Judah 
as  nations  for  which  their  enemies  were  to  be  em- 
ployed as  instruments  of  retribution,  and  with  in- 
dividuals of  whom  a  remnant  would  be  saved. 


The  scene  is  the  earthly  life.  To  this  judgment 
evils  of  various  kinds  were  referred  (ef.  Job;  also 
Luke  xiii.  1  sqq.).  Later  the  judgment  was  con- 
ceived of  as  following  the  MeBsianic  kingdom  (cf. 
Psalms  of  Solomon,  i.-zviii.,  Eng.  transl.  in  Pres- 
byterian Review,  iv.  1883,  775  sqq.).  In  Alexan- 
drian Judaism  no  distant  final  judgment  is  taught 
— each  sold  goes  at  death  to  its  true  place.  In  the 
New  Testament  the  final  judgment  is  connected 
with  the  parousia  of  Christ,  yet  the  judgment  is 
there  both  present  and  future.  The  judge  is  rep- 
resented as  either  God  or  Christ,  and  judgment  is 
according  to  works  as  expressive  of  character.  In 
the  teachings  of  Jesus  this  note  is  repeatedly  struck 
especially  in  the  parables,  and  apostolic  preaching 
resounds  with  it.  All  men  appear  to  be  the  sub- 
jects of  it,  and  not  those  only  who  have  known 
Christ  (II  Cor  v.  10;  Matt.  xxv.  31  sqq.).  One 
aspect  of  the  judgment  is  that  it  createa  nothing 
but  only  discloses  what  already  exists,  i.e.,  the  re- 
lation of  the  person  and  his  deeds  to  the  divine 
moral  order.  There  are  particular  judgments 
which,  however  overwhelming  in  themselves — the 
flood,  the  downfall  of  Sodom  and  of  Jerusalem— 
are  not  final  but  only  prefigurations  of  the  last 
judgment.  The  New  Testament  knows  of  no  gra- 
dation through  imperceptible  stages  of  judgment 
from  highest  to  lowest;  all  men  are  either  within 
or  without  the  kingdom  of  God.  One  is  warned 
against  self-deception  and  against  hasty  judgment 
respecting  others  (Matt,  vii.;  Rom.  xiv.  7-12).  A 
person  may  be  unconscious  of  his  real  actions  or 
character,  but  these  will  come  to  light  and  receive 
retribution.  The  full  realisation  may  be  long  de- 
layed, but  no  stage  of  the  process  is  indifferent  and 
the  end  will  surely  come.  There  is  no  evidence  of 
a  private  judgment  at  death. 

The  centred  idea  embodied  in  the  various  pic- 
tures of  judgment  is  that  of  human  responsibility 
and  of  infallible  retribution.    This  rests  upon  the 
conviction  of  an  indestructible  moral  order,  of  lavs 
as  expressive  of  a  personal  divine  will,  and  of  Christ 
in  such  essential  relation  to  mankind  that  God  will 
have  no  one  reach  his  final  destiny 
The        apart  from  Christ.    Yet  according  to 
Nature  of   the  Scriptures  the  judgment  is  not 
Judgment  final  in  the  sense  that  ethical  develop- 
ment has  reached  its  limit,  but  only 
so  far  as  this  is  conceived  as  related  to  the  consum- 
mation of  the  kingdom  of  God.    This  is  a  teleo- 
logical  view  of  man's  life  in  which  he  is  lifted  above 
the  necessitated  causal  order,  offered  a  divine  goal, 
albeit  a  flying  one,  as  the  aim  of  ethi<^  endeavor, 
and  bidden  to  rely  only  upon  an  aU-eeeing,  right- 
eous God  for  recompense.    The  process  is  essen- 
tially teleological,  so  that,  as  Schiller  declared,  the 
history  of  the  world  is  the  judgment  oi  the  world. 
Two  general  theories  of  judgment  have  been 
proposed:    (1)  The   common  view,   which  is  set 
forth  in  the  following  positions,     (a)  It  takes  place 
at  a  definite    moment — ^immediately 
Theories  of  after  the  general  resurrection  (see  Rss- 
Jadgment  urrection  of  the  Dbad).    (b)  It  will 
be  universal;  the  whole  human  race  is 
to  appear,  each  one  in  the  completeness  of  per- 
sonal   life,    "  body,  soul,  and  spirit."    (c)  It  will 


267 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Judges 
Jndaoa 


be  public — ^tbe  grounds  of  it  open  and  evident  to 
all;  whether  sins  of  the  saints  will  be  disclosed  may 
be  left  in  question,  (d)  The  decision  will  be  based 
on  the  deeds  done  in  the  body;  probation  has  ended 
at  death,  (e)  The  law  of  judgment  will  be  the 
will  of  God  as  it  has  been  severally  revealed  to  all 
men:  to  those  under  the  written  law,  by  that  law; 
to  those  without  that  law,  by  the  law  in  their 
hearts;  to  those  under  the  Christian  revelation,  by 
what  they  have  known  of  it.  (0  It  will  be  final 
and  thus  fix  the  changeless  state  of  all — the  good 
in  felicity,  the  wicked  in  wo.  (g)  The  hour  when 
this  is  to  occur  is  unknown,  but  is  purposely 
retained  within  the  secret  counsel  of  God.  A  modi- 
fication of  this  view,  while  conceiving  of  the  par- 
ousia  of  Christ  as  a  spiritual  process  and  the  resur- 
rection as  the  rising  of  each  man  to  life  after  death, 
holds  that  there  is  no  other  judgment  than  that 
which  occurs  at  death.  (2)  The  other  idea  of 
judgment  presents  it  as  a  process  which  endures  as 
long  as  law  and  moral  being  endure.  It  involves 
experience  of  good  and  evil  results  of  choice,  and 
the  revelation  of  the  nature  of  these  within  the 
moral  consciousness.  The  conscience  is  the  seat  of 
this  solemn  process.  By  means  of  it  all  that  op- 
poses the  will  of  God  is  gradually  disclosed,  con- 
demned, and  separated  from  the  good,  so  that  the 
good  progressively  triumphs.  T^  results  of  this 
process  of  judging  abide  in  the  blessed  or  baleful 
conditions  and  character  of  personal  and  social  life. 

C.  A.  Beckwith. 
Bzbuoobapht:  For  the  idea  in  the  Bible  the  reader  will 
oonsult  worlu  on  Biblical  theology*  such  as  those  by 
Schults  and  Beysohlac  (see  Biblical  Thbolooy);  for 
the  theological  content,  the  appropriate  sections  of  trea- 
tiaes  on  systematio  theology  such  as  the  works  by  Hodge, 
Shedd,  and  others  (see  Doom  a,  Doohatics);  also  the 
literature  under  Eschatoloot.  Special  treatment  is 
given  by:  J.  B.  Moiley,  Univtnity  Sermont,  pp.  72-96, 
London,  1883;  T.  T.  Hunger,  The  Freedom  of  Faiih,  pp. 
337-356,  Edinburgh.  1884;  J.  M.  Whiton,  Beyond  the 
Shadow,  pp.  141-102,  ib.  1885;  W.  N.  Clarke,  OutUne  of 
ChrUaan  Thoology,  pp.  450-466,  New  York,  1808;  C.  A. 
Beokwith,  RealUiea  of  ChrUUan  Theology,  pp.  361-366, 
Boston,  1006.  Consult  also  A.  Jukes,  The  Second  Death 
and  Aesfitalum  of  AU  Thinge,  London.  1878. 

JUDITH.    See  Apocrypha,  A,  IV.,  8. 

JUDSON,  AOONIRAM:    The  Apostle  of  Bunna 
and  one  of  the  first  and  most  devoted  of.  the  foi^ 
eign  missionaries  of  the  American  churches;   b.  at 
Maiden,  Mass.,  Aug.  9,  1788;    d.  on  boanl  of  a 
vessel  off  the  coast  of  Burma  Apr.  12,  1850.    He 
graduated  first  in  his  class  at  Brown  University  in 
1807.    After  teaching  school  for  a  year  at  Plym- 
outh, he  entered  Andover  Seminary  in  the  autunm 
of  1808,  although  ''  not  a  professor  of  religion,  or  a 
candidate  for  the  ministry,  but  as  a  person  deeply 
in  earnest  on  the  subject,  and  desirous 
Eaily       of  arriving  at  the  truth ''  (Wayland). 
Life  and    The  following  May  he  made  a  profes- 
Work,      sion  of  his  faith  in  the  Third  Congrega- 
tional Church  at  Plymouth,  of  which 
his  father  was  then  pastor.    His  attention  was  first 
drawn  to  the  subject  of  missionary  effort  in  heathen 
lands  by  the  perusal,  in  1809,  of  Buchanan's  Star 
in  the  East;  and  in  Feb.,  1810,  he  devoted  himself 
to  that  work.    About  this  time  he  entered  into  in- 
tinoate  relations  with  that  illustriouB  band  of  young 
VI.— 17 


men— Mills,  Nott,  Newell,  and  Richards,  and  joined 
the  first  three  in  submitting  a  statement  to  the 
General  Association  of  Ministers  at  Bradford,  Mass., 
which  led  to  the  oiganization  of  the  American  Boaid 
of  Commissioners  for  Foreign  Missions.     In  Jan., 

1811,  he  was  sent  to  England,  by  the  American 
Board,  to  promote  measures  of  affiliation  and  co- 
operation between  it  and  the  London  Missionary 
Society.  He  returned  unsuccessful  in  the  imme- 
diate design  of  his  journey,  but  was  appointed,  with 
Nott,  Newell,  Hall,  and  Rice,  a  missionary  to  India. 
He  was  ordained,  with  these  four  men,  on  Feb.  6, 

1812,  at  Salem,  Mass.  Judson  sailed  on  the  19th, 
from  New  York,  with  Mrs.  Judson  and  Mr.  and  Mrs. 
Newell,  for  Calcutta,  where  he  arrived  June  17. 
On  the  voyage  his  views  on  the  mode  of  baptism 
imderwent  a  change;  and,  after  his  arrival  in  India, 
he  and  Mrs.  Judson  were  baptised  by  immersion  in 
the  Baptist  Church  of  Calcutta.  In  consequence 
of  this  change  of  views,  he  passed  under  the  care  of 
the  American  Baptist  Missionary  Union  at  its  for- 
mation in  1814.  The  East  India  Company  forbade 
his  prosecution  of  missionary  labors  in  India;  and, 
after  various  vicissitudes,  he  landed  in  July,  1813,  at 
Rangoon,  Burma,  taking  up  his  residence  at  the 
Mission  House  of  Felix  Carey.  Judson  devoted 
himself  to  the  acquisition  of  the  language,  in  which 
he  afterward  became  a  proficient  scholar.  After 
six  years  of  labor,  the  first  convert,  Moung  Nau, 
was  baptized  at  Rangoon,  June  27,  1819.  He  was 
the  first  Burman  accession  to  the  Church  of  Christ. 
From  1824  to  1826,  during  the  war  of  England  with 
Burma,  Judson  suffered  almost  incredible  hardships. 
He  was  imprisoned  for  seventeen  months  in  the 
jails  of  Ava  and  Oung-pen-la,  being  bound  during 
nine  months  of  this  period,  with  three,  and  during 
two  months  with  no  less  than  five,  pairs  of  fetters. 
His  sufferings  from  fever,  excruciating  heat,  hun- 
ger, repeated  disappointments,  and  the  cruelty  of 
his  keepers,  form  one  of  the  most  thrilling  narra- 
tives in  the  annals  of  modem  missionary  trial. 

Mrs.  Ann  Hasseltine  Judson  suffered  no  less  than 
her  husband,  though  she  was  not  subjected  to  im- 
prisonment. Her  heroic  efforts  to  relieve  the  suf- 
ferings of  the  English  prisoners  re- 
MxB.        ceived  the  tributes  of  warmest  grati- 

Judson.  tude  and  praise  at  the  time.  She  was 
bom  in  Bradford,  Mass.,  Dec.  22,  1789, 
and  had  been  married  on  Feb.  5,  1812.  She  en- 
tered with  great  enthusiasm  into  missionary  effort, 
and  established  a  school  at  Rangoon  for  girls.  In 
1821  she  paid  a  visit  to  America.  Her  health  was 
never  robust;  but  she  combined  with  strong  intel- 
lectual powers  a  remarkable  heroism  and  fortitude. 
During  the  imprisonment  of  her  husband  she  was 
unremitting  in  her  self-sacrifice,  and  walked  fear- 
less and  respected  from  palace  to  prison  among  the 
excited  Burman  population.  She  died  Oct.  24, 
1826.  Hers  is  one  of  the  immortal  names  in  mis- 
sionary biography. 

In  1826  Judson  transferred  the  headquarters  of 
his  mission  to  Amherst,  in  Tenasserim,  Lower 
Burma;  and  in  1830  he  began  preaching  to  the 
Karens.  In  1835  he  completed  the  revision  of  the 
Old  Testament  in  the  Burmese  language,  and  in 
1837  that  of  the  New  Testament.    In  the  latter 


Judaoa 
Julian 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


268 


year  there  were  1,144  baptized  converts  in  Burma. 
After  an  absence  of  more  than  thirty  years,  he 
returned,  in  1845,  for  a  visit  to  his  native  land. 
On  the  voyage  his  second  wife  (Sarah 
Later      Hall  Boardman)  died  (Sept.  1)  at  St. 
Work.      Helena.    She  was  the  widow  of  the  mis- 
Visit  to     sionary,  Dr.  Boardman,  and  was  mar- 
America.    riedtoJudsoninl834.  Judson's  arrival 
in  the  United  States  was  the  signal 
for  an  enthusiastic  outburst  of  admiration  for  the 
missionary,  and  interest  in  the  cause  he  represented. 
Everywhere  crowded  assemblies  gathered  to  see 
and  hear  him.    He,  however,  shunned  the  public 
gaze,  and  was  diffident  as  a  speaker.    In   1823 
Brown  University  had  honored  him  with  the  degree 
of  D.D.    On  July  11,  1846,  he  again  set  saU  for 
Burma,  having  married,  a  few  days  before.  Miss 
Emily  Chubbuck  of  Eaton,  N.  Y.,  who  was  already 
well  known  under  the  name  of  "  Fanny  Forester." 
He  arrived  safely  at  Rangoon,  and  spent  much  of 
the  remaining  period  of  his  life  in  revising  his  Eng- 
lish-Burmese dictionary  (ed.  E.  A.  Stevens,  Maul- 
main,  1862).    His  health,  however,  was  shattered; 
and  be  died  while  on  a  voyage  to  the  Isle  of  Bour- 
bon.   His  body  was  buried  in  the  ocean. 

Judson  was  a  man  of  medium  height  and  slender 
person.  He  was  endowed  with  strong  intellectual 
powers,  and  sought  in  his  Christian  life,  by  the 
perusal  of  the  works  of  Mme.  Guyon  and  others,  a 
fervent  type  of  piety.  His  confidence  in  the  suc- 
cess of  missionary  effort  never  wavered.  Being 
asked,  on  his  visit  to  America,  whether  the  pros- 
pects were  bright  for  the  conversion  of  the  world, 
he  inunediately  replied,  "  As  bright.  Sir,  as  the 
promises  of  God."  Adoniram  Judson's  name  will 
always  have  a  place  in  the  very  first  rank  of  Amer- 
ican missionaries  to  heathen  lands.  He  belongs 
to  the  first  band  of  those  missionaries,  and  his  hero- 
ism, wise  judgment,  and  diligent  labor  have  not 
been  excelled  if  equaled  by  any  who  have  followed 
him.  D.  S.  ScHAFF. 

Bibuoqeapbt:  Bio8ra|>hiM  of  Adoniram  Judson  hAV«  been 
witten  by  F.  Wayland,  2  volt.,  Boston.  1863;  H.  Bonar, 
London.  1871;  and  E.  Judson  (his  son).  New  York.  1883. 
The  lives  of  his  three  wives  were  written  by  W.  Wyeth,  3 
vols..  New  York,  1892;  A.  W.  Stuart.  Auburn.  1861;  A.  W. 
Wilson.  New  York.  1863;   and  by  C.  B.  Hartley,  ib.  n.  d. 

JUDSON,  EDWARD:  Baptist;  b.  at  Maul- 
main  (95  m.  s.e.  of  Rangoon),  Burma,  Dec.  27, 
1844.  He  was  brought  to  the  United  States  while 
still  an  infant,  and  was  educated  at  Madison  (now 
Colgate)  University  and  Brown  University  (A.B., 
1865),  after  which  he  was  principal  of  the  academy 
at  Townshend,  Vt.,  for  two  years  (1865-67).  He 
was  then  professor  of  Latin  in  Madison  University 
from  1867-74,  and,  after  a  year  of  travel  and  study 
in  Europe  in  1874-75,  accepted  a  call  to  the  paa- 
torate  of  the  Baptist  church  at  Orange,  N.  J.,  where 
he  remained  until  1881.  In  the  latter  year  he  be- 
came pastor  of  the  Berean  Baptist  Church,  New 
York  City,  where  he  engaged  actively  in  educa- 
tional and  philanthropic  work  among  the  poorer 
classes.  The  church  becoming  too  small  for  the 
congregation  which  he  gathered,  he  raised  funds 
for  the  erection  of  the  Judson  Memorial  Church, 
New  York  City,  which  is  one  of  the  leading  "  in- 
':;titutional  "  churches  of  the  city.     He  has  since 


been  pastor  of  this  church,  which  is  named  in  honor 
of  his  father,  Adoniram  Judson  (q.v.).  He  was 
president  of  the  American  Baptist  Missionary 
Union  in  1885-^7  and  has  been  a  trustee  of  Brown 
University,  Vassar  College,  and  Colgate  Univer- 
sity. He  has  written:  Life  of  Adoniram  Judson 
(New  York,  1883);  and  The  InttihUional  Church: 
Primer  in  Pagtoral  Theology  (1809). 

JUELICHER,  yQOiH-er,  GUSTAV  ADOLF:  Ger- 
man Protestant;  b.  at  Falkenbeig  (a  suburb  of 
Berlin)  Jan.  26,  1857.  He  was  educated  at  the 
University  of  Berlin  (Ph.D.,  1880),  and  was  chap- 
lain of  the  orphan  asylum  at  Rummelsberg,  a 
suburb  of  Berlin,  from  1882  to  1888.  In  1887  he 
became  privat-docent  at  the  university  of  the  same 
city  for  New-Testament  history  and  church  history, 
and  in  the  following  year  was  appointed  associate 
professor  of  the  same  subjects  at  Marbui^g,  where 
he  has  been  full  professor  since  1889.  He  is  a 
member  of  the  committee  on  Church  Fathers  of  the 
Royal  Prussian  Academy  of  Berlin  and  in  this  ca- 
pacity is  engaged  in  the  preparation  of  a  Prosopo- 
graphia  imperii  Romani  from  the  reign  of  Diocletian 
to  Justinian.  In  theology  his  position  is  that  of 
a  rigid  limitation  to  strict  historical  investigation. 
He  has  written:  Die  Oleichniereden  Jesu  (2  vols., 
Freiburg,  1888-99),  EinUi^ng  in  doe  Neue  Teeta- 
ment  (1894;  Eng.  transL,  Introduction  to  the  New 
Teetamentf  London,  1904);  and  Pandue  und  Jesus 
(TObingen,  1907). 

JTTLIAH:  The  Emperor  Julian  (Flavius  Clau- 
dius Julianus),  frequently  known  as  ''  the  Apos- 
tate," was  bom  at  Constantinople  in  331,  some 
time  after  June  26,  the  son  of  Julius  Constantius, 
H  jroimger  stepbrother  of  Constantino  the  Great, 
by  Basilina,  his  second  wife;  d.  in  Persia  June  26, 

363.    Among  the  authorities  for  his 

Aathorittes  life  and  policy,  his  own  works  take  the 

for  his      first  place,  although  their  history  is 

Life.       obscure    and    their    text    defective. 

They  include  eight  orations;  a  long 
treatise  addressed  to  Themistius  and  another  to  the 
Athenians;  the  ''  Symposium  ";  the  "  Beard- 
hater  **  (Gk.  Mieopogon);  more  than  eighty  letters, 
some  decrees,  and  some  fragments  contained  al- 
most wholly  in  Cyril's  ten  books  against  Julian. 
In  the  ''  Symposium "  (also  called  Kaieares)  he 
criticises  his  predecessors  in  the  empire,  assembled 
at  a  feast  on  Olympus,  chastises  their  vices,  and 
ends  with  a  panegjrric  of  Marcus  Aurelius.  The 
"  Beard-hater "  is  a  satirical  treatise  written  at 
Antioch  in  the  beginning  of  363,  containing  a  witty 
characterisation  of  himself  and  of  the  Christian 
population  of  Antioch.  The  letters,  of  which  a 
few  are  spurious  or  doubtful,  were  almost  all  writ- 
ten during  his  reign,  and  are  the  best  source  for  his 
philosophic  and  political  standpoint.  Unfortu- 
nately the  work  "  Against  the  Christians,"  with  the 
composition  of  which  he  was  busy  in  the  last  months 
of  his  life,  is  only  partially  extant. 

Next  in  importance  come  the  pagan  historians, 
especially  Ammianus  Marcellinus,  Eutropius,  and 
Zosimus.  The  first-named  is  the  main  authority 
for  the  external  events  of  Julian's  reign;  he  was  a 
writer  of  great  impartiality,  and,  like  Eutropius,  a 


269 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Judsoa 
JuUaa 


contemporary  if  not  an  eye-witness.  Zosimus 
writes  with  unconcealed  sympathy  for  the  restorer 
of  Hellenism.  Aurelius  Victor  tells  little.  Among 
the  orators  and  men  of  letters,  Lihanius  is  the  most 
important;  seven  of  his  orations  refer  directly  to 
Julian  and  offer  valuable  material.  The  statements 
of  Eunapius  in  his  lives  of  the  sophists  and  of  the 
panegyrist  Mamertinus  are  to  be  received  with 
caution. 

As  to  the  Christian  writers,  their  hatred  of  the 
emperor  led  them  sometimes  into  distortions  of 
fact  or  malicious  lies,  or  at  least  made  them  willing 
to  lend  an  ear  to  calumny,  except  during  the  short 
period  when  Julian's  recall  of  the  orthodox  bishops 
w^on  a  favorable  judgment  from  some,  such  as 
Hilary.  The  two  orations  in  which  Gregory  Nazi- 
anzen  denounced  the  emperor,  his  contemporary 
and  acquaintance,  form  a  strong  contrast  to  Euse- 
bius'  life  of  Constantine.  Among  the  historians, 
even  Socrates  here  lays  aside  his  usual  impartiality. 
Rufinus,  as  a  contemporary,  deserves  most  atten- 
tion; then  follow  Socrates,  Sozomen,  Theodoret, 
with  some  fragments  of  Philostorgius.  Isolated 
notices  occur  in  most  of  the  Fathers,  and  there 
are  four  poenis  against  Julian  by  Ephraem  Syrus 
written  in  363  and  containing  legendary  material 
mingled  with  valuable  notes.  In  spite  of  their 
prejudice,  the  ecclesiastical  writers  are  not  to  be 
undervalued,  as  they  complete  the  material  of  the 
pagan  historians  in  some  important  particulars,  and 
demonstrably  rest  in  not  a  few  places  upon  docu- 
mentary evidence.  Modem  historians  have  learned 
only  in  the  last  two  centuries  to  take  a  broad  and 
abstract  view  of  Julian's  career,  and  to  see  with  in- 
creasing clearness  that  his  admirable  quaUties  were 
his  own,  while  his  obvious  and  by  no  means  insig- 
nificant defects  were  the  product  of  his  education 
and  environment. 

When  the  sons  of  Constantine  secured  the  em- 
pire in  337  by  the  slaughter  of  their  male  relations 
(see  Constantine  the  Great  and  his  Sons), 
Jidian  was  spared  on  account  of  his 

Sketch  of   tender  age,  and  remained  in  Constan- 

His  Life,  tinople  under  the  charge  of  his  distant 
kinsman.  Bishop  Eusebius  of  Nico- 
media,  and  of  the  eunuch  Mardonius,  who  was  a 
professing  Christian,  though  his  ideals  seem  to  have 
been  Hellenistic.  It  is  possible  that  he  laid  the 
foundation  for  Julian's  later  attitude;  but  he  also 
awakened  in  him  the  enthusiasm  for  what  was  noble 
and  good  that  distinguished  his  manhood.  In  342 
Eusebius  died,  and  the  suspicious  Constantius  con- 
fined Julian  and  his  sickly  half-brother  Gallus  in 
the  fortress  of  Macellum  in  Cappadocia  for  the  next 
six  years,  surroxmded  by  Christian  clerics.  The 
lad  read  the  Bible,  copied  religious  books,  built  a 
chapel  to  St.  Mamas,  and  is  said  to  have  officiated 
as  a  lector  in  public  worship,  which  presupposes 
(unless  there  was  some  departure  from  the  ordinary 
practise)  that  he  had  been  baptized,  as  indeed 
Cjrril  positively  asserts,  though  neither  Julian  nor 
any  of  his  contemporaries  speak  of  his  baptism. 
At  any  rate,  there  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that 
Julian's  religious  views  were  at  this  time  hostile  to 
the  Christian  Church.  About  350  the  brothers 
were  allowed  to  leave  Macellum,  and  Julian,  re- 


turning to  Constantinople,  devoted  himself  to  study. 
The  emperor  objected,  however,  to  his  presence  in 
the  capital,  and  he  went  to  Nicomedia,  promising 
not  to  attend  the  lectures  which  Libanius  was  then 
delivering  there.  But  he  read  them;  and  here  at 
this  time,  later  in  Peigamum,  and  finally  in  Ephe- 
sus  he  was  introduced  by  the  foremost  Hellenistic 
teachers  of  the  day  to  the  Neoplatonic  philosophy 
and  mysticism.  In  351  he  formally,  though  unolv 
trusively,  became  a  convert  to  paganism.  The 
dreams  of  poets  and  the  speculations  of  philoso- 
phers were  to  him  the  living  truth;  in  Neoplato- 
nism  he  found  the  revelation  of  all  the  wealth  of  the 
highest  ideals  of  antiquity  and  of  Greek  civih'za- 
tion.  His  feelings,  principles,  and  aims  were,  how- 
ever, not  those  of  the  ancient  masters  whom  he 
thought  to  follow,  but  modem,  and  such  as  might 
nearly  all  have  been  justified  from  the  teachings  of 
Christian  leaders  of  his  day.  The  fortunes  of  his 
life,  his  imagination  and  his  education  inclined  him 
to  Greek  mythology  and  learning,  as  similar  ele- 
ments had  brought  thousands  of  others  to  Chris- 
tianity. The  great  task  of  reforming  Hellenism 
and  abolishing  the  system  of  his  predecessor  seems 
to  have  been  put  before  him  by  his  philosophic 
friends  in  Nicomedia  and  Ephesus.  Whether  he 
was  already  longing  for  the  throne  is  not  definitely 
known,  but  it  is  likely  that  he  was;  and  the  teach- 
ers, who  never  lost  their  hold  over  him,  seem  to  have 
exacted  promises  as  to  his  conduct  in  the  event  of 
his  accession.  In  354  Constantius  put  Gallus  to 
death,  and  kept  Julian  practically  in  confinement 
at  Milan  for  six  months.  Then  he  was  allowed  to 
return  to  Bithynia,  and  in  the  summer  of  355  to 
go  to  Athens,  where  he  associated  with  the  most 
prominent  Hellenic  leaders  and  was  initiated 
into  the  Eleusinian  mysteries.  In  October  he  was 
recalled  to  northern  Italy,  where  the  emperor 
needed  an  heir-apparent  and  a  leader  against  the 
Germanic  inroads  in  Gaul.  He  played  a  valiant 
part  for  four  years  of  military  activity  amid  great 
difficidties,  carrying  the  war  into  the  enemy's  own 
country  and  winning  the  respect  and  confidence  of 
the  army.  He  was  in  Paris  in  the  winter  of  359- 
360.  There  he  received  the  command  to  send  his 
best  soldiers  to  the  East  to  Constantius.  They  an- 
swered by  hailing  Julian  as  Augustus,  apparently 
without  any  suggestion  from  him,  if  not  against  his 
will.  After  some  hesitation  he  allowed  them  to 
crown  him,  and  notified  Constantius  of  what  had 
happened,  without  aswiming  the  imperial  title. 
Constantius  answered  with  the  sword;  but  Julian 
was  ready  to  meet  him.  During  the  winter  of  360- 
361  he  was  making  his  preparations  at  Vienne. 
He  celebrated  the  feast  of  the  Epiphany  with  Chris- 
tian rites;  then  he  threw  off  the  mask,  and  went 
south  by  forced  marches,  opening  the  closed  pagan 
temples  wherever  he  passed.  Constantius  came 
from  Syria  to  meet  him,  but  died  Nov.  3  in  Cilicia; 
and  on  Dec.  11,  361,  Julian  entered  Constantinople 
as  undisputed  emperor.  He  remained  there  the 
rest  of  that  winter,  occupied  with  plans  for  far- 
reaching  reforms,  but  at  the  same  time  making 
preparations  for  a  campaign  against  the  Persians. 
In  the  summer  of  362  he  went  through  Asia  Minor, 
receiving  discouraging  reports  of  the  results  of  his 


Julian 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


260 


policy,  to  Antioeh,  where  the  excitable  and  viva- 
cious populace  received  him  with  open  scorn  of  his 
views  and  plans,  and  the  Christian  portion  indulged 
in  ominous  demonstrations.  On  Mar.  4,  363,  be 
started  out  for  his  campaign,  pressing  forward 
boldly  to  meet  his  Persian  enemies,  sharing  all  the 
fatigues  and  privations  of  his  soldiers,  and  busily 
occupied  at  the  same  time  with  his  studies  and  his 
great  reform  plans.  After  several  successful  skir- 
mishes, he  received  a  spear-woimd  in  the  battle  of 
Jime  26,  and  died  a  few  hours  afterward.  The 
famous  narrative  of  Theodoret,  according  to  which 
he  cried  out  just  before  he  died,  "  Thou  hast  con- 
quered, O  Galilean  I"  is  apparently  an  outgrowth 
of  the  account  written  by  Ephraem  Syrus  in  the 
same  year,  which  relates  how  **  he  turned  aside, 
groaning,  and  thought  of  the  threats  which  at  his 
departure  he  bad  made  by  letter  against  the  Church." 
It  LB  significant  that  the  Persians,  according  to 
Ammianus  (XXV.,  vi.  6),  on  the  following  day 
mocked  the  Romans  as  traitors  to  their  own  em- 
peror, since  it  was  a  Roman  spear  that  had  pierced 
his  side.  The  rumor  soon  spread  in  the  empire, 
and  Libanius  in  his  funeral  oration  put  into  words 
the  suspicion  that  a  Christian  had  been  responsible 
for  his  death.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  Rufinus,  and 
Socrates  treat  the  question  as  indifferent,  and  So- 
zomen  shows  that  the  Christians  were  capable  of 
the  deed  by  claiming  it  for  one  of  them  and  laud- 
ing it.  But  Libanius  did  not  offer  the  slightest 
evidence  in  support  of  his  accusation,  and  several 
considerations  may  be  urged  against  it.  Similar 
rumors  have  often  arisen  in  the  case  of  a  sudden 
death;  Julian  was  a  bold  and  reckless  soldier,  who 
had  often  exposed  himself  to  great  danger;  be  him- 
self gave  utterance  to  no  suspicion — according  to 
Ammianus  he  thanked  the  gods  that  he  had  fallen 
by  "  no  clandestine  ambush'';  Eutropius  says  ex- 
pressly that  he  was  wounded  by  one  of  the  enemy, 
and  Ephraem  knows  nothing  different;  and  Am- 
mianus says  that  no  offers  of  reward  produced  the 
Persian  who  had  given  the  wound — he  may  have 
been  dead — ^which  gave  rise  to  their  reproach  of 
the  Romans,  and  thus  to  the  growth  of  the  legend. 
Julian  was  buried  at  Tarsus,  leaving  no  heir;  and 
his  wife,  Helena,  the  sister  of  Constantius,  had 
died  at  Vienne  in  the  winter  of  360-^1. 

The  restoration  of  Hellenism  was  the  great  aim 
of  Julian's  reign.    On  his  arrival  in  Constantinople 
he  made  a  clean  sweep  of  the  old  court,  and  the 
Neoplatonic  philosophers,  with  Maximus  at  their 
head,  hastened  to  appear  there  in  support  of  one 
who  was  an  emperor  after  their  own 
His        heart.    The  worship   of   the   ancient 
Policy  and  gods  in  its  traditional  form  was  de- 
Character,  clared    the    privileged    religion;     the 
temples  were  ordered  to  be  opened  or 
rebuilt,  and  their  property  restored.    Julian  was 
especially  anxious  to  restore  the  complete  sacri- 
ficial system;    and  the  way  in  which  he  went  to 
work  shows  that  the  ideas  underlying  the  old  pub- 
lic worship  were  not  his,  but  that  he  designed  to 
bring  about  the  restoration  of  the  old  paganism 
under  the  forms  of  certain  mystic  cults,  and  to 
unite  all  the  older  religions  into  a  sort  of  pagan 
imperial  church.    It  is  from  the  mysteries  that  all 


the  determining  lines  of  his  policy  are  taken.  If 
the  whole  of  public  life  was  to  be  ordered  accord- 
ing to  the  piety  prescribed  in  the  mysteries,  the 
plan  would  not  have  been  a  reaction  but  a  reform 
in  the  highest  sense.  The  return  to  the  ancient 
gods  is  the  only  reactionary  feature  of  it;  the  as- 
cetio-pietistic  and  mystic-hierarchical  ordering  of 
the  worship,  with  its  oiganized  associations  and 
priesthood,  woidd  have  been  an  unheard-of  inno- 
vation. To  change  paganism  into  a  State  religion, 
and  thus  to  modify  the  whole  relation  between  re- 
ligion and  the  State  as  it  had  been  understood  in 
antiquity,  was  a  thing  which  could  be  done  only 
by  force.  The  remnant  of  the  pagan  population 
showed  itself  indifferent  or  actually  hostile  to  the 
plans  which  Julian  promulgated  in  a  series  of  edicts 
which  combined,  so  to  speak,  imperial  and  papal 
characteristics.  The  reforming  tendencies  of  his 
plans  were  displayed  especially  in  his  provisions  for 
the  ceremonial  reception  of  converts  to  paganism, 
who  were  to  be  admitted  to  draw  near  to  the  gods 
only  after  spiritual  and  bodily  purification,  and  for 
the  creation  of  a  definitely  graduated  and  strictly 
organized  hierarchy,  with  the  emperor  as  pontifex 
maximus,  and  high  priests  (answering  to  metropol- 
itans) for  the  provinces.  In  yet  other  particidars 
the  imitation  of  the  Church's  discipline  is  obvious. 
It  is  most  direct  in  regard  to  the  care  of  the  poor, 
as  to  which  Julian  made  no  secret  of  his  admiration 
for  the  Christian  model;  other  resemblances  are 
indirect,  coming  through  the  influence  which  the 
mysteries  had  already  exercised  upon  the  Christian 
system. 

In  discussing  the  question  of  Julian's  actual  re- 
lations to  the  Christian  Church,  it  is  necessary  to 
distinguish  between  what  was  in  his  mind  and 
what  he  actually  did,  and  even  between  the  differ- 
ent parts  of  his  short  reign — since,  though  his  pol- 
icy did  not  essentially  change,  there  are  traces  of 
increasing  irritation  in  his  mind,  which  influenced 
his  edicts.  In  principle,  however,  he  rejected  the 
use  of  force  as  an  aid  to  conversion.  Christianity, 
which  he  regarded  as  a  pitiable  superstition  of 
weak-minded  people,  a  distorted  form  of  worship 
suited  to  barbarians  with  no  knowledge  of  history, 
an  assemblage  of  discordant  elements  held  together 
only  by  an  ambitious  clergy,  was  to  be  allowed  to 
fall  to  decay  of  itself.  In  the  army  the  cross  was 
to  be  replaced  by  pagan  emblems,  and  the  pre- 
torian  guard  was  to  be  purged  of  Christians.  Chris- 
tian officials  were  to  be  removed  from  the  govern- 
ment. All  privileges  were  withdrawn  from  the 
clergy  and  the  Church,  including  support  from 
State  fimds  and  such  rights  of  jurisdiction  as  had 
been  conceded.  The  restoration  of  pagan  temples 
at  the  cost  of  those  who  had  destroyed  them  im- 
posed this  burden  upon  the  Christians.  All  Chris- 
tian factions  were  to  be  treated  alike,  including  the 
Donatists,  and  this  involved  the  recall  of  the  ban- 
ished orthodox  bishops.  The  old  idea  that  he  did 
this  with  the  purpose  of  fostering  discord  among 
his  antagonists,  while  in  view  of  the  short-sighted- 
ness of  his  policy  it  is  possible,  is  not  probable; 
and  the  result  was  actually  beneficial  to  the  Church. 
His  school  law  of  June  17,  362,  which  required 
candidates   for  teachers'  positions  to  obtain  the 


261 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Julian 


license  of  the  local  authorities  or  of  the  emperor, 
while  apparently  not  affecting  religious  questions, 
reaUy  excluded  the  Christians  from  such  positions. 
The  assertion  that  he  forbade  them  to  attend  the 
schools  is  apparently  based  on  a  misunderstanding. 
Another  weapon  in  his  religious  campaign  was  his 
treatise  ''  Against  the  Christians,"  which  he  cir- 
culated not  long  before  his  death.  The  whole  first 
book  is  extant,  some  fragments  of  the  second,  and 
scarcely  any  of  the  third.  For  knowledge  and 
acuteness  it  is  not  to  be  compared  with  the  works 
of  Celsus  and  Porphyry.  It  tells  much  of  the  re- 
ligious and  historical  attitude  of  Julian  and  his 
partisans,  but  little  of  his  relations  with  the  Church, 
whose  real  weak  points  are  seldom  touched  upon. 
If  it  were  possible  positively  to  decide  as  to  the 
truth  of  the  statements  that  he  threatened  severe 
repressive  measures  against  his  retium  from  the 
Persian  campaign,  it  wotdd  be  easier  to  arrive  at 
a  final  judgment  of  the  man;  but  sober  history  will 
at  least  regard  him  most  truly  as  a  belated  son  of 
a  great  bygone  age,  deceived  in  his  ideals  but  noble 
in  nature,  and  deserving  of  honor  as  a  man  who 
attempted  to  do  justice  to  his  fellows  at  a  time 
when  this  was  a  rare  virtue.  (A.  Harnack.) 

Bibuoobapbt:  The  beet  edition  of  the  worke  of  Julian  in 
the  original  Greek  is  by  F.  C.  Hertlein,  2  vols..  Leipsic, 
1875-70;  the  fracments  of  his  Books  against  the  Chris- 
tians were  edited  by  K.  J.  Neumann  (ib.  1880).  who  also 
tnmslated  them  into  German,  Kaiaer  JuUana  Blieher 
gegen  die  CArisfsn,  ib.  1880.  In  English  translation  are 
Qregory  Naxiansen's  two  invectives  against,  and  Liba- 
nius'  funeral  oration  upon  Julian;  and  Julian's  essays 
"  Upon  the  Sovereign  Sun,"  and  *'  Upon  the  Mother  of 
the  Gods  "  (transl.  by  C.  W.  King.  Julian  the  Emperor, 
London,  1888).  In  French  there  is  a  complete  transla- 
tion of  Julian's  works  and  letters,  by  Eugene  Talbot, 
(Euvree  complHee  de  Vempereur  Julihi,  Paris,  1863.  The 
most  elaborate  biography  of  Julian  is  by  G«tano  Negri, 
transl.  from  the  2d  cd.  of  the  original  Italian,  2  vols., 
London  and  New  York,  1905;  other  noteworthy  biog- 
raphies are  by  Neander,  Eng.  transl.,  London,  1850; 
F.  J.  Holgwarth,  Freiburg,  1874;  A.  Naville,  NeucbAtel, 
1877;  G.  H.  Kendall,  Cambridge,  1877;  Alice  Gardner, 
London  and  New  York,  1805;  W.  Koch,  Leipsic.  1899; 
E.  M  Oiler,  Hanover.  1901;  P.  Allard,  3  vols.,  Paris,  1902. 
Special  treatises  are:  F.  Rode,  Oeeekichte  der  Reaction 
Kaiaer  Juliant  gegen  die  chrietUche  Kirehe^  Jena,  1877; 
E.  J.  Chinnock,  A  Few  Notee  on  JtiZian  and  a  TranaktUon 
of  kie  PtMie  Lettere,  London,  1901.  Consult  «lso  Tille- 
mont,  MMnoiree,  vi.;  Ceillier.  Avieure  eaerie,  iii.  398-412; 
Gibbon.  Decline  and  Fail,  chaps.  xxiL-xxiv.;  Sohaff. 
ChriMHan  Church,  iii.  41-59;    DCB,  iii.  484-525. 

JULIAH  CESARINI,  CARDINAL.    See  Cbsarini, 

GlULIANO. 

JTTLIAH  OF  ECLANUM:  The  most  gifted  and 
consistent  champion  of  Pelagianism;  b.  in  Apulia 
between  380  and  390;  d.,  according  to  Gennadius, 
under  Valentinian  III.  (425-455) .  Well  educated  in 
classical  literature,  he  learned  from  Aristotle  the 
art  of  dialectics  which  he  used  so  cleverly  in  later 
times.  While  still  a  youth,  he  became  bishop  of 
Eclanum  near  Beneventum  and  seems  to  have  been 
greatly  respected.  It  is  not  known  how  he  was 
won  over  to  Pelagianism,  but  this  doctrine  corre- 
sponded to  his  whole  disposition,  which  was  not 
religious,  but  intellectual.  By  an  edict  of  the 
Emperor  Honorius  and  the  Epistola  tracUUaria  of 
the  Roman  Bishop  Zosimus  (see  Pelaoiub),  Julian 
with  seventeen  other  bishops  was  crowded  out  of 
his  episcopal  position  in  418  and  expelled  from  his 


native  country.  Entrusted  with  the  defense  of  his 
associates,  he  assumed  the  leadership  in  the  strug- 
gle against  Augustinianism,  and  attacked  it  first 
in  a  letter  to  Bishop  Rufus  of  Thessalonica,  wherein 
he  laid  down  his  views  concerning  the  divine  crea- 
tion of  each  individual  man,  concerning  marriage, 
law,  the  freedom  of  the  will,  and  baptism  against 
Augustine  and  his  adherents,  whom  he  regarded  as 
Manicheans.  In  connection  with  this  letter  there 
was  issued  a  circular  letter  to  the  adherents  of 
Pelagius  in  Italy,  which,  however,  was  probably 
not  written  by  Julian  himself.  Against  Augus- 
tine's De  nuptiis  et  concupUcentia  he  directed  the 
four  books  of  his  work  Ad  Turhantium  (419);  its 
main  thought  is  the  natural  goodness  of  man  vouch- 
safed by  God's  creation.  Augustine  wrote  a  sec- 
ond treatise  De  nuptiia  et  concupiscentia  and  Julian 
answered  by  addressing  eight  books  to  Fionas  (Libri 
via  ad  Florum  contra  Augtistine  librum  Becundum  de 
nuptiis).  This  is  Julian's  most  important  writing, 
full  of  personal,  passionate,  and  spiteful  polemics 
against  Augustine,  but  also  fraught  with  diedectical 
acuteness  and  logical  sequence  of  thoughts;  it 
forms  the  proper  source  for  the  knowledge  of  Ju- 
lian's theology.  The  efforts  of  himself  and  his  as- 
sociates at  the  court  of  the  Byzantine  Emperor 
Theodosius  II.  (d.  450)  to  be  restored  to  their  posi- 
tions were  without  success,  and  Marius  Mercator 
especially  caused  his  expulsion  from  Constantinople. 
At  the  Council  of  Ephesus  in  431  he  was  expressly 
condenmed. 

The  fimdamental  presupposition  of  Jidian's  doc- 
trines is  that  sin  is  a  matter  of  the  will  and  not  of 
nature.  Will  again  presupposes  the  freedom  of 
choice,  and  this  consists  in  the  possibility  of  ad- 
mitting or  rejecting  sin.  In  virtue  of  this  liberty 
of  will  man  bears  the  image  of  God  within  himself 
and  is  akin  to  him  just  as  according  to  his  sensual 
nature  he  is  related  to  the  animal.  In  free  will 
man  possesses  such  a  perpetual  possibility  of  will- 
ing and  not  willing  that  Julian  denies  even  the  force 
of  motives.  From  this  conception  of  free  will  it 
follows  that  it  is  a  possession  which  can  not  be  lost 
and  can  not  be  restrained  or  limited  by  sin.  The 
conception  of  sin  as  a  work  of  the  will  implies  that 
it  can  arise  only  under  an  entirely  free  choice. 
Therefore  Julian  found  himself  in  entire  opposition 
to  Augustine's  doctrine  of  hereditary  sin.  It  is  a 
contradidio  in  adjecto  since  sin  and  guilt  can  exist 
only  where  there  is  freedom  of  decision.  Children 
can  not  sin  because  they  have  no  will.  It  is  per- 
fect nonsense  to  deny  the  virtue  of  pagans.  Augus- 
,tine's  doctrine  is  altogether  Manichean  since  only 
the  devil  can  be  the  creator  and  lord  of  an  evil 
nature.  Augustine  is  even  worse  than  Mani,  since 
he  makes  God  the  author  and  multiplier  of  sin. 
Since  God  creates  the  nature  of  each  individual 
man,  it  must  be  good.  If  man  were  evil  by  nature 
he  would  not  be  capable  of  redemption;  disgrace 
of  nature  would  therefore  imply  the  denial  of  grace. 
The  doctrine  of  original  sin  contradicts  also  the 
justice  of  God,  since  according  to  it  he  recom- 
penses and  punishes  that  which  is  not  a  matter  of 
liberty  and  not  due  to  one's  own  fault.  Justice, 
however,  is  a  generally  acknowledged  and  fundar 
mental  law,  and  a  contradiction  to  this  law  suffices 


Julian 
JuU«a 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOQ 


262 


for  th*  refutation  of  the  doctrine  of  hereditary  sin. 
Death  is  not  evil;  it  is  natural  for  a  creature  to  die. 
The  doctrine  of  hereditary  sin  destroys  also  the 
sanctity  of  marriage.    Marriage  is  pleasing  to  God 
as  the  sexual  impulse  is  his  work.    Even  Christ 
possessed  concupiscence,  and  if  there  was  no  natr 
taraie  peceahim  in  him,  it  is  also  not  in  our  nature. 
At  the  same  time  Julian  does  not  deny  the  impor- 
tance of  God's  grace.    Our  bodily  and  especially 
our  spiritual  endowments  are  works  of  divine  grace. 
He  does  not  deny  the  loss  of  the  meriium  innocen- 
Hoe,    In  baptism  we  receive  forgiveness  of  sin  and 
incitement  to  good  works.    Thus  the  good  will  of 
man  is  aided  by  God.    The  increase  of  divine  bene- 
factions is  useful  and  necessary  although  virtue 
and  sin  remain  always  a  matter  of  free  will.    Julian 
always  tried  to  prove  his  position  frcHn  Scripture, 
but  he  did  not  consider  this  his  last  and  highest 
authority;   for  him  reason  was  higher  than  Scrip- 
ture and  tradition.    Scripture  can  never  contra- 
dict what  reason  teaches.    No  one  ever  understood 
how  to  use  the  art  of  dialectics  more  cleverly  than 
Julian,  and  he  tried  to  decide  all  questions  by  log- 
ical conclusions.  (N.  Bonwbtbch.) 
Biblioorapbt:  The  ehief  fonroM  are:  Notioee  in  Ausuetine 
(who  bed  known  Julian's  peiente  end  took  an  interest 
in  him),  vols.  ii.  and  x.  of  the  Benedictine  edition  of  his 
works  and  MPL,  yrriii.,  xliv.,  xlv.;    ef.  xIt.  1736  sqq. 
For  further  notices:  Marios  Ifercator.  MPL,  xlviii.;   Vin- 
cent of  Lerins;    Prosper;    and  Gennadius.     Consult  A. 
Bruckner,   Julian  von  Eklanum,   agin  Ltbtn  und  aeint 
Lehn,  in  TU,  zv.  3.  Leipsic.  1807;   C.  T.  Q.  SohOnemann, 
BUdiothsea  .  .  .  pairum  LaHnontm,  ii..  |  18,  ib.  1704  (con- 
densed account,  but  Taluable);    W.  ftnith.  Dictionary  of 
Ormk  and  Roman  Biography  and  Mythology,  ii.  643-644, 
London,  1890;    Hamack,  Dogma,  y.  171  sqq.,  186  sqq., 
203.  236,  236.  vi.  303;    Oillier,  Avteurt  wrH,  iz.  483- 
638.  consult  Index;    Neander.  Chriatian  Churdi,  ii  660- 
665  et  passim;    Sehaff.  Chriatian  Churdi,  m,  800,  837- 
838.  037;  DCB,  iii.  460^73;  Von  Schubert,  in  TU,  zxiv. 
4  (1003). 

JULIAH  OF  HALICARHASSUS:  Bishop  of  Hall- 
camassus.  Little  is  known  of  Julian's  life  and 
personality.  As  bishop  of  Halicamassus  in  Caria, 
he  took  part  with  the  later  patriarch  of  Antioch, 
Severus,  (q.v.)  in  the  intrigue  which  led  to  the  down- 
fall of  the  Patriarch  Maoedonius  of  Constantinople 
in  511.  After  his  banishment  at  the  beginning  of 
the  reign  of  Justin  I.  in  518  (see  Mongphtbites), 
he  took  up  his  abode  in  the  cloister  of  Enaton,  be- 
fore the  gates  of  Alexandria.  Here  he  became  in- 
volved with  Severus,  likewise  in  exile,  in  a  dispute 
over  the  question  whether  Christ's  body  during  his 
life  on  earth  was  incorruptible  or  corruptible 
(see  below).  At  Alexandria  the  dispute  led  to  a 
division  of  the  Monophysite  party  which  continued 
till  the  seventh  century.  Julian's  later  destinies 
are  unknown;  at  all  events,  he  did  not  return  to 
Halicamassus.  His  doctrine  circulated  as  far  as 
Arabia,  and  also  found  acceptance  in  the  Armenian 
Church. 

There  are  extant  the  following  works  of  Julian: 
his  correspondence  with  Severus,  in  the  Syriac 
translation  of  Bishop  Paul  of  Callinicus;  ten  anath- 
emas; and  a  commentary  on  Job  printed  among 
Origen's  works,  and  only  lately  recognized  by  Use- 
ner  as  a  work  of  Julian's. 

The  expressions  "  incorruptible,"  **  corruptible," 
or  "  imperishable,"  ''  perishable,"  do  not  correctly 


reproduce  the  debated  meaning  of  apkihartos, 
phihartoB,  as  understood  by  Julian  and  Severus. 
The  controversy  hinges  not  upion  fhthora,  as  indi- 
cating total  dissolution  of  the  body  into  so  many 
atoms,  but  on  the  phikora  existing  in  the  natural 
infirmities  of  the  body;  such  as  hunger,  thirst, 
weariness,  sweat,  tears,  bleeding,  etc.  So,  as 
Julian  conceived  it,  the  body  of  Christ  was  not 
subject  to  this  manner  of  **  corruption,"  which  is 
a  characteristic  of  human  nature  in  consequence  of 
Adam's  sin.  When  Christ  himgered  and  thirsted, 
he  did  so  because  he  willed  it,  not  of  necessity;  and 
he  willed  so,  because  only  in  that  way  could  he 
free  us  from  corruption.  But  Julian  did  not  ad- 
mit that,  in  order  to  redeem  us,  Christ  must  have 
possessed  a  body  subjected  to  corruption  through- 
out. He  could  not  believe  that  one  and  the  same 
being  was  both  "  corruptible  "  and  "  incorruptible." 
With  singular  inconsistency,  however,  be  did  not 
believe  himself  compelled  to  deny  the  doctrine  of 
the  like  nature  of  Christ's  body  to  that  of  ours; 
on  the  contrary,  he  expressly  rejected  the  opposite 
doctrine,  that  of  Eutyches.  The  Julian  party  re- 
proached their  opponents  for  being  "  corruption 
worshipers  ";  whereas  these  retorted  with  the  re- 
proach of  docetism,  insomuch  that  the  epithets 
'^aphthartodocetics"  and  "  phantasiasts,"  or  illu- 
sionists, ever  afterward  stayed  attached  to  the 
Julianists.  In  this  matter,  the  orthodox  and  the 
Severians  made  common  cause,  although  there  were 
some  ''  aphthartodocetics  "  among  the  orthodox 
themselves.  For  the  fact  that  Emperor  Justinian 
himself  was  open  to  this  line  of  argument  see  Jus- 
tinian; and  for  the  significance  of  the  contro- 
verted question  generally,  as  a  phase  of  Monophy- 
sitism,  see  Monophtbites.  G.  KntJcER. 

Bibuoobapht:  C.  W.  F.  Waleh.  Hialorie  der  Kataereien, 
viil  650  sqq.,  886  sqq..  Leipeie.  1778;  J.  G.  L.  CUeaeler. 
Commentatio,  qua  Monophyaitarum  .  .  .  variaa  da  ChriaH 
paraona  opinionea  .  .  .  iUuairantur,  2  parts,  OAttinsen. 
1836;  J.  P.  N.  Land.  Anecdota  Syriaea,  iii  263-271.  Ley- 
den,  1870;  H.  Usener,  in  H.  Lietxmann.  Caienen,  pp.  28- 
34,  Freibuni.  1897;  idem,  in  Rheiniaehaa  Muaeum,  !▼ 
(1900).  321-340;  £.  Ter-Minaasianti,  in  TU,  xxvl  4 
(1904),  paaBim;  Knunbaeher.  Oeaehichte,  pp.  62-63; 
Geillier.  Aulaura  aacrea,  viil  364,  3d.  109.  344;  DCB,  vL 
476-476. 

JULIAN    OF   TOLEDO.    See    Pomerivs,   Juu- 

ANUS. 

JULIUS:    The  name  of  three  popes. 

Julias  I:  Pope  337-352.  According  to  tradi- 
tion he  was  the  son  of  Rusticus,  a  Roman,  and 
elected  after  a  long  interregnum  Feb.  6,  337.  Little 
is  known  of  his  pontificate,  except  in  regard  to  his 
spiritual  care  for  the  rapidly  growing  Roman  com- 
munity— he  built  no  less  than  five  new  churches— 
and  to  his  position  in  the  Arian  controversy,  which 
had  scarcely  affected  Rome  before  his  time.  He 
took  part  in  it  only  when  both  parties  sought  a  de- 
cision from  him.  The  request  came  first  from  the 
Eusebians,  who  sent  three  Eastern  clerics  in  338  to 
ask  his  approval  of  their  deposition  of  Athanasius 
and  putting  PLstus  in  his  place.  Soon  afterward 
an  embassy  appeared  from  Athanasius,  who  so  suc- 
cessfully presented  their  case  that  the  Eusebians 
themselves,  so  Athanasius  asserts,  proposed  the 
reference  of  the  matter  to  a  new  council.    Pr»- 


d68 


RELIGIOUS  ENCfYCLOPEDU 


Julian 
Julius 


ently,  however,  the  Eusebians  got  the  ear  of  the 
Emperor  Constantius,  and  by  Easter,  339,  Athana- 
siuB  himself  was  seeking  refuge  in  Rome,  to  be  fol- 
lowed by  other  banished  orthodox  prelates.    The 
friendly  reception  which  they  received  in  Rome 
gave  the  Eusebians  an  excuse  for  rudely  refusing 
Julius'  invitation  to  the  proposed  council.    It  met 
at  Rome  in  340,  and  absolved  Athanasius  and  Mar- 
oelluB  of  Ancyra  from  the  charges  brought  against 
them.    Julius    communicated    the    result    to    the 
Orientals  in  his  famous  epistle  to  Flacillus,  a  mas- 
terpiece of  diplomacy.    He  considers  the  question 
from  the  standpoint  of  ecclesiastical  law,  asserting 
that  the  Council  of  Nicsahad  permitted  the  revi- 
sion of  the  acts  of  one  synod  by  another,  though  no 
foundation  is  known  for  this  statement,  and  justi- 
fies his  reopening  of  the  case  of  Athanasius  by  the 
assertion  that  the  custom  of  the  Church  requires 
the  bishop  of  Rome  to  be  notified  of  charges  against 
bishops  (or  against  the  bishop  of  Alexandria)  and 
to  lay  down  the  law.    This  does  not  apparently 
cover  the  later  claim  to  a  supreme  judicial  fimc- 
tion;   and  it  did  not  even  attain  the  result  which 
Julius  hoped.    The  relations  between  Rome  and 
the  East  were  more  strained  than  ever,  and  it  was 
not  Julius  but  Hosius  of  Cordova  that  determined 
Ck>nstans  to  summon  the  Council  of  Sardica  in  343. 
This  coimcil  recogniased  the  pope  as  the  strongest 
support  of  the  Nicene  party,  and  passed  canons 
which  really  allowed  him  a  more  limited  authority 
than  the  Coimcil  of  Chaloedon  gave  in  similar  cases 
to  the  exarchs  and  the  patriarchs  of  Constantinople, 
although  their  importance  lies  in  the  use  which 
later   popes   made   of  them,   interpolating   them 
among  those  of  Nicsea  and  deducing  from  them  a 
final  judicial  authority  over  the  whole  Church. 
Julius  seems  to  have  had  no  opportimity  to  act  on 
these  provisions,  since  the  change  in  the  emperor's 
attitude  toward  the  Nicene  party  left  him  no  longer 
the   central   figure   in   the   strife.    He   welcomed 
Athanasius  in  Rome  on  his  homeward  journey  in 
346,  and  shortly  after,  at  the  request  of  a  synod 
in  Milan,  he  investigated  the  orthodoxy  of  Ursa- 
dus  and  Valens,  and  received  them  both  again  into 
conamunion.     He  died  Apr.  12,  352,  and  was  early 
honored  in  Rome  as  a  saint,  while  the  number  of 
forgeries  passing  xmder  his  name  shows  the  impres- 
sion which  his  clever  policy  made  on  succeeding 
generations  and  the  extent  to  which  it  was  held  to 
have  strengthened  the  papal  authority. 

(H.  B6HMER.) 
Bibuogbaphy:  Souroea  are:  Uhv  ponHflealU,  ed.  Duchesne, 
t  206,  Pariii,  1886,  ed.  Mommaen  in  MOH,  Oest.  porU. 
Rem.,  i  (1808),  75-76;  CataloguB  Ltberiania,  ed.  Momm- 
een  in  MGH,  Auet.  ant.,  ix  (1802).  76;  EpUt.  in  MPL, 
Txii  Consult:  B.  Jungmann,  DiMerlaHonea  Mleetae,  ii. 
7-31,  Regensburg.  1881;  L.  Rivington,  Primitive  Church 
and  ih€  Siee  of  St.  Peier,  pp.  173  sqq.,  467  sqq.,  London, 
1894;  W.  Bright,  Roman  See  and  the  Early  Chtwdi,  pp.  81 
sqq..  ib.  1896;  Mihnan,  Latin  ChriatianUy,  I  100-101; 
Bower,  Popes.  L  M-SI9;  KL,  vt  1097-98. 

Julius  n.  (Giuliano  Rovere — ^he  was  not  con- 
nected with  the  highly  aristocratic  Delia  Rovere 
family):  Pope  1503-13.  He  was  bom  at  Albiz- 
sola,  near  Savona  (25  m.  s.w.  of  Genoa),  1443. 
When  his  uncle,  Francesco  (later  Pope  Sixtus  IV.), 
became  cardinal,  he  turned  to  the  spiritual  career, 
likewise  becoming  cardinal  by  1471;   and  in  1480- 


1481,  he  was  legate  to  the  French  King  Louis  XI. 
He  exerted  only  a  moderate  influence  over  his 
uncle,  Sixtus  IV.  (d.  1484),  who  stood  under  the 
sway  of  another  nephew,  Cardinal  Riario;  but  he 
determined  the  policy  of  his  successor.  Innocent 
VIII.  (q.v.).  However,  when  Borgia  (Alexander 
VI.)  ascended  the  papal  throne,  Julius  was  com- 
pelled to  secure  his  life  by  flight  to  France  (1494). 
It  was  not  xmtil  1498,  when  the  growing  power  of 
the  pope  drew  the  second  successor  of  Louis  XI. 
to  his  side,  that  Julius  became  ostensibly  recon- 
ciled with  Alexander,  and  now  wrought  for  the  con- 
clusion of  a  compact  between  the  two  rulers  which 
occasioned  fresh  war  over  Italy.  He  did  not  ven- 
ture back  to  Rome  till  after  the  death  of  Alexander 
VI.  (Aug.  18,  1503).  On  Oct.  31,  1503,  after  the 
sudden  end  of  the  pontificate  of  Pius  III.,  lasting 
less  than  a  month,  he  was  chosen  pope.  He  had 
gained  the  Spanish  cardinals  by  the  degrading 
promise  not  to  contest  the  Romagna  against  Bor- 
gia's son  Gesare.  Nevertheless,  in  the  first  year 
of  his  pontificate,  he  demanded  the  delivery  of  the 
fortresses  in  that  region  and  node  Gesare  captive. 
Then  the  Venetians  interposed,  and  occupied  the 
Romagna;  but,  owing  to  a  league  of  the  pope  with 
France  and  Germany  in  1504,  they  were  compelled 
to  surrender  all  the  occupied  points  except  Rimini 
and  Faenza.  Julius  then  at  the  head  of  an  army 
wrested  these  cities  from  the  Venetians  and  united 
the  entire  district  with  the  Papal  States.  The  en- 
mity toward  Venice  continued,  and  in  1506  Jidius 
again  contrived,  in  the  League  of  Cambrai,  to  com- 
bine the  mightiest  sovereigns  of  the  West — Spain, 
France,  and  Germany — against  the  republic.  The 
Curia  now  began  a  system  of  deceitfid  and  oppor- 
txmist  seesaw  statecraft  whereby  it  maintained  its 
position  among  the  nations.  Hardly  were  the  dis- 
tricts that  had  been  occupied  by  Venice  won  back 
by  the  help  of  France,  when  Julius  arrayed  himself 
against  France  on  the  side  of  Venice.  The  French 
king's  resentment  went  so  far  that  in  1510  he  as- 
sembled a  national  synod  against  the  pope  at 
Tours,  and  sought  an  alliance  with  Emperor  Maxi- 
milian, with  a  view  to  depose  the  pope  from  his 
dignity.  Maximilian  actually  thought  of  crown- 
ing his  own  head  with  the  tiara.  Meanwhile,  Julius 
in  person  waged  war  on  the  duke  of  Ferrara,  who 
had  remained  on  the  side  of  France,  hoping  to 
unite  his  city  and  territory  with  the  States  of  the 
Church;  and  he  succeeded,  in  the  winter  of  1511; 
but  France  retaliated  by  occupying  Bologna,  and 
an  antipapal  coimcil  was  convened  at  Pisa.  In 
opposition,  Julius  convened  the  Fifth  Lateran 
Coimcil  in  1512,  and,  by  foimding  the  ''  Holy 
League,"  he  secured  the  retreat  of  the  French  across 
the  Alps  in  the  same  year.  He  still  managed  to 
add  Parma  and  Piacenza  to  the  States  of  the 
Church;  but  all  the  results  of  his  war-lust  and  of 
his  statecraft  continued  insecure,  since  the  States 
of  the  Church,  being  subject  to  a  policy  of  constant 
vacillation,  lacked  the  conditions  of  independent 
existence.    He  died  Feb.  21,  1513. 

E.  Benrath. 

Biblxooraprt:  For  souroea  consult  hia  bulla  in  A.  M. 
Cherubini,  MoQnum  \nMarium  Rcmanum^  t  477  sqq., 
Lyona,  1655,  and  in  Turin  ed.,  y.  399  aqq.;    B-  Brown, 


Julius  III 
Julius  Bohtar 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


264 


CdUndar  cf  8taU  Paptn,  vob.  l-iL,  London.  1864  iqq.; 
Pauli  Jovii  Bittoria  fui  temporu,  Basel.  1617;  O.  Ray- 
nftkiua,  AnnaUa  seduiatHd,  Cologne.  1604-1727.  Con- 
milt  further:  A.  von  Reumont,  Oeachiehie  <Ur  StatU  Rom, 
iii  10  sqq..  Berlin,  1870;  Q.  Balbi,  Juliu9  !!.,  BerUn. 
1877;  J.  Burekhardt,  Die  Cultur  der  Renaiaaance  in  ItaUen, 
L  112.  231  eqq..  Leipeio,  1877;  idem.  OetdiidUe  der  Ra- 
nai»9ance  in  liali^n,  pp.  11  aqq..  ib.  1877;  M.  Broech, 
Paptt  JtUitu  II.  und  die  OrUnduno  dm  KirehaneiaaUe, 
Gotha.  1878;  F.  Gregorovius.  Oeaehiehte  der  Stadt  Rom, 
▼ol.  yiii..  Stuttgart.  1881;  Greighton,  Papacy,  ▼.  68-202; 
Raoke.  Popes,  i.  30  sqq..  ui.  11-14;  Bower.  Popw,  iii. 
28a-200;  KL,  vi.  1008-2002. 

Joliiu  nL  (Giovanni  Maria  del  Monte):  Pope 
1550-^.  He  was  bom  of  a  distinguished  Roman 
family,  being  nephew  of  Cardinal  Antonio  del 
Monte,  in  Rome  in  1487.  By  favor  of  Julius  II. 
he  succeeded  his  uncle  as  archbishop  of  Siponto, 
and  in  1536  became  cardinal  under  Paul  III.  As 
papal  legate  at  the  opening  of  the  Council  of  Trent 
in  1545,  he  managed  to  thwart  all  the  plans  of  the 
emperor.  In  spite  of  the  opposition  of  the  car- 
dinals with  imperial  sympathies,  he  was  elected 
pope  after  the  death  of  Paul  III.  in  1550.  Hence- 
forth he  thoroughly  reversed  his  policy  toward  the 
emperor,  inviting  him  to  reopen  the  council  after 
its  suspension,  and  turned  away  from  Henry  II.  of 
France,  whereupon  the  latter  sided  with  the  Far- 
nese  nephews  and  tried  to  constitute  them  proprie- 
tors of  the  contested  possessions  in  southern  Italy 
which  heretofore  they  had  held  from  the  Church  as 
retainers.  The  pope  was  again  obliged  to  suspend 
the  council  when  Maurice  of  Saxony,  in  1552, 
turned  unexpectedly  against  the  emperor,  and  al- 
most captured  him  at  Innsbruck.  The  most  mo- 
mentous event  during  the  pontificate  of  Julius  III. 
was  the  death  of  Edward  VI.  of  England,  and  the 
return  of  England  to  the  Roman  obedience.  Ju- 
lius despatch^  Cardinal  Pole  (see  Pole,  Reginald) 
as  plenipotentiary  legate  to  Queen  Bfary  Tudor, 
and  he  brought  it  to  pass  that  Parliament  again 
recognized  the  papal  supremacy,  though  subject 
to  acceptance  of  the  consimmiated  transfer  of 
chiutsh  property  to  state  or  private  possession. 
He  then  achieved  the  bloody  realisation  of  the 
Counter-Reformation  in  Engkuid.  The  pontificate 
of  Julius  III.  occurred  at  a  time  when  in  Italy,  too, 
the  nullification  of  the  reforming  movement  was 
prosecuted  with  every  instnmient  of  force  and 
cunning.  He  assured  free  play  and  advancement 
to  the  Inquisition,  even  though  his  indolent  nature 
did  not  so  energetically  and  personally  interest  him 
in  this  matter  as  proved  true  of  his  successors. 
That  his  moral  life  before  and  after  his  elevation  to 
the  papal  throne  bears  no  strict  scrutiny,  is  at- 
tested by  the  utterances  of  many  contemporaries. 
The  avowed  favorite  Innocent,  originally  a  street 
urchin  of  Parma,  was  not  the  only  unworthy  re- 
cipient on  whom  he  bestowed  chim^h  dignities  and 
goods.  He  likewise  endowed  his  relatives  in  this 
way;  but  the  full  time  of  political  nepotism  was 
past.  Julius  died  May  23,  1555,  shortly  after  send- 
ing Cardinal  Morone  to  Germany,  with  the  purpose 
of  giving  such  a  turn  to  the  religious  peace  at  the 
impending  Diet  of  Augsburg,  that  Germany  should 
be  led  bade  to  the  bosom  of  the  Roman  Church  after 
the  precedent  of  England.  The  same  aim  was  to 
be  promoted  also  by  the  Ck)llegium  Germanicum  in 


Rome,  founded  by  Ignatius  Loyola,  and  formally 
opened  in  1552,  where  the  61ite  of  the  Jesuit  order 
were  to  be  educated  for  the  battle  against  German 
Protestantism.  K.  Ben  rath. 

Bibliookapht:  The  bulls  of  Julius  are  in  A.  M.  Cbenibini. 
Magman  buXUxrium  Romanwn,  i.  778  sqq..  Turin  ed..  vt 
401  sqq.  Consult:  Dec  faita  ei  goalee  du  pope  Jvlee  ///. 
Geneva  (T).  1551;  O.  Raynaldus.  Annalee  ecdeeiaaiiei,  Co- 
logne. 1604-1727;  Paolo  Sarpi.  The  HiaUnie  of  <Ae  CouiuxU 
c/  Treni,  pp.  208-303.  371.  376.  382-380.  London.  1620; 
C.  Weiss,  Papiere  da  VHat  du  cardinal  do  OranveOe,  vol.  iii.. 
Paris.  1841;  W.  G.  Soldan.  GeeehidUe  dee  Proteataniiamue 
in  Frankreieh,  i.  226  sqq.,  Leipoic,  1866;  Petruoelli  della 
Gattina,  Hiat.  diplomaiique  dee  eondavaa,  ii.  23  sqq.. 
Paris.  1864;  A.  von  Reumont,  CfeadiiefUa  der  Stadt  Rom^ 
iii.  2,  pp.  603  sqq..  Berlin.  1870;  L.  Maynier.  £iude  hia- 
torique  aur  le  concile  de  Trente,  pp.  686  sqq.,  Paris.  1874; 
M.  Brosch.  OeaehidUe  dee  KirchenataaU,  I  189  aqq..  Gotba, 
1880;  De  Leva,  in  Riaiaia  etorica  Italiana,  1884,  pp.  632 
sqq.;  Ranke.  Popes,  i.  206-210  et  passim;  Bower.  Popaa. 
iii.  317;  KL,  vi.  2002-06;  and  literature  under  Trent, 
Council  op. 

JULIUS    AFRICANUSy    SEXTUS:    One    of   the 
most  learned  ecclesiastical  writers  of  the  third  cen- 
tury;  b.  probably  about  160  in  Africa,  perhaps  in 
Libya;    d.  probably  soon  after  240.    In  early  life 
he  may  have  been  an  officer,  but  after  the  expedi- 
tion of  Septimius  Severus  against  Osrhoene  (195) 
he   settled    at  Emmaus  (Nicopolis)   in  Palestine. 
About  215  he  spent  some  time  in  Alexandria  study- 
ing under  Heraclas,  and  later,  in  the  reign  of  EUL- 
gabalus  or  Alexander  Severus,  went  to  Rome  on 
behalf  of  his  fellow  citizens.     He  published  his 
"  Chronography  "  in  the  fourth  year   of   EUgab- 
alus,  and  his  heterogeneous  work  entitled  Kettoi 
("  Embroiderings  **)  under  Alexander,  to  whom  it 
was  dedicated.    His  extant  letter  to  Origen,  whom 
he  calls  ''  son,''  was  written  in  his  old  age.    That 
he  was  ordained  in  later  life  is  doubtful.     He  is  one 
of  the  few  ancient  Greek  Fathers  who  were  in  rela- 
tion with  Rome,  and  this  was  an  advantage  to  his 
"  Chronography."    Divided  into  five  books,  and 
beginning  with  an  apologetic  purpose,  it  develops 
a  scientific  aim  and  shows  a  good  knowledge  of 
earlier  pagan  and  Jewish  sources.    The  whole  work 
was  practically  incorporated  into  the  chronogrs- 
phies  of  later  writers,  especially  Eusebius,  and  de- 
serves to  be  considered  not  only  as  the  basis  of 
Christian   chronography,   but  as  relatively  better 
executed  than  the  attempts  of  Julius'  successors. 
Critical  study  of  the  KeaUn  has  made  so  little  prog- 
ress that  it  is  scarcely  worth  while  to  summarise  its 
conclusions.    It  appears  to  have  been  intended  as 
a  sort  of  encyclopedia  of  the  material  sciences  with 
the  cognate  mathematical  and  technical  branches, 
but  to  have  contained  a  large  proportion  of  merely 
curious,  trifling,  or  miraculous  matters,  on  which 
account  the  authorship  of  Julius  has  been  ques- 
tioned.   Among  the  parts  published  are  sections 
on  agriculture,  liturgiology,  tactics,  and  medicine 
(including  veterinary  practise).    The  two  letters, 
that  to  Aristides  on  the  gen^ogies  of  Christ,  of 
which  only  fragments  are  preserved,  and  that  to 
Origen  on  the  story  of  Susanna,  are  admirable  bits 
of  critical  historical  work.  (A.  Harnack.) 

Bibuoorapht:  Incomplete  collectione  of  the  {ng^Mnt8  en 
in  A.  Gallandi,  Btbliothaca  veierum  pairum,  u.  337-376, 
14  vols.,  Venice,  176&-81.  and  in  M.  J.  Routh,  B^ivmoi 
eaeraa,  vol.  ii.,  6  vols.,  Oxford.  184&-48.  The  bast  ed.  of 
the  "  ChronoKraphy  "  is  in  Gelser,  see  below;    for  tba 


d65 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Julius  IZX 
Julius  Bohtar 


Ketici  consult  VgUrum  malhi§maiieonim  opera,  ed.  M. 
TbeTonot  and  J.  BoiTin.  Fuia,  1603;  and  for  the  Letter 
to  Arietidas.  F.  Spitta,  D«r  Bri^f  det  Jvlitu  AfirieanuB  an 
AriaHdM,  Halle.  1877.  An  Eng.  trand.  of  the  fragmenta 
is  in  ANF,  tI  123  sqq.;  and  a  list  of  literature  is  given 
in  ANF,  BiblioKraphy,  pp.  68-60.  Consult:  Jerome.  De 
vtr.  tlL.  Iziii;  H.  Gelaer.  Sextu*  Jtdiu§  Aj^rieantu  und  die 
bymnHmeAe  Chronographie,  2  vols.,  Leipeio.  1880-08; 
Sohaff.  ChrieHan  Chvreh,  iii.  803-^806;  KrOger,  Htstory. 
pp.  348-263;  Hamack.  LiUeraiur,  I  607-^13,  ii.  1.  pp. 
124  sqq.,  ii.  part  ii..  passim;  DCB,  I  63-57. 

JULIUS  BCHTER:  Bishop  of  WOraburg  1573- 
1617;  b.  at  the  castle  of  Mespelbnmn  in  the  Spes- 
sart  (northwestern  Bavaria)  Mar.  18,  1545;  d.  at 
Wtiraburg  Sept.  13,  1617.  The  circumstances 
under  which  his  work  was  begun  were  as  follows: 
Not  till  after  1540,  after  the  death  of  Bishop  Con- 
rad II.,  did  the  Reformation  prosper  in  the  diocese 
of  WQrzbuig.  Then  almost  all  citi- 
Early  sens  and  noblemen  separated  from  the 
Activity,  old  church  and  inaugurated  Lutheran 
preachers.  Roman  Gathohc  institu- 
tions decayed  and  the  secular  clergy  was  without 
means  and  protection,  so  that  many  of  its  members 
adopted  the  new  doctrine.  Bishop  Friedrich  of 
Wirsbeig  (1558-73)  did  not  possess  the  necessary 
energy  to  stem  the  tide  of  the  new  movement,  al- 
though he  sought  a  very  close  political  union  with 
Bavaria  and  in  1567,  against  the  opposition  of  the 
cathedral  chapter,  realized  the  foundation  of  a 
Jesuit  college  in  WQrzbuig.  On  Dec.  1, 1573,  Julius 
Echter  was  elected  bishop.  He  had  been  educated 
in  the  Roman  Catholic  spirit  from  1560  to  1569  at 
Mainz,  Louvain,  Douai,  Paris,  Angers,  Pavia  and 
Rome.  As  a  licentiate  of  law  and  with  a  fund  of 
knowledge  often  praised  in  later  times  he  came  in 
1569  to  Wtlrzburg  where  he  was  received  as  an 
active  member  of  the  cathedral  chapter.  In  1570 
he  became  dean  of  the  cathedral  and  in  his  twenty- 
eighth  year  was  elected  bishop,  to  the  great  satis- 
faction of  Rome.  In  spite  of  contrary  statements, 
it  has  been  proved  that  he  never  had  Protestant 
inclinations.  He  represented  the  interests  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  estates  of  the  realm  at  the  diet  of 
Regensbuig  in  1576  and  of  Augsburg  in  1582.  Con- 
tinuing the  policy  of  his  predecessor,  he  kept  in  the 
closest  touch  with  Bavaria.  He  was  thought  to  be 
secretly  inclined  toward  Protestantism  because  of 
his  cooperation  in  the  deposition  of  Balthasar  of 
Dembach,  abbot  of  Fulda,  in  1576  at  Hanmielbuig, 
but  this  action  was  due  to  a  youthful  ambition  to 
incorporate  the  abbacy  of  Fulda  and  to  become  the 
successor  of  Balthasar.  His  act  caused  general  in- 
dignation among  Roman  Catholics,  and  the  abbot 
was  reinstituted  in  1602. 

It  was  only  with  great  hesitancy  that  Julius  un- 
dertook the  work  of  counteracting  the  Reformation 
in  his  diocese.    Although  he  had  been  urged  by 
Rome  in  1575  and  1577,  he  did  not  convoke  a  di- 
ocesan synod  because  he  dreaded  the 
His        hatred    of    the    Protestant    princes. 
Timidity.    Moreover,  he  feared  to  proceed  against 
heretical  ecclesiastics   lest   whole   re- 
gions should  be  deprived  of  ecclesiastics  for  whom 
there  were  no  substitutes.    From  the  noble  fam- 
ilies he  did  not  dare  to  demand  the  oath  of  adher- 
ence to  the  Roman  confession  of  faith  because  he 
suspected  that  none  of  them  had  remained  faithful. 


In  1582  he  still  asked  for  a  papal  brief  that  should 
censure  him  on  account  of  the  conditions  in  his 
diocese  and  impose  upon  him  a  visitation  and  ex- 
amination of  all  ecclesiastics,  and  a  second  similar 
brief  to  be  directed  to  the  chapter.  The  Curia 
granted  both  of  them.  His  implication  in  the 
affair  of  Fulda  also  hampered  his  attempts  against 
the  Reformation,  but,  on  the  other  hand,  it  required 
him  to  give  clear  proof  of  his  fidelity  to  Itoman 
Catholicism.  But  the  weakness  of  the  Protestant 
princes  became  so  evident  at  the  diets  of  1576  and 
1582  and  on  other  occasions  that  Julius  lost  his  fear. 
Nevertheless,  even  in  the  early  years  of  his  ad- 
ministration he  had  made  some  important  changes. 
In  1575  all  concubines,  even  those  of  the  canons, 
were  forced  to  leave  the  city  of  Wtirzbuig;  in  1577 
fourteen  preachers  were  expelled  from  the  chapter; 
in  1581  Julius  rejected  the  interference  of  the  no- 
bility with  religious  affairs.  In  1578  the  seminary 
of  priests  was  newly  organized,  and  in 
His  1582  there  was  established  again  the 
Achieve-  University  of  WQrzburg  as  an  institu- 
mentB  in  tion  of  the  Counter-Reformation,  under 
Counter-  the  dominating  influence  of  the  Jea- 
Reform,  uits.  A  new  church  order  (1584  in 
Latin,  1589  in  a  remodeled  form  in 
German)  impressively  reminded  the  clergy  of  their 
duties  in  the  spirit  of  the  Council  of  Trent  and  en- 
forced a  stricter  ecclesiastical  organization.  All 
Lutheran  preachers  (about  170)  were  deprived  of 
their  offices;  Ph>testant  officers  were  dismissed. 
A  visitation  of  the  whole  diocese  (1585  to  1587) 
was  directed  against  all  Protestant  members  of  the 
population.  In  1587  all  who  did  not  become  Cath- 
olic were  compelled  to  emigrate;  in  the  course  of 
three  years  about  100,000  had  been  converted. 
Only  a  few  hundred  remained  true  to  their  convic- 
tions and  preferred  to  emigrate  in  spite  of  the  fact 
that  they  had  to  leave  one-third  of  their  posses- 
sions to  the  bishop.  Julius  preserved  an  attitude 
of  calm  amid  the  resentment  of  the  Protestants. 
Pamphlets  were  published  against  him,  and  the 
electors  of  Saxony,  Palatinate  and  Brandenburg, 
the  landgrave  of  Hesse,  the  margraves  of  Branden- 
burg and  Baden,  the  prince  of  Anhalt  protested, 
some  addressing  themselves  to  the  emperor  with 
complaints  about  the  violation  of  the  religious  peace; 
but  Julius  no  longer  overestimated  the  importance 
of  these  Protestant  admonitions,  feeling  himself 
secure  under  the  protection  of  Duke  Wilhelm  of 
Bavaria  and  of  the  pope  and  assured  of  the  favor 
of  the  emperor.  The  reform  of  ecclesiastical  insti- 
tutions went  hand  in  hand  with  the  suppression  of 
Protestantism.  The  new  church  order  contained, 
beside  regulations  for  the  conduct  of  the  clergy, 
instructions  concerning  the  church  service,  claimed 
possession  of  the  churches,  and  ordered  observance 
of  the  decrees  of  councils.  There  appeared  re- 
vised editions  of  books  for  the  church  service,  of 
breviaries,  psalters,  and  nussals.  The  book-trade 
was  so  controlled  that  only  unobjectionable  books 
were  circulated.  The  monasteries,  too,  felt  the  re- 
forming influence  of  the  bishop — the  possessions  of 
those  that  were  hopelessly  ruined  were  used  for 
other  purposes  (university,  hospital),  the  others 
were  restored  and  subjected  to  rigorous  visitations; 


hampers 
Juriaa 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


dM 


in  the  same  way  the  chapter  was  reformed.  A  few 
of  the  nobility  opposed  the  new  state  of  affairs,  and 
remnants  of  the  Reformation  were  still  found  at  the 
beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century;  but  on  the 
whole  Wflrzburg  had  become  thoroughly  Catholic, 
and  the  generation  following  that  of  Julius  was  de- 
voted to  the  church  and  the  Jesuits.    See  BxiyrHA- 

ZAR  OF  DbBNBACH  AND  THB  CoUNTEB-RbFORMATION 
IN    PULDA.  (W.  GOETZ.) 

Bibuoorarht:  J.  N.  Buchioger,  Jutiut  Bchter  von  Metpel- 
hrunn^  Wflriburg,  1843;  H.  L.  J.  Heppe,  Re§tauraiion  da 
KatholicUmus  in  .  .  .  WUrwburo,  Marburs,  1860;  F.  X. 
Wegele,  OetchichU  der  UnivtrtiUU  WHnburg,  2  vols., 
WOrsburg,  1882;  Lomen,  in  Fortehunoen  der  dmiiaektn 
Otaehiehie,  vol.  xxiii.;  M.  Ritter.  Deutadu  OeBchiefUe  im 
ZeUaUer  der  QeoenreformaHon,  i.  624  sqq..  Stuttcart,  1887; 
J.  Jansflen,  Hiei.  of  the  German  People,  viii.  336,  366. 
London.  1906;  KL,  vi  200»-16. 

JUMPERS:  A  name  applied  in  derision  to  the 
Welsh  Calvinistic  Methodists  (see  Presbyterians) 
since  they  not  only  expressed  their  emotion  in  the 
outcries  frequent  in  Methodist  meetings,  but  also 
"  leaped  and  sprang  for  joy."  These  ecstatic  mani- 
festations first  appear^  about  1760  in  circles  of 
Webh  Methodists,  and  spread  with  such  contagion 
that  they  were  for  a  time  regarded  as  a  character- 
istic of  the  sect.  Justification  for  the  practise  was 
sought  from  I  Sam.  vi.  16;  Luke  vi.  23;  and  Acts 
iii.  8.    The  custom  later  became  obsolete. 

(C.  SCHOBLLf.) 

JUNCKER,  yunk'er,  ALFRED:  German  Protes- 
tant; b.  at  Ida-  und  MarienhQtte,  Silesia,  July  4, 
1865.  He  was  educated  at  the  universities  of 
Breslau,  Berlin,  Leipsic,  and  Halle  from  1884  to 
1888  (Uc.  theol.,  Halle,  1891).  From  1892  to  1895 
he  was  pastor  at  Bunzlau,  after  which  he  was  ap- 
pointed inspector  of  the  Sedlnitzkysches  Johim- 
neum,  Breslau.  In  1896  he  became  privat-docent 
at  the  University  of  Breslau,  where  he  was  ap- 
pointed to  his  present  position  of  associate  profes- 
sor of  New-Testament  exegesis  in  1904.  He  has 
written  Das  Ich  und  die  Motivation  dea  WiUena  im 
Chriatentunif  ein  Beitrag  zur  Ldsung  dea  euddmo- 
nistischen  PrMema  (Halle,  1891);  Die  Etkik  dee 
Apostele  PatUua,  vol.  i.  (Halle,  1904);  and  Daa  Gd>ei 
hei  Paulue  (Gross-Lichterfelde,  1905). 

JUNILIUS:  Ecclesiastical  writer;  b.  in  Africa; 
d.  about  550.  He  was  a  contemporary  of  Cas- 
siodorus  and  lived  at  Constantinople  under  Jus- 
tinian, where  he  held  some  high  civil  office  (accord- 
ing to  Procopius,  Historia  arcana,  xx.,  that  of 
Quaestor  sacri  palatii).  According  to  his  own 
statement,  his  work  entitled:  Instituta  regidaria 
divines  legis,  which  he  dedicated  to  Bishop  Prima- 
sius  of  Hadnunetiun  at  the  time  of  the  Three 
Chapter  Controversy  (q.v.),  is  based  on  the  com- 
munications of  a  Persian  Paulus.  In  the  form  of 
question  and  answer,  this  work,  in  two  books,  con- 
tains a  methodical  introduction  into  the  sacred 
Scriptures.  The  first  part  (book  i.  1-10)  treats  of 
the  various  rhetorical  styles,  of  the  varied  author- 
ity and  authorship  of  the  Scriptures,  distinction 
between  poetry  and  prose,  of  the  proper  sequence 
between  the  two  Testaments.  The  books  of  (Ilhron- 
icles,  Job,  Ezra  with  Nehemiah  and  Esther,  and 
also  Canticles,  James,  II  Peter,  Jude,  II  and  III 


John,  and  Revelation  are  not  reckoned  among  the 
canonical  Scriptures.  The  second  part  (book  i. 
11-ii.  27)  presents  a  synopMsis  of  the  doctrinal  con- 
tent of  Scripture:  of  (3od,  his  being,  the  persons  of 
the  Trinity,  God's  modes  of  operation,  and  his  rela- 
tion to  his  creatures;  of  the  present  world,  creation, 
divine  government,  nature,  free  will;  and  of  the 
world  to  come,  the  story  of  salvation,  election  and 
calling;  of  types  and  prophecies,  and  their  fulfil- 
ment both  in  time  and  in  eternity.  In  conclusion, 
there  are  some  hermeneutical  rules  (ii.  28),  grounds 
for  the  credibility  of  Scripture  (ii.  29),  and  an  ex- 
planation of  the  relation  between  reason  and  faitL 

G.  KRt^GER. 

Biblioobapht:  The  work  of  Junilius  was  edited  by  J.  Gaat, 
Basel,  154A,  reproduced  Paris,  1644,  and  reprinted  is 
MPL,  Ixviii.  15-42;  alao  by  H.  Kihn,  Freiburs.  188a 
and  in  pp.  465-528  of  Kihn 'a  Theodor  von  MopeueeUa  und 
/uniltM  i4/rtoanu«,  ib.  1880.  Consult:  A.  Bahlfa,  is 
fiaehriehten  der  OeeelUchaft  der  Wiaaenackaften  ,  .  .  at 
OdUinoen,  1890,  pp.  242-246;   DCB,  iu.  534-535. 

JUNTOS,  FRANCISCUS  (FRAWgOIS  DU  JON): 
Reformed  theologian;   b.  at  Bouiges  May  1,  1545; 
d.  at  Leyden  Oct.  13,  1602.    At  the  age  of  thirteen 
he  began  the  study  of  law,  but  soon  gave  it  up  in 
order  to  repair  the  deficiencies  of  his  earlier  educa- 
tion at  the  school  of  Lyons,  where  he  succumbed 
for  a  time  to  the  temptations  of  atheism,  but  soon 
was  converted  and  then  studied  theology  at  Ge- 
neva.   In  1565  he  was  called  as  preacher  to  the 
Walloon  congregation  of  Antwerp,  whence  he  bad 
to  flee  in  1567,  owing  to  intrigues  of  Roman  Catho- 
lic and  Anabaptist  opponents.     He  accompanied 
Prince  William  of  Orange  on  his  campaign  to  Cham- 
pagne, then  he  became  pastor  of  the  Walloon  con- 
gregation at  Schdnau  in  the  Palatinate.     In  1573 
Elector  Frederick  III.  called  him  to  Heidelberg  to 
assist  in  a  Latin  translation  of  the  Old  Testament. 
After  the  death  of  the  elector,  Count  Palatine  John 
Casimir  called  him  to  the  newly  established  Caa- 
mirianum  at  Neustadt-on-the-Haardt.     Soon  after- 
ward he  became  preacher  of  the  Walloon  congrega- 
tion in  Otterberg.     In  1582  he  returned  to  his 
professorship  at  Neustadt  and  in  15S4  removed  to 
the  University  of  Heidelberg.     In  1592  he  followed 
a  call  to  Leyden.     In  his  tl^logical  convictions  he 
was  always  a  genuine  pupil  of  Calvin.     His  Ecde- 
eiasOci  eive  de  natiara  et  administratione  ecdegiae 
Dei  libri  tree  (Heidelberg,  1581)  had  great  influence 
upon  the  development  of  synods  and  presbyteries. 
His  ParaUda  eacra  (1588),  a  treatise  on  Old-Testa- 
ment quotations  in  the  New,  was  epoch-making 
for    Biblical    exegesis.     In     his    Animadversiones 
(1602),  against  Bellarmine,  he  defended  Protestant- 
ism against  Romanism,  and  in  De/ensio  catholicae 
doctrinae  (1592)  he  attacked  the  Antitrinitarians. 
Le  Plaisible  Chrestien   ou   de   la  paix  de  Viglife 
catholique,  written  a  few  months  before  the  renun- 
ciation of  Protestantism  by  Henry  IV.,  is  a  defense 
of  an   independent   Gallico-Catholic  Church.    He 
also  made  several  translations,  and  wrote  works  of 
philological  and  historical  interest.     His  contem- 
poraries esteemed  him  very  highly. 

(F.  W.  CuNof.) 
Biblioorapht:  The  early  Vita  by  P.  Menila  appeared  1*7' 
den,    1596,   and   Easlinsen,    1769,   also  reprinted  in  the 
Opera  of  JuniuB,  Geneva,  1607,  1613.    The  bert  moden 


267 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jumpers 
Jnriaa 


life  u  by  F.  W.  Cimo,  Amsterdam,  1801;  otben  are  by 
J.  Reitema,  Groningen,  1864,  and  A.  Dayaine,  Paris, 
1882.  Consult  also  Nioeron,  Mimoirea,  vol.  xvi.;  P. 
Bayle,  Dictionary  HiMtorieal  and  CriHoal,  iii.  623-628, 
London,  1736. 

JXJUKIN,  jun'kin,  GEORGE:.  Presbyterian;  b. 
near  Carlisle,  Pa.,  Nov.  1,  1790;  d.  in  Philadel- 
phia Biay  20,  1868.  He  was  graduated  at  Jeffer- 
son College,  Pa.,  in  1813,  studied  theology  under 
John  M.  Mason  in  New  York,  and  in  1819  became 
pastor  of  the  Associate  Reformed  Church  at  Milton, 
Penn.  In  1822  he  went  over  to  the  Presbyterian 
Church.  He  was  principal  of  the  Pennsylvania 
Manual  Labor  Academy,  Germantown,  Pa.,  1830- 
1832,  president  of  Lafayette  College,  Easton, 
Pa.,  1832-41  and  again  1844-48,  and  president 
of  Miami  University,  Ohio,  1841-44.  In  1848  he 
became  president  of  Washington  College  (now 
Washington  and  Lee  University),  Lexington,  Va. 
On  the  secession  of  Virginia  in  1861,  which  he  had 
strongly  opposed,  he  removed  to  Philadelphia.  He 
was  one  of  the  leaders  of  the  Old  School  Presby- 
terians, and  was  moderator  of  the  General  Assem- 
bly in  1844.  The  more  important  of  his  publica- 
tions are:  The  Vindication:  A  Reply  to  the  Defence 
of  Robert  Barnes  (Philadelphia,  1836);  A  Treatise 
on  Justification  (1839);  Lectures  on  the  Prophecies 
(1844);  Political  Fallacies  (New  York,  1863);  A 
Treatise  on  Sanctification  (Philadelphia,  1864); 
The  Two  Missions,  the  Apostolical  and  the  Evan- 
gelical (1864);  The  Tabernacle  (1865);  and  A  Com- 
mentary upon  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (1873). 

Biblzoobapht:  Hie  Life  was  written  by  his  brother,  D.  X. 
Junkin.  Philadelphia,  1871.  Consult:  E.  H.  Gillett.  Hi§- 
tory  of  Ae  PrtAyienan  Church,  iL  473-475  et  passim, 
Philadelphia,  1864;  R.  E.  Thompson,  American  Church 
Hiatmy  Strie;  vi.  100-111  et  passim,  New  York,  1896; 
J.  H.  Patton,  Popular  Hi*i.  of  Vim  Prttbriterian  Church, 
U.  8,  A.,  pp.  402-404,  422.  ib.  1000. 

JURIEU,  zhQ''rS-0',  PIERRE:  With  the  possi- 
ble exception  of  Pierre  Bayle  (q.v.),  the  most  im- 
portant theologian  and  strongest  controversialist 
of  the  French  Calvinists  at  the  close  of  the  seven- 
teenth century;  b.  at  Mer  (11  m.  n.e.  of  Blois), 
where  his  father  was  pastor,  Dec.  24,  1637;  d.  at 
Rotterdam  Jan.  11,  1713.  He  studied  philosophy 
at  the  Academy  of  Saumur  and  divinity  at  Sedan 
1656-58,  then  traveled  through  the  Netherlands 
and  England.  In  1671  he  succeeded  to  his  father's 
curacy  at  Mer,  was  ordained,  and  remained  there 
till  1674,  when  the  Academy  of  Sedan  elected  him 
lecturer  in  Hebrew  and  soon  after  preacher.  He 
filled  both  offices  with  such  ability  that  Bayle,  who 
had  obtained  through  him  a  lectureship  in  philoso- 
phy in  1675,  designated  him  "  one  of  the  &vt  men 
of  this  century,  the  first  of  our  communion.''  Dur- 
ing the  ten  years  spent  at  Sedan,  Jurieu  zealously 
defended  the  Reformation  against  the  attacks  of 
Bossuet  and  others.  In  July,  1681,  when  the 
Academy  of  Sedan  was  dissolved  by  Louis  XIV., 
as  his  stay  in  France  had  become  dangerous,  he 
went  to  Rotterdam,  where,  besides  a  pastorship, 
he  received  a  lectureship  founded  specially  for  him. 
There  he  worked  hard  to  promote  the  cause  of  the 
French  Reformed  Chureh  by  his  writings,   and 


caring  for  the  exiled  French  pastors.  Like  Come- 
nius  and  others  he  had  to  pass  through  sad  ex- 
periences, having  become  too  sanguine  of  the  im- 
mediate restoration  of  the  French  Church  through 
his  interpretation  of  the  prophecies  in  the  Apoca- 
lypse, and  later  on  by  expecting  too  much  from  the 
fanatical  prophets  of  Dauphin^.  Meanwhile  ad- 
vancing  age  warned  him  to  bring  to  completion  a 
work  on  which  he  had  long  been  busy,  his  Histoire 
critique  des  dogmes  et  des  cuUeSf  published  in  two 
parts  at  Amsterdam,  1704-05  (Eng.  transL,  2  vols., 
London,  1705).  Thenceforth  ill  health  kept  him 
from  work. 

Jurieu,  like  Calvin,  held  that  the  true  Church  is 
known  by  two  signs:  the  preaching  of  the  pure 
word  of  God  and  the  right  dispensation  of  the 
sacraments.  It  should  be  governed  by  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  Christian  congregation,  and  has 
the  right  to  exclude  all  those  who  do  not  accept  the 
confession  of  faith.  However,  later  on,  to  refute 
Bossuet  and  to  satisfy  new  conceptions  of  his  own 
mind,  he  came  to  a  broader  view  of  the  Church.  In 
his  Histoire  du  calvinisme  et  du  papisms  (2  vols., 
Rotterdam,  1683)  he  makes  a  distinction  between 
the  temporal  and  the  spiritual  power.  In  the  name 
of  the  latter,  he  demands  full  liberty  of  conscience. 
But  the  church  service  must  be  approved  by  the 
majority  of  the  nation  because  the  sovereign  is 
only  the  representative  of  the  nation.  When,  in 
1685,  the  Edict  of  Nantes  was  revoked  by  Louis 
XIV.,  many  Protestants  besides  Jurieu  began 
to  doubt  the  divine  right  of  kings  and  stood  for 
the  rights  of  the  people.  As  in  Bayle's  writings 
many  of  Voltaire's  ideas  are  to  be  found,  so  in 
Jurieu's  works  is  the  germ  of  Rousseau's  Contrat 
social. 

Since  many  of  the  controversial  works  of  the 
time  were  published  anonymously,  it  is  not  always 
possible  to  determine  their  authorship  with  cer- 
tainty. The  principal  works  undoubtedly  by 
Jurieu  are:  on  dogma  and  controversy,  against  the 
Roman  Catholics,  La  Politique  du  dergi  de  France 
(Amsterdam,  1680);  Reflexions  sur  la  cruelle  per- 
sicution  que  souffre  Viglise  rtfomUe  en  France 
(1685);  Pr^fugis  Ugitimes  centre  le  papisms  (1685); 
Le  Vrai  Systhne  de  Viglise  et  la  viritable  analyse  de 
la  foi  (Dort,  1686) ;  Lettres  pastorales  addressees  aux 
fidHes  de  France  (Rotterdam,  1686;  Eng.  transL, 
London,  1689);  concerning  the  Lutherans  or  the 
Reformed,  Des  droits  des  deux  souverains  en  motive 
de  religion  (1687);  Units  de  V^glise  et  points  fonda- 
mentaux  (1688);  on  history  and  politics,  Histoire 
du  calvinisme  et  du  papisms  unis  en  paralUle  (2  vols., 
1683);  edifying  and  apocalyptic,  L'Accomplissement 
des  prophities  ou  la  ddivrance  de  Viglise  (2  vols., 
1686;  Eng.  transl,  London,  1687);  TraiU  de 
Vamour  divin  (1700).  G.  Bonei^Mauby. 

Biblioorapht:  The  biographies  by  C.  van  Oordt,  Geneva, 
1870  (best);  and  C.  E.  M^gnin,  Strasburg,  1854.  Con- 
stilt  also:  J.  C.  F.  Hoefer.  Nouvelle  hiooraphie  gSnirale, 
xxvii.  267  sqq.,  46  vols.,  Paris,  1852-66;  F.  Puaux,  Lcm 
Pricvrteura  francaia  (U  la  toUranca,  D61e,  1880;  J.  B.  Kan. 
in  BuUetin  de  la  eommieeion  de  Vhittoire  dee  (gli^ee  Wal- 
lonee,  Paris,  1800;  H.  M.  Baird,  Huouenota  and  Ihe  Rett- 
oeation  of  the  Edict  of  Nantee,  2  vols..  New  York,  1805; 
Lichtenbeiger,  ESR,  vi.  561-560. 


JoriodioUon,  BoolenlMtioAl 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


d68 


JURISDICTION,  ECCLESIASTICAL. 


1  The  Early   and    Roman   Gatholio 

Churohea. 
1.  Penal  and  DiMtpUnary  Juriwliction. 
The  Pint  Three  Centuriee  (f  1). 
The  Christian  Roman  Empire  ({  2). 
The  Merovingian  Period  (f  3). 
The  Carolincian  and  Later  Periods 

(14). 
Depoeition,  Degradation,  and  Sue> 
pennon  (f  6). 

L  The  Early  and  Roman  Catholic  Chnrchat. — 
1.  P«nal  and  Diaoiplinanr  JoriadloUon:    In  the 

apoetolic  period,  the  Church  exerciaed  such  disci- 
plinary jurisdiction  as  any  oi^ganisation  naturally 
has  over  its  members,  expressed  in  the  case  of 
grave  faults  by  exclusion  from  the 
1.  The  First  Church,  with  a  possibility  of  restora- 
Three      tion  to  membership  on  proof  of  re- 

Oenturiea.  pentance  and  amendment  (I  Cor.  v. 
11;  II  Cor.  ii.  5  sqq.).  In  the  sub- 
apostolic  era  this  exclusion  is  not  only  from  the 
local  commimity  but  from  the  whole  Church;  and 
the  bishop,  who  now,  with  the  other  clergy  and  the 
whole  body  of  believers,  exercises  this  jurisdiction, 
appears  as  a  divinely  appointed  organ  of  it,  acting 
in  the  place  of  Christ.  With  the  second  century 
appears  a  stricter  principle,  denying  the  possibility 
of  more  than  one  restoration  to  communion,  and  of 
even  one  in  the  case  of  such  grievous  sins  as  idola- 
try, unchastity,  and  murder.  Where  restoration  was 
allowed,  it  followed  upon  public  Penance  (q.v.);  but 
this  was  of  the  nature  of  a  preliminary  voluntarily 
assumed,  not  of  a  penal  measure.  In  the  third  century 
deposition  and  deprivation  of  income  are  employed 
against  clerics,  in  addition  to  excommunication. 

With  the  recognition  of  Christianity  by  the  State 
and  the  increasing  conciliar  activity,  the  system 
developed  in  more  detail.  Against  laymen  differ- 
ent forms  of  Excommunication  (q.v.)  were  em- 
ployed; against  clerics,  deposition,  degradation,  or 
suspension,  sometimes  with  depriva^ 
8.  The      tion  of  clerical  income  or  (in  the  case 

^^■***'^  of  young  clerics  and  those  in  minor 
s  "^  orders)  corporal  punishment.  At  first, 
™'  *'  of  course,  there  was  no  definite  code 
for  these  proceedings,  but  the  community  (or  later 
the  bishop)  had  to  decide  the  individual  case.  By 
degrees,  however,  legal  principles  were  developed 
to  regulate  the  life  of  the  Church.  Thus  the  Fa^ 
there  distinguish  between  peccatum  and  delictum  or 
crimenf  and  it  is  expressly  recognised  that  a  sin  of 
thought  alone  is  not  subject  to  external  or  legal 
penalties.  By  the  fourth  century  a  definite  basb 
is  reached  for  the  infliction  of  ecclesiastical  penal- 
ties; for  the  severer,  certain  forms  of  apostasy,  im- 
morality and  homicide;  for  the  lighter,  some  cases 
of  contact  with  paganism  or  neglect  of  Christian 
duties  (e.g.,  of  attendance  at  public  worship).  A 
distinction  is  drawn  between  poena  vindioativa  and 
poena  medicinaUe  or  cenmra,  the  latter  having  the 
amendment  of  the  offender  for  its  chief  purpose 
and  terminating  with  the  removal  of  the  offense. 
These  latter  are  employed  mainly  against  the  deigy; 
those  imposed  on  laymen,  including  excommunica- 
tion, are  all  practically  vindioaHvae.    The  exercise 


Matten  CSalling  for  Ftonalty  ({  6). 
The  Organ  of  Eodetiaetioal  Juriadio- 

tion  (I  7). 
Ciompetenoe  of  EoelesiastUsal  Jurie- 

dietion  ({  8). 
Seeular  Juriediction  over  the  Clergy 

Method  of  Procedure  ({  10). 
2.  AdrnhdetratiTe  and  Civil  Juriedie- 


IL  The  Proteetant  Ghnrehee. 
Modem  TMnd  ({  1). 
Fundamental   Law  in   the   United 

Statce  (I  2). 
Elementary  Prindplee  (|  3). 
limiti  of  Eodeeiaatieal  Jurisdiction 

(14). 
Legd  Aspects  of  Discipline  (|  5). 
Relations  of  Churches  and  Officers 

(16). 

of  jurisdiction  over  laymen  and  clergy  below  the 
rank  of  bishop  belonged  to  the  bishop,  who  was 
bound  to  consult  his  priests  and  deacons  before 
pronouncing  sentence.  A  court  of  appeal  (and  for 
bishops  of  first  instance)  existed  in  the  provincial 
synod.  The  Sjmod  of  Sardica  (343)  provides,  in 
case  of  the  condemnation  of  a  bishop,  for  an  appeal 
from  either  party  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  who  may 
either  confinn  the  sentence  or  order  a  new  investi- 
gation by  neighboring  bishops,  together  with  priests 
delegated  by  him  as  assessors.  On  the  basis  of  this 
decree,  which  never  obtained  ecumenical  recogni- 
tion, the  popes  based  the  claim  to  supreme  juris- 
diction, and  to  a  right  of  judging  in  the  first  in- 
stance all  metropolitans,  primates,  and  patriarchs; 
and  such  a  claim  was  carried  into  practical  effect 
throughout  a  large  part  of  the  West,  under  the  sanc- 
tion of  the  imperial  power. 

A  similar  sanction  was  given  to  the  competence 
of  other  ecclesiastical  tribunals;  and  certain  of- 
fenses against  ecclesiastical  law,  especially  the 
abandonment  of  the  Catholic  faith,  were  made 
crimes  under  secular  law;  secular  penalties  were 
also  imposed  upon  some  offenses  against  discipline 
on  the  part  of  the  clergy  (such  as  gambling,  illegal 
marriage,  wilful  abandonment  of  the  clerical  state). 
By  Roman  law,  however,  the  clergy  were  not  ex- 
empted from  secular  jurisdiction,  except  that  bish- 
ops accused  of  a  breach  of  secular  law  were  to  be 
tried  first  by  a  synod  of  their  peers,  who  were  never- 
theless obliged  to  hand  over  a  convicted  offender  to 
the  State  after  the  imposition  of  their  own  penalty, 
until  Justinian  reserved  the  right  to  sanction  secular 
proceedings  against  a  bishop  to  the  emperor  alone. 

During  the  Merovingian  period,  the  character  of 

excommunication  was  changed  by  the  acceptaooe 

of  the  doctrine  of  the  indelibility  of  baptism,  which 

rendered  a  complete  and  absolute  sep- 

8.  The  Ker-  aration  from  the  Church  impossible, 

ovlnglan    while  desertion  of  the  Church's  faith 

Period.  was  unlawful  and  punishable.  Besides 
the  earlier  penalties  there  were  now 
added  flogging  for  slaves  and  inferior  persons,  im- 
prisonment in  a  monastery,  and  in  the  Visigothic 
kingdom  banishment,  decalvation  (scalping),  con- 
fiscation of  property,  money  fines,  the  loss  of  secu- 
lar dignities,  and  reduction  to  slavery.  In  this 
period  corporal  punishment  was  applied  to  clerics 
in  major  orders  as  well  as  minor.  The  performance 
of  works  of  penance  was  now  enforced  as  a  penalty, 
either  alone  or  with  others,  for  life,  for  a  fixed  pe- 
riod, or  until  amendment  or 'removal  by  ecclesias- 
tical superiors.  The  judicial  system  remained  much 
as  before,  except  that  the  policy  of  the  Visigothic 
and  Franldsh  kingdoms  left  Uttle  room  for  appeals 


869 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


JnrifldloUon,  ! 


Oarolln- 
fflanand 


to  the  pope.  In  regard  to  the  judgment  of  clerical 
offenders,  the  Fraodkish  law  was  that  crimes  pun- 
ishable by  death  or  exile  (treason,  homicide,  rob- 
bery) were  referred,  in  the  case  of  bishop>s,  to  a 
provincial  or  national  synod,  and  when  this  had 
pronounced  sentence  of  deposition  the  offender 
came  under  royal  jurisdiction  for  death,  banish- 
ment, or  confiscation.  As  to  the  lower  clergy,  the 
Church  as  early  as  the  sixth  century  demanded  a 
change  in  the  old  Roman  law,  requiring  the  secular 
courts  to  abstain  from  all  action  until  the  bishop 
had  proceeded  against  the  accused  in  the  way  of 
ecclesiastical  discipline.  The  edict  of  Clothair  II.' 
(614)  conceded  this  in  regard  to  priests  and  dea- 
cons, and  forbade  the  execution  of  capital  punish- 
ment upon  them  imtil  they  had  first  been  deposed 
by  ecclesiastical  authority. 

From  the  ninth  to  the  sixteenth  century,  the 
system  of  jurisdiction  received  its  further  develop- 
ment, and  has  remained  practically  imchanged  in 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church  since  the  latter  date. 
Partly  through  the  Carolingian  capit- 
4.  The  ularies,  and  then  through  a  long  series 
of  papal  enactments,  a  number  of 
^^^^       further  secular  penalties  were  imposed 

Periods,  upon  offenders,  of  the  most  varied 
kind,  including  the  deposition  of  kings 
and  princes,  the  absolution  of  their  subjects  from 
allegiance,  the  piercing  of  the  tongue  for  blas- 
phemy, death  for  sodomy  and  abortion,  withdrawal 
of  all  communication  with  Christians  for  Jews,  etc., 
etc.  The  Roman  Catholic  Church  has  not  yet 
abandoned  the  medieval  view  that  it  is  entitled  to 
inflict  secular  penalties,  though  in  consequence  of 
the  changed  relations  between  Church  and  State 
these  have  fallen  into  disuse  against  laymen,  ex- 
cept infamy  regarded  as  a  ground  of  irregularity; 
and  the  Church  is  empowered  by  modem  legislation 
to  inflict  them  upon  the  clergy  only  in  the  forms  of 
money  fines  and  confinement  in  a  house  of  correc- 
tion. In  the  line  of  purely  spiritual  penalties,  there 
were  added  the  local  Interdict  (q.v.),  the  refusal  of 
Christian  burial  as  a  separate  penalty,  suspension 
from  particular  churchly  rights,  incapacity  to  hold 
ecclesiastical  offices,  and  the  indigncUio  of  the  pope 
(loss  of  papal  favor  and  breaking  off  of  commimica- 
tion).  Apart  from  the  limitation  of  the  prohibi- 
tion of  intercourse  with  excommunicated  persons 
(see  Excommunication),  a  distinction  was  made 
in  the  eighteenth  century  between  suspension  from 
the  privileges  of  church  membership  (for  which  in 
this  period  the  terms  irUerdictum  personale,  inter- 
didum  ingresmts  ecdesiae  came  into  use)  and  the 
minor  excommunication. 

By  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century,  in  connection 
with  the  development  of  the  doctrine  of  the  indeli- 
bility of  holy  orders  and  the  struggle  of  the  Church 
to  maintain  the  privilegium  fori  for  its  deigy,  the 
earlier  penalty  of  deposition  was  distinguished  into 
two  classes — what  was  now  called  deposition,  and 
degradation.  The  former  deprived  the  offender  of 
his  office  and  benefice,  of  the  right  to  exerdse  his 
orders,  and  of  the  capacity  to  be  again  employed  in 
the  service  of  the  Church;  the  latter,  in  addition, 
took  away  from  him  all  the  privileges  of  the  clerical 
state,  and  delivered  him  over  to  the  jurisdiction  of 


secular  tribunals.    This  was  employed  only  in  defi- 
nitely fixed  grave  crimes,  especially  heresy.    Depri- 
vation,  which   does  not   render  the 
*'  ,??^^    offender  incapable  of  holding  another 
J™^?*     benefice,  was  seldom  used  before  the 
tion   and  *^®^^^  century,  but  has  been  frequent 
Suiq>6n-    since.    A  modem  variation  of  it  is  the 
■ion.       removal  of  a  cleric  from  one  benefice  to 
another  less  desirable  one.    Suspension 
has  also  been  developed  in  detail,  and  may  be  ab 
officio,  ab  ordine,  a  beneficio,  or  totalis^  from  all  three. 
The  Council  of  Trent  gave  the  right  to  bishops  to 
inflict  suspension  ab  officio  or  ab  ordine  for  a  sin 
not  publicly  known  without  any  preliminary  hear- 
ing; the  only  recourse  lies  to  the  pope. 

A  distinction,  first  occurring  in  the  Visigothic 
kingdom  at  the  end  of  the  sixth  century,  has  since 
been  made  between  poenas  ferendae  serUentiae  and 
poenae  UUae  serUentiae,  The  latter  class  take  effect 
immediately  upon  the  commission  of  the  act  with 
which  they  are  connected,  without  requiring  any 
judicial  process.  Excommunication  and  suspension 
when  they  are  penalties  ferendae  serUentiae,  require 
a  threefold  or  at  least  a  single  peremptory  admoni- 
tion before  they  can  be  imposed,  thus  giving  the 
offender  an  opportunity  to  avert  the  penalty  by 
the  performance  of  due  penance.  From  the  twelfth 
century  on,  both  the  popes  and  general  and  local 
councils  established  an  inordinate  number  of  pen- 
alties UUae  sententiae;  but  Pius  IX.,  in  the  consti- 
tution Apostolicae  sedis  of  1869,  abolished  all  those 
which  rested  on  the  common  law,  the  later  general 
councils,  and  the  papal  constitutions,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  such  as  were  established  by  the  Council 
of  Trent,  had  to  do  with  papal  elections  and  the  in- 
ternal management  of  orders,  congregations,  col- 
legiate bodies,  and  church  institutions,  or  were  ex- 
pressly named  in  this  decree. 

In  regard  to  the  development  of  the  matter  cov- 
ered by  ecclesiastical  penalties,  in  the  Carolingian 
period  the  offenses  legislated  against  were  in  large 
measure  those  of  a  grave  moral  nature, 
^'n^i**'*  "^^^  *®  sexual  immorality,   perjury, 
Oallinff    j^j^j  robbery.    After  the  eleventh  cen- 
Pez&alty.    ^^^»  ^^®  papal  legislation  is  deter- 
mined predominantly  by  the  hierarch- 
ical interests  of  the  Church,  and  directed  against 
heresy,  the  invasion  of  ecclesiastical  liberties,  the 
subjection  of  clerics  to  secular  tribimals,  the  ap- 
propriation by  laymen  of  ecclesiastical  property, 
lay  investiture,  and  the  like.    It  is  tme,  however, 
ttuikt  a  large  number  of  penalties  provided  against 
the  neglect  of  spiritual  duties  (the  keeping  of  Sun- 
day, the  Easter  duty,  fasting),  and  against  robbery, 
false  coinage,  desertion  of  children,  tournaments, 
false  accusation,  abuse  of  power,  and  so  on;   and 
that  the  Church,  by  the  erection  of  the  ''  Tmce  of 
God  "  (q.v.)  into  a  general  institution,  did  much  to 
put  down  a  large  class  of  crimes  against  person  and 
property.    But  in  spite  of  all  these  undeniable 
services  to  civilization,  it  still  remains  true  that 
where  the  criminal  legislation  of  the  medieval  pope 
is  determined  by  any  dear  and  consistent  policy,  it 
is  in  cases  affecting  the  position  of  the  Church  as  a 
hierarchical  power. 
If  the  earlier  penal  legislation  of  the  Church  is  of 


Jurlsdiotion,  BooleoiaitloAl 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


270 


a  purely  occasional  character,  with  no  attempt  to 
build  up  a  thorough-going  system,  the  same  ia  true 
to  a  large  extent  of  the  period  from  the  fifteenth  to 
the  eighteenth  century,  including  the  Tridentine 
alone  among  general  councils.  And  again,  although 
the  council  deals  with  such  ethical  crimes  as  duel- 
ing, adultery,  seduction  and  forced  marriage,  and 
the  papal  constitutions  with  such  others  as  big- 
amy, sodomy,  the  slave-trade,  piracy,  wrecking, 
and  the  bearing  of  false  witness,  they  still  impose 
the  majority  of  their  penalties  upon  what  may  be 
called  hierarchical  offenses.  It  is  for  these  that 
the  latest  constitution  of  the  kind,  the  Aposiolicae 
aediSf  maintains  the  penalties  latae  serUentiae,  which 
it  keeps  up  for  dueling  and  abortion  alone  among 
offenses  of  a  general  ethical  nature. 

The  principal  oigan  for  the  exercise  of  ecclesias- 
tical jurisdiction  on  this  system  is  the  pope,  who 
since  the  twelfth  century  has  succeeded  in  main- 
taining his  claim  to  be  the  judex  ordinaritu  eingu- 
larum.  The  Council  of  Trent,  however,  following 
the  precedents  of  the  Concordat  of 

fZlJP^^  ^  Basel  and  the  Council  of  Constance, 
^Si^ia  decreed  that  controverted  questions 
tioalJoriB-  8^^^d  come  in  the  first  instance  before 

diction.  *  ^^®  bishops.  The  direct  jurisdiction 
of  the  pope  finds  its  greatest  practical 
significance  in  regard  to  the  ecclesiastical  dig- 
nitaries whose  immediate  superior  he  is,  the  car- 
dinals and  metropolitans,  and  outside  of  these  to 
the  bishops.  The  Council  of  Trent,  in  subjecting 
the  latter  to  his  jurisdiction,  did  but  confirm  the 
established  medieval  law  from  the  end  of  the 
eleventh  century,  that  in  all  cases  of  serious  of- 
fenses, for  which  degradation,  deposition  or  de- 
privation were  the  penalties,  they  should  be  wholly 
subject  to  papal  decision,  while  less  grave  matters 
might  be  dealt  with  by  the  provincial  councils. 

The  Council  of  Trent,  again  following  the  two 
earlier  reforming  councils,  attempted  to  exclude 
as  far  as  possible  the  final  decision  of  cases  in  Rome, 
and  so  provided  for  the  nomination  by  provincial 
or  diocesan  synods  of  certain  clerics  to  be  known 
as  indicts  synodales  to  whom  the  pope  might  dele- 
gate the  decision  of  certain  cases  brought  before 
him.  This  arrangement  never  had  much  practical 
significance,  as  the  popes  preferred  to  place  appeals 
in  the  hands  of  their  nuncios  or  of  archbishops  and 
bishops,  or  in  some  cases  to  give  the  nuncios  the 
appointment  of  those  who  should  hear  them.  At 
the  present  time  many  cases  are  finally  disposed  of 
by  the  Roman  congregations,  especially  the  Coip- 
gregatio  cancilii  and  the  Congregatio  episcoporum 
et  regularium  (see  Curia). 

In  regard  to  the  competence  of  ecclesiastical  ju- 
risdiction, the  Church  has  always  claimed  the  right 
to  punish  any  violation  of  its  ordinances  either  by 
clergy  or  by  laity,  independently  of  the  question 
whether  the  offense  was  also  against 
8.  Oompe-  gecular  law.  As  long  as  it  employed 
purely   ecclesiastical    penalties,    there 


tence  of 
Bcclesias- 


tical  Juris-  ®^^d  be  no  conflict  between  the  two 

diction,     jurisdictions.    This  was  the  case  not 

only  under  the  Roman  empire  but  also 

in  the  Merovingian  and  Carol ingian  periods — ^all 

the  more  because  the  Germanic  penal  code  con- 


tained but  few  crimes  on  which  public  punishment 
was  inflicted.  Up  to  the  twelfth  century  the  Church 
was  thus  able  to  fill  up  a  serious  gap  in  penal  legis- 
lation by  taking  cognizance  of  a  number  of  grave 
crimes  for  which  the  secular  law  provided  no  pub- 
lic penalty.  When,  from  the  twelfth  century  on, 
the  latter  began  to  increase  the  nimiber  of  crimes 
which  it  punished,  conflicts  could  no  longer  be 
avoided,  and  the  secular  tribunals  protested  against 
the  invasion  of  their  rights  by  the  Church  courts. 
In  practise,  then,  there  developed  out  of  these  con- 
ditions a  distinction  of  offenses  into  delicta  mere 
Becuiaria,  ddida  mere  ecdesiaetica,  and  delicta  mixta 
or  mixti  fori.  No  general  agreement  could  be  or 
has  been  reached  as  to  what  constitutes  the  third 
class,  in  which  both  secular  and  ecclesiastical  au- 
thorities have  competence.  Usually  it  has  been 
held  to  include  the  principal  offenses  against  chas- 
tity, usury,  sorcery,  magic,  pexjury,  blasphemy, 
and  the  forgery  of  papal  briefs.  For  modem  prac- 
tice see  below,  XL  The  action  of  the  Church  against 
secular  offenses  is  thus  confined  nowadays  almost 
wholly  to  the  forum  internum,  i.e.,  to  the  imposition 
of  penance  in  the  confessional;  and  the  established 
ecclesiastical  courts  only  take  part  in  the  process  in 
so  far  as  it  is  a  question  of  cases  reserved  to  the 
pope  or  bishop  for  decision  (see  Casus  Rbservati). 
The  question  of  secular  jurisdiction  over  the 
clergy  was  raised  early  in  the  ninth  century  by 
ecclesiastical  reformers,  with  the  help  of  the  for^ 
geries  of  Benedictus  Levita  and  the  pseudo-Isidore; 
and  they  succeeded  to  a  large  extent 
9.  Seoolar  hi  enforcing  their  claim  of  Elxemption 
Jurisdiction (q .v.).  Throughout  the  Middle  Ages, 
over  the  indeed,  secular  rulers  maintained  their 
Olergy*  right  to  punish  even  bishops  for  a 
breach  of  their  obligations  as  vassals, 
oflUcials,  or  subjects,  with  imprisonment  or  exile; 
but  they  made  no  attempt,  except  in  rare  instances, 
to  exercise  a  power  of  deposition,  which  by  the 
eleventh  century  was  recognised  as  a  right  reserved 
to  the  pope.  In  respect  to  the  other  clergy,  the 
Church's  claim  was  never  acknowledged  for  clerics 
who  were  not  recognizable  as  such  by  the  tonsure 
and  clerical  garb,  and  with  the  fourteenth  century 
a  strong  reaction  began  against  such  exemption, 
which  finally  led  to  its  complete  abolition  in  most 
countries.  The  Church,  however,  still  held  to  it 
in  theory,  even  in  the  Syllabus  of  1864. 

The  opening  of  ecclesiastical  proceedings  was 
conditioned  from  the  earliest  times  by  the  notori- 
ety of  the  offense,  or  by  self-demmdation  on  the 
offender's  part,  or  by  the  accusation  of  another; 
Method  ^^  *^  might  follow  ex  officio  when  the 
of  Pro-     authorities  had  sufficient  cause,  as  in 
oedurs.     well-grounded  suspicion.    In  aU  these 
cases,  the  bishop  might  proceed  first 
by  a  brotherly  admonition,  on  the  basis  of  Matt. 
xviii.  15-17  (the  so-called  denunciaHo  evangeiUca); 
if  the  offender  remained  obstinate,  formal  trial  and 
punishment  might  follow,  or  in  the  opposite  case  he 
might  take  upon  himself  the  canonical  penance 
without  being  shut  out  of  the  communion  of  the 
Church.    From   the    fourth   century   the   Church 
adopted  the  Roman  regulations  in  regard  to  accu- 
sations:  the  formal  charge  to  be  signed  by  the  ao- 


271 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Joriadlotloii,  BoolesUstioAl 


cuaer,  the  obligation  to  prove  the  charge,  and  the 
lex  talioma,  instead  of  which  excommunication  was 
frequently  the  penalty  for  accusers  who  failed  to 
follow  up  or  to  prove  their  chaiges.  Under  the  in- 
fluence of  Germanic  ideas,  the  Church  further 
adopted  the  oath  of  piu^tion,  especially  in  the 
case  of  clergy  who  had  been  tried  and  not  con- 
victed, when  some  suspicion  still  remained.  The 
compurgators  were  dropped,  and  the  process  was 
regarded  less  as  a  privilege  of  the  acciised  than  as 
his  duty,  to  clear  himself  from  suspicion.  In  the 
Carolingian  period  the  Frankish  Church  employed 
still  more  of  the  Germanic  procedure;  the  accuised 
had  the  right  to  clear  himself  by  an  oath,  and  if  it 
was  made  with  compurgators  he  went  free  of  either 
the  charge  or  the  suspicion  (in  case  of  ex  officio 
proceedings).  Under  the  joint  influence  of  the 
Roman  and  Germanic  systems,  by  the  end  of  the 
eleventh  century  this  had  become  the  conunon  law 
of  the  Church,  except  that  the  accuser  in  the  case 
of  clerics  was  always  required  to  prove  his  charge. 
The  purgatio  carumica  was  opposed  to  the  purgatio 
vulgaris  or  Wager  of  Battle  (q.v.),  which  the  popes 
were  endeavoring  to  suppress.  The  objection  to  the 
use  of  this  method  in  ex  offi^do  proceedings,  that  it 
allowed  no  objective  investigation  of  the  offenses 
suspected  to  have  been  committed,  and  the  need  of 
stricter  discipline  for  the  clergy,  especially  in  view 
of  the  increasing  accusations  brought  against  them 
by  the  heretical  sects,  caused  Innocent  III.  to  re- 
form the  procedure  in  ex  offijdo  cases,  distinguish- 
ing two  courses,  -per  inquisitionem  and  per  denurir 
ciaiionem.  The  former  was  rather  a  disciplinary 
than  a  criminal  process,  and  permitted  purgation 
by  oath  when  no  positive  result  had  been  reached 
by  the  investigation,  or  when  the  preliminary  pro- 
ceedings had  raised  a  strong  presumption  in  favor 
of  innocence.  The  other  process  required  the  de- 
nundatio  evangelica  to  precede  further  action,  which 
followed  the  course  of  criminal  procedure  in  case  of 
recalcitrancy.  But  this  method  gradually  disap- 
peared from  the  practise  of  the  Church  in  conse- 
quence of  the  limitation  of  its  power  over  the  laity 
in  criminal  cases.  There  was  the  less  need  for  it 
when,  as  was  frequently  the  case  from  the  fifteenth 
century,  special  officials  (called  promotoree  or  pro- 
curaiorea  figcalea)  were  appointed  as  assessors  to 
the  eccle^astical  courts,  to  investigate  suspected 
crimes  or  disciplinary  offenses,  bring  them  before 
the  courts,  and  represent  the  public  interests  at  the 
trial.  By  the  seventeenth  century,  when  the  de- 
nuneiaiio  evangelica  had  ceased  to  be  practical  in 
view  of  the  office  of  these  promotores,  and  when  the 
requirement  of  an  inainuatio  damoea  or  infamia  for 
the  opening  of  a  process  per  inquisitionem  had  lost 
its  significance,  the  place  of  both  methods  was 
taken  by  a  modified  form  of  the  latter,  the  purpose 
of  which  was  to  establish  the  facts,  whether  they 
pointed  to  the  guilt  or  the  innocence  of  the  accused. 
The  purgatio  canonical  for  which  in  any  case  it  was 
increasingly  difficult  to  find  compurgators,  was  out 
of  place  in  this  form  of  procedure,  and  disappeared 
with  the  seventeenth  century.  Since  papal  legis- 
lation had  made  no  attempt  at  a  imiversal  recon- 
struction of  the  penal  and  disciplinary  procedure 
from  the  pontificate  of  Innocent  III.  until  the  be- 


ginning of  the  nineteenth  century,  the  newer  8y»- 
tem  developed  variously  in  different  places;  but 
there  was  a  general  tendency,  caused  by  the  limi- 
tation of  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  and  by  the  di- 
minution of  the  revenues  which  had  formerly  sup- 
ported the  courts,  to  dispense  with  all  but  the 
essential  forms.  A  similar  tendency  is  displayed  in 
the  instructions  of  the  Congregation  of  Bishops  and 
Regulars  issued  in  1880,  which  sets  forth  an  im- 
proved and  simplified  form  of  procedure,  to  take 
place  privately  and  in  writing,  and  allows  the  bish- 
ops to  use  it  when  the  older  form  is  impossible  or 
inexpedient. 

8.  Administrative  and  OivU  Jorlsdiction:  The 
development  of  the  civil  jurisdiction  of  the  Church 
is  described  under  Audientia  Efiscopalis.  Be- 
sides this,  the  imperial  legislation  expressly  recog- 
nized the  competence  of  the  bishops  de  reHgione, 
i.e.,  in  controversies  to  be  decided  according  to 
ecclesiastical  rules,  concerning,  for  example,  the 
right  to  the  incumbency  of  Church  offices.  In  Gaul 
also  such  matters  were  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
bishops  and  synods;  but  since  there  was  a  differ- 
ence of  law  between  Church  and  State,  and  the  State 
did  not  undertake  to  execute  the  ecclesiastical  de- 
cisions, those  matters  which  required  state  action 
(matrimonial  causes,  questions  of  church  property, 
etc.)  came  before  the  secular  courts.  In  614  the 
Church  succeeded  in  getting  all  cases  de  possessione 
(questions  of  property,  to  be  settled  by  award,  not 
by  public  penalty)  in  which  the  clergy  were  con- 
cerned before  its  courts.  In  the  Carolingian  period 
the  claims  of  the  Church  were  recognized  by  the 
ordinance  that  disputes  between  clerics  should  be 
settled  by  the  bishop,  and  that  the  bishop  should 
sit  with  the  court  in  any  question  de  possessione 
between  clerics  and  laymen.  In  the  Middle  Ages 
the  Church  succeeded  to  a  great  extent  in  enforcing 
its  contention  that  the  laity  had  no  competence  in 
ecclesiastical  matters,  helped  by  the  contrast  be- 
tween the  confusion  or  weakness  of  secular  courts 
and  its  own  prompt  and  thorough  execution  of  its 
decisions,  with  the  power  of  excommunication  to 
back  them.  According  to  the  canon  law,  the  spir- 
itual courts  took  cognizance  of  all  causae  incidentes 
spiritufUes  (those  which  touched  the  sacraments  or 
offices  of  the  Church,  especially  marriage);  the 
causae  spiritualibus  annexae  (such  as  the  right  of 
patronage,  tithes,  betrothals,  wills,  and  agreements 
ratified  by  oath);  causae  dvHes  ecdesiastids  acces- 
soriae  (questions  of  dowry,  legitimacy,  etc.).  Fur- 
ther, all  civil  proceedings,  in  so  far  as  the  injustice 
of  one  party  could  be  construed  as  sin,  might  be 
brought  into  the  church  courts;  and  so  might  the 
cases  of  personae  miserabHes  (widows,  orphans, 
paupers,  pilgrims),  as  well  as  those  in  which  secu- 
lar judges  denied  justice.  Clergy,  monks  and  nuns, 
all  ecclesiastical  institutions,  crusaders  belonged  in 
any  case  to  the  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction,  except  in 
cases  of  feudal  rights.  Here  also  the  Roman  Cath- 
olic Church  still  clings  to  these  claims  in  theory, 
although  they  have  long  ceased  to  be  practical  in 
most  countries.  (P.  HiNBCHiust*) 

n.  The  Protestant  Churches:  The  jurisdiction 
exercised  at  the  present  time  by  the  chim^hes 
of  western  Europe  and  the  United  States  differs 


JuxiadloUon,  Boel— iaatloal 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


87S 


both  in  nature  and  extent  from  the  jurindietion 
of    the    ancient    and    medieval    GhurdL     The 
changes  have  been  brought    about  very  largely 
by  the  chan^sd  relations  of  political 
z.  Modem  and  ecclesiastical  institutions.     These 
Trend,      modifications  have   been    developing 
since     the     sixteenth     century    and 
have  paralleled  the  changes  in  doctrine  and  forms 
of  worship.    They  have  at  times  originated  with 
the  churches  themselves,  but  more  frequently  have 
resulted  from  the  action  of  the  dvil  power.    While 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  medieval  Church  covered  to 
a  varying  extent  the  institution  of  marriage,  the 
execution  and  probate  of  wills,  and  the  descent  of 
property,  and  included  also  a  considerable  minor 
criminal  jurisdiction  over  the  clergy,  the  modem 
churches  are  by  the  State  deprived  of  such  juris- 
diction and  confined  to  matters  defined  by  the 
civil  power  as  purely  spiritual   in  their  objects. 
Where  an  ecclesiastical  body  is  by  law  established, 
as  is  the  case  with  the  Church  of  England  (see 
England,  Chxtrch  of),  the  civil  power  fixes  for 
the  Church  its  organisation  and  jurisdiction.    The 
modifications  since  the   Reformation   have   been 
gradual.    The  changes  in  jurisdiction  have  been 
most  radical  where,  as  in  the  United  States,  the 
Church  has  ceased  to  be  a  governmental  institution. 
The  sphere   of  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  exer- 
cised by  the  American  churches  has  been  outlined 
by  the  supreme  court  of  the  United 
a.  Fuada-  States  in  the  case  of  Watson  vs.  Jones 
mental  Uw  (13  WaUaoe,  U.  S.  Reporto  679,  as 
in  the      follows: 

United  "  ^  ^^  oountiy  the  full  and  frae  richt  to 

.Q*»fM  entertain  any  religioas  belief,  to  practiae 
oiana.  ^^^  religious  principle,  and  to  teaoh  any  re- 
UgiouB  dootrine  which  doee  not  violate  the  laws 
of  morality  and  property,  and  which  does  not  infringe  per- 
sonal rights,  is  conceded  to  all.  The  law  knows  no  hensy, 
is  committed  to  the  support  of  no  dogma,  the  establishment 
of  no  sect.  The  right  to  organise  voluntary  religious  asso- 
ciations to  asnst  in  the  expression  of  any  religious  doctrine 
and  to  create  tribunals  for  the  decision  of  oontroverted 
questions  of  faith  within  the  association,  and  for  the  eode- 
siasticat  government  of  all  the  individual  members,  congre- 
gations and  officers  within  the  general  association  is  un- 
questioned. All  who  unite  themselves  to  such  a  body  do 
so  with  an  implied  consent  to  this  government  and  are 
bound  to  submit  to  it.  But  it  would  be  a  vain  oonsent  and 
would  lead  to  the  total  suppression  of  such  religious  bodies, 
if  any  one  aggrieved  by  one  of  their  decisions  could  appeal 
to  the  secular  courts  and  have  them  reversed.  It  is  <^  the 
essence  of  these  religious  unions,  and  of  their  right  to  es- 
tablish tribunals  for  the  decisions  arising  among  themselves, 
that  those  decisions  should  be  binding  in  all  oases  of  ecclesi- 
astical cognisance,  subject  only  to  such  appeals  as  the  or- 
ganism itself  provides  for." 

This  sphere  of  liberty  for  the  purpose  of  religion 
has  been  defined  in  detail  by  principles  laid  down 
by  the  civil  power.  While  modem  states  have  in 
some  esses  relinquished  the  power  to  legislate  in 
ecclesiastical  matters,  they  have  everywhere  re- 
served the  power  to  define  the  sphere  of  ecclesias- 
tical jurisdiction;  and  no  matter  what  may  be  the 
desires  of  a  church  body  for  added  powers  over  its 
members,  the  rule  of  the  State  is  absolute.  Mod- 
era  states,  in  defining  the  powers  of  bodies  organ- 
ized for  the  purposes  of  religion,  have  not  enacted 
formal  codes  stating  the  jurisdiction  of  such  bodies 
in  detail;  but  they  have  laid  down  general  princi- 
ples in  the  civil  courts  in  the  adjudication  of  cases 


brought  about  through  church  oantroversieB.  The 
civil  courts  of  the  United  States  have  in  the  cen- 
tury past  developed  some  fundamental  principles 
applicable  to  all  the  religious  organizations  of  the 
land  which  have  become  law  wherever  American 
sovereignty  has  been  extended.  Similar  principles 
have  been  worked  out  by  the  dvil  courts  in  aO 
parts  of  the  British  empire. 

The  basic  principle  of  modem  ecclesiastical  juris- 
diction is  that  all  ecclesiastical  relations  must  be 

voluntary  both  in  their  inception  and 

3.  Elemen-  in  their  duration.    This  rule  applies 

taiy  Prin-  as  well  to  church  membership  as  to  the 

ciples.      holding    of   ecclesiastical    office.    No 

ecclesiastical  relations  are  of  the  na- 
ture of  a  dvil  contract  in  law.  The  dosest  juridical 
analogy  is  to  an  obligation  in  equity.  Such  rela- 
tions can  be  severed  at  any  time  without  incurring 
dvil  disabilities.  The  polity  of  the  denomination 
and  the  obligations  laid  down  in  a  disdpline  as  as- 
sumed by  a  member  do  not,  from  the  standpoint 
of  the  State,  change  the  voluntary  character  of  the 
relationship.  Another  elementary  prindple  limit- 
ing ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  is  that  the  law  of  the 
land  is  law  for  the  churches.  So  much  of  the  dvil 
law  as  applies  must  be  read  into  the  internal  or 
canon  law  of  all  religious  organizations.  So  also 
the  internal  law  of  religious  bodies  can  validly  con- 
tain nothing  that  contradicts  the  prindples  of  the 
common  and  statute  law  of  the  land.  The  churches, 
therefore,  may  enact  no  rule  overriding,  restrain- 
ing, or  curtailing  the  dvil  rights  of  their  members. 
Nor  can  the  churches  make  a  valid  attempt  to  ex- 
empt their  members  from  their  dvU  and  political 
obligations.  Thus  a  chimsh  body  may  not  validly 
disdpline  its  members  for  exercising  the  elective 
franchise  or  serving  upon  juries  or  taking  up  arms 
in  defense  of  the  State.  A  further  limitation  of 
ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  is  found  in  the  prindple 
that  church  coiuts  can  not  with  legal  sanction  ad- 
judicate civil  controversies  among  their  membeis, 
although  the  parties  may  have  voluntarily  sub- 
mitted their  cases  to  such  coiuts.  No  decision  can 
be  rendered  that  will  bar  the  parties  from  their 
right  of  appeal  to  the  dvil  courts. 

With  these  as  fundamental  prindples  of  limita- 
tion found  in  the  polity  of  all  the  states  of  western 

dvilization,  modem  ecclesiastical  ju- 

4,  Limits   risdiction  and  disdpline  are  definitely 

of  Ecdeii-  limited  to  the  conduct  of  moral  and 

astical  Ju-  spiritual   operations,   ooc^ration  for 

risdIcttoiL   the  piupoees  of  religion,  propaganda 

of  faith,  charity,  and  education.  The 
churches  are  at  liberty  to  define  their  faith  and  to 
regulate  their  own  affairs.  They  may  lay  down 
rules  of  conduct  for  their  members  and  prescribe 
what  manner  of  life  they  shall  live.  Sudi  a  life, 
however,  must  be  in  accord  with  the  prevailing 
standards  of  public  morality,  and  such  standards 
are  in  the  last  analysis  fixed  by  the  exerdse  of  the 
police  power  of  the  State  by  the  dvU  authorities. 
In  many  instances  modem  religious  organizations 
have  endeavored  to  prescribe  for  their  members 
modes  of  life  not  in  accordance  with  the  prevailing 
standards  of  public  morality.  There  have  been 
attempts  to  institute  abnormal  relations  of  the 


278 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jurifldiotion, 


sexes,  the  infliction  of  physical  suffering,  cruel 
penance,  exhausting  tests  of  physical  endurance, 
and  lewd  assemblies,  and  acts  which  constitute  a 
disturbance  of  the  public  peace.  All  such  acts  on 
the  part  of  religious  bodies  bring  about  the  inter- 
vention of  the  civil  power.  No  argument  based 
upoQ  any  assumed  sanction  of  revealed  religion 
will  validate  such  acts.  Within  these  well-de&ied 
limits  the  churches  may  exercise  a  complete  and 
detailed  jurisdiction  over  their  members.  They 
can  bring  members  to  trial  for  violations  of  disci- 
pline and  for  acts  and  modes  of  life  contrary  to  the 
principles  of  their  faith.  They  are  at  liberty  to 
prescribe  the  rules  by  which  their  courts  shall  be 
organized  and  the  procedure  of  trials.  Such  courts 
are  under  legal  obligation  to  proceed  according  to 
the  law  of  the  body  that  created  them,  and  should 
they  not  live  up  to  their  own  law,  their  decisions 
can  be  set  aside  by  the  civil  courts. 

The  discipline  that  can  be  meted  out  to  church 

members  upon  the  findings  of  church  courts  may 

extend  only  (1)  to  admonition,  (2)  sus- 

5.  Legftl  pension  of  privileges,  (3)  penance, 
Aspects  of  (4)  excommunication,  and  (5)  expul- 
Dbcipline.  sion  from  membership.    If  the  church 

law  provides  for  an  appeal  to  a  higher 
judicatory,  such  an  appeal  may  not  be  refused  by 
the  trial  court.  If  an  appeal  be  refused,  the  higher 
judicatories  may  be  compelled  by  the  civil  courts 
to  entertain  it.  If  the  decision  of  a  church  court 
affects  the  dvil  rights  as  well  as  the  ecclesiastical 
relations  of  a  church  member,  so  much  of  the  de- 
cision as  relates  to  the  civil  rights  will  be  regarded 
by  the  civil  courts  as  null  and  void,  while  due 
effect  will  be  given  to  so  much  of  the  decision  as 
affects  purely  ecclesiastical  relations.  Where  mem- 
bership in  a  particular  congregation  carries  with  it 
the  right  of  sepulture  in  a  certain  groimd,  the  loss 
of  membership  will  result  in  the  loss  of  that  right, 
as  the  civil  courts  have  held  that  such  a  right  is  a 
privilege  that  can  be  lost  with  membership.  Mar- 
riage, the  annulment  of  marriage,  and  divorce  are 
now  matters  within  the  exclusive  jurisdiction  of 
the  civil  courts,  so  that  chim^h  discipline  in  rela- 
tion to  these  matters  is  entirely  without  legal 
effect  and  can  affect  only  the  ecclesiastical  stand- 
ings of  the  parties. 

In  general  the  same  principles  govern  the  juris- 
diction that  the  chim^bra  exerdse  over  their  minis- 
ters   and    other    officials.    Here    the 

6.  Rela-    modem  jurisdiction  is  in  deepest  con- 
tions  of     trast  with  that  of  the  medieval  Church. 

Churches   From  the  standpoint  of  civil  law  the 
and        holding  of  ecclesiastical  office  is  en- 
Officers,    tirely  a  voluntary  matter,  no  perpet- 
ual tenure  or  obligation  being  possi- 
ble.    Any  ecclesiastical  office  may  be  renounced  at 
any  time  without  incurring  civil  disabilities.    One 
who  accepts  office  in  a  religious  body  voluntarily 
assumes  the  obligation  to  obey  the  rules  of  that 
body  not  only  in  all  matters  pertaining  to  his 
office  but  also  as  to  the  mode  of  life  required  of 
him.     Under  the  principles  of  modem  ecclesias- 
tical jurisdiction  church  office  is  not  a  civil  right, 
but  is  in  the  nature  of  a  vested  interest  to  be  en- 
joyed upon  a  certain  tenure.    In  several  ways  the 
VI.— 18 


State  recognises  the  ministry  of  the  churches.  Or- 
dained ministers  and  priests  are  among  those  au- 
thorized by  the  State  to  perform  the  marriage  cere- 
mony, and  such  church  offidab  are  exempt  from 
jury  duty  and  from  enforced  military  service.  The 
civil  courts  will  entertain  the  case  of  a  church  offi- 
cial when  deprived  of  his  office  in  any  other  manner 
than  according  to  the  law  of  the  organisation  to 
which  he  belongs.  The  deposed  official  can  ap- 
peal to  the  dvU  courts  for  restitution  and  can 
compel  the  church  authorities  to  grant  him  a  trial 
according  to  the  law  of  the  body.  If,  however,  he 
has  been  duly  tried  and  properly  deprived  of  his 
office,  he  has  no  redress  in  the  civil  courts,  as  he  has 
not  been  deprived  of  a  dvil  right  and  his  relation 
to  his  churdi  was  not  contractual.  Although  the 
discipline  of  a  church  body  may  require  that  its 
ordained  ministers  refrain  from  secular  employ- 
ment as  means  of  livelihood,  an  ordained  minister  or 
priest  has  no  daim  on  his  church  or  superior  offi- 
cials for  support  unless  such  a  claim  is  specifically 
recognised  by  the  law  of  the  church.  'Die  penal- 
ties which  may  be  prescribed  by  the  judgment  of 
an  ecclesiastical  court  rendered  against  an  official 
are:  (1)  censure,  (2)  the  temporary  suspension  of 
the  right  to  exercise  the  functions  of  his  office, 
(3)  deprivation  of  his  office,  and  (4)  expulsion  from 
church  membership.  No  finandal  penalties  can 
be  infficted  nor  can  the  defendant  be  compelled  to 
share  the  costs  of  trial.  The  church  courts  have 
no  power  to  compel  the  attendance  of  witnesses, 
but  they  can  compel,  with  the  aid  of  the  dvil 
courts,  the  production  of  books  and  papers  in  the 
custody  of  those  over  whom  they  have  jurisdic- 
tion. The  proceedings  of  ecclesiastical  courts 
need  not  be  made  public,  but  in  the  event  of  testi- 
mony being  given  in  public  or  such  testimony  be- 
ing subsequently  published  and  proved  false  on 
material  points,  such  testimony  may  constitute 
libel  and  an  action  will  lie  for  damages  for  defamsr 
tion  of  character. 

When  there  is  controversy  as  to  the  person  en- 
titled to  a  chimsh  office,  the  dvil  courts  will  not 
take  the  initiative,  but  if  a  proper  action  can  be 
plaimed  involving  the  title  to  property,  especially 
in  the  case  of  church  trustees,  the  dvil  courts  will 
take  cognizance  of  the  matter  collaterally.  Such 
matters  come  within  the  equity  jurisdiction  of 
the  dvil  courts.  The  methods  employed  by  the 
civil  courts  when  they  intervene  in  ecclesiastical 
matters  are  usually  the  issue  of  writs  of  mandamus 
directed  to  the  ecdesiastical  authorities  compel- 
ling certain  action,  or  the  issue  of  writs  of  injunction 
restraining  certain  proposed  action.  In  case  a  de- 
posed church  offidal  has  had  in  his  possesion 
funds  belonging  to  the  organization,  an  action  for 
an  accounting  will  lie  in  the  same  manner  as  against 
any  civil  treasurer  or  trustee. 

Gborgb  Jambs  Batlbb. 
BiBuooaArar:  For  the  early  Ghuroh  ooiwult:  Bingham, 
OrUfinea^  II.,  iv.-yii;  J.  Fulton,  Index  oanonum;  Cfrmk 
text  and  Bng.  traneL  and  Complete  Digeet  of  One  ,  ,  ,  Code 
of  Canon  Law  of  the  .  ,  ,  primiiive  Churdi,  New  York, 
1883. 

For  the  Roman  Gatholio  Chmvh  oonsolt:  Corpue  furie 
eanonid,  ed.  A.  L.  Biohter  and  A.  Friedberg,  LeiiMie, 
1879  (best  edition);  E.  Friedberg,  De  fhdum  inter  eede- 
aiam  et  civitatem  refpindorum  jvdieio,  Leiprie,  1861;    W. 


Jorlfldiotlon,  BoolMiaitloal 
JuBtifloation 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOO 


874 


Molitor,  Utbtr  kanamachM  Q^HdUavtirfahrmi  oeotn  Kleri- 
km;  M*ins,  1860;  F.  Kober.  Dit  Sutpention  der  Kirehsf^ 
dimisr,  TObiocen,  1862;  idem,  Depo§Uion  und  Dtgrada- 
lion  nock  dm  GrundaHtBan  det  kirchliekan  RtekU,  ib.  1867; 
D.  Bouiz,  Traetaiut  de  ivdiciie  eedetiaaHeiM,  2  vols.,  PAiis, 
1866;  N.  MOnohen,  Daa  kammiadte  Q^ndOtvmrfahnti  und 
StrajrwAi,  2  volt.,  Colosne,  1866;  J.  F.  von  Schulte. 
Utbfr  Kirdl^nairofen,  Berlin,  1872;  F.  Drotto.  Kirch- 
lidteB  Dianjdinar  und  Kriminalvmfahren  O90en  OeiaUi^e, 
Pftderborn,  1881;  E.  Kftti,  GrundriM  de»  kanoniBchtn 
SirafreehU,  Berlin,  1881;  Jura  meerdotum  vindieaia.  New 
York,  1883;  P.  PieTantonelli,  PraxU  fori  eeeUaioMHei, 
Rome.  1883;  P.  Hinechiiu,  KirekmndU  .  ,  ,  in  DeutacK- 
land,  vols,  ir.-vi,  Berlin.  1886-07;  A.  NimI.  Der  Oa- 
riehi99tand  dm  Klsrua  im  fr&nki$^en  RtieK  Innsbruek, 
1886;  A.  L.  Riohter.  Lehrinidi  <iM  .  .  .  KtrdtenreekU, 
H  206-210.  212-226.  Leipoic.  1886;  R.  Sohm.  OtUaieh$ 
Oeriekhbarkeit  im  frdcnktMehm  Reidi,  in  ZmUtkrifi  fUer 
KirekenradU,  ix  (1889).  103  iqq.;  8.  B.  Smitli.  BUmenU 
<^  BceUmaMHoaL  Law,  3  vols..  New  York,  1803;  C.  GrtMs. 
UMnuk  dM  lEolAolwdk«n  KirdmwwdOa,  Vienna,  1804; 
£.  Friedberg,  LtMmck  de9  ,  ,  ,  KirdtenreekU,  lOa  101. 
103-107,  Leipeio.  1806;  A.  T.  Wirgman.  ConatUutianal 
Autkariiy  eS  lAe  BteAofM  in  Ifte  CaOwiic  Ckvrdi,  New  York. 
1800;  J.  B.  BeegmtUler.  L«fcr6tMA  dM  katMiMkm  Kvrd^M^ 
reeftli.  Freiburg.  1000-04;  W.  von  BrOnneek,  Beilra^  mr 
QmmskiUhkt  dM  KirthenrtdUa  in  dan  deultcAen  KoUmiao' 
liofMlafulm,  2  parte,  Berlin,  1002-04. 

For  the  German  Evangelical  Chmvfaee  ooneult:  O. 
Mejer.  KirdiMnMudd  und  Konaitiiorial-KompeUns,  Roe- 
todc,  1861;  Q.  Galli,  Dia  lutkaritdten  und  ealvinitHadten 
Kirdiienatrafan  M^en  Laian  im  ReformaHonumtaltrr,  Bree- 
lau.  1870;  A.  L.  Riohter.  ut  mip..  H  211.  227-231;  R. 
Frenk,  Die  nauertn  Diasiplinaroeaetta  dar  dautadt^aoan- 
Odiaekan  Landaakir^an,  Marburg.  1800;  E.  Friedbei«. 
ut  0up..  if  102.  10&-100;  K.  Kfihler.  Lahrlnuh  daa  .  ,  . 
Kirdianradaa,  pp.  104.  268,  Berlin.  1806. 

For  Protestant  Churehee  in  Great  Britain  ooneult:  J. 
Brownbill.  PrindpUa  cf  Bngliak  Canon  Law,  London; 
1883;  ConHUuHon  and  Law  of  Ika  Ckurdi  af  SeoOand, 
Edinburgh,  1884;  Compandium  of  tka  Ada  <4  GananU  Aa- 
aambly  RaloHng  to  Procadura  in  CAurcA  Couria,  ib.  1886; 
H«  W.  Grippe,  TraaHaa  on  tka  Law  RalaUno  Co  tka  Ckurek 
and  Clartfv,  London,  1886;  W.  Mair,  Digaat  of  Lawa  Ra- 
laHno  to  tka  Ckurek  pf  Seotiand,  Edinburgh,  1887;  F.  H. 
L.  Errington,  Clargv  Diaeiplina  Ad,  189M,  London.  1802; 
T.  B.  Hardem,  Ckurth  Diaeiplina,  Ounbridge,  1802; 
J.  Chitty.  Siaiulaa  BalaUng  to  Ckurek  and  CUirgy,  London. 
1804;  R.  J.  Phillimore.  BodaaiaaHcal  Law  af  tka  Churdt  of 
Bngland,  2  vole.,  ib.  1806;  F.  W.  Maitland.  Roman  Canon 
Law  in  ika  Ckurdi  i4  Btufland,  Ounbridge,  1808;  H. 
Hardy.  BedaaiaaUoal  Proeaadinga  undar  tike  CUrgy  Diaei- 
pUnB  Ada,  London,  1800;  H.  MiUer.  A  Ouida  to  Bedaaiaa- 
Ueal  Law,  London.  1800;  J.  H.  Blunt,  Tka  Book  of  Ckurek 
Law,  ib.  1001;  T.  £.  Smith.  Summary  af  tka  Law  and 
Praetiaa  in  tka  Beclaaiaatieal  Courta,  ib.  1002;  J.  M.  Dun- 
can, Tka  Paroddal  BedaaiaaHeal  Law  of  Scotland,  Edin- 
burgh, 1003;  W.  H.  Frere,  Tka  Relation  of  Ckurdi  and 
Parliamant  in  Ragard  to  Beclaaiaatieal  Diaeiplina,  Oxford. 
1003;  P.  V.  Smith.  77^  Law  of  Ckurdiwardana  and  Sidaa- 
mmi,  London,  1003;  idem.  Lagal  PoaiHon  of  tka  Clergy,  ib. 
1006.  For  the  United  Btatee:  E.  Buck.  Bodaaiaatiedl 
Law,  Boston.  n.d.:  R.  H.  Tyler.  Am/arioan  Beclaaiaatieal 
Law,  Albany,  1866;  M.  Hoffman.  BedaaiaalAedl  Law  in 
Naw  York,  New  York.  1868;  L.  T.  Townsend,  Handbook 
upon  Ckurek  Triala,  ib.  1886;  C.  B.  Howell.  Tka  Ckurdi 
and  CivU  Law,  Detroit.  1886;  8.  B.  Smith,  ut  sup.;  alao. 
Naw  Procadura  in  Criminal  and  Dieeiplinary  Cauaaa  of 
Bedaaiaatica,  New  York,  1887;  W.  D.  Wilson,  Amarican 
Ckurdi  Law,  ib.  1880;  H.  J.  Desmond,  Tka  Ckurek  and 
tka  Law,  Chicago,  1808;  and  the  literature  under  Chitbcb 
DnapuMB. 

JUSTICE,  ETHICAL,  AND  BQUITT:  Justice 
(in  the  ethical  sense)  in  itself  is  the  maintenance  of 
positive  legal  order,  assuring  the  peaceful  and 
thriving  existence  of  human  society,  the  supreme 
political  virtue — jtutUia  regnorum  fundamerUum. 
Aristotle  distinguishes  putiHa  dMributiva  el  coT' 
recHva,  The  firet  distributes  riches,  power,  and 
honor  according  to  desert;  the  other  compensates 


for  inequalities  and  balances  the  loss  and  gain  in 
the  transactions  of  life.  Justice  provides  the  ex- 
act proportion  of  duties  and  rights,  and  punishes 
every  violation  of  positive  legal  order.  Justice 
establishes  general  lines  of  direction  by  laws,  which 
prove  themselves  emanations  of  justice  whenever 
they  correspond  to  the  original  conception  of  right 
and  reveal  it  in  the  decisions  and  ordinances  based 
upon  them. 

Equity  (lAt.  aequiUu,  Gk.  iiotU)  is  to  be  asso- 
ciated with  justice.  What  the  latter  establishes  in 
a  general  way,  sometimes  appears  insufficient  when 
applied  to  the  individual  case — mimmum  jus,  mimma 
injuria.  What  is  just  in  general  and  what  is  in- 
dividually just  may  diverge  considerably.  In  such 
a  case  equity  regards  and  vindicates  rationality  of 
natural  right  and  corrects  positive  law  in  its  too 
wide  or  too  narrow  comprehension. 

Justice  as  a  personal  quality  is  the  demeanor  of 
man  in  accordance  with  the  legal  order,  his  recti- 
tude. Its  principle  is  exact  compensation — mum 
cuique.  Benevolence  can  not  stand  in  its  place. 
Rectitude  obliges  us  to  conscientious  practising  of 
the  law,  even  when  thereby  evil  may  arise  to  our 
neighbor.  It  is  wrong  and  contrary  to  our  duty 
to  spare  him  out  of  fear  or  weakness.  In  actual 
practise  rectitude  becomes  probity  or  honesty. 

Here  also  equity  forms  the  morally  indispensable 
complement  of  rectitude  (Col.  iv.  1).  In  our  con- 
duct toward  our  neighbor  equity  consists  in  yield- 
ing up  and  destBting  from  our  just  claims,  where, 
relentlessly  pursuing  them,  we  should  damage  the 
neighbor  in  a  degree  detrimental  to  charity;  and, 
on  the  other  hand,  in  acknowledging  and  fulfilling  , 
claims  of  our  neighbor  on  us  whic^  are  not  founded 
on  strict  legality,  if  they  are  of  true  profit  to  him 
and  if  we  do  not  neglect  other  duties  by  complying 
with  them.  In  the  union  of  rectitude  and  equity 
alone  true  justice  of  moral  conduct  is  achieved. 

(Karl  BuROBRf.) 

In  theology  justice  has  been  given  many  signifi- 
cations. In  the  doctrine  of  the  divine  attributes  it 
has  been  regarded  as  an  inviolable  characteristic  of 
holiness,  and  as  such  has  been  set  over  against  love 
as  its  opposite  (see  Holiness).  It  has,  however, 
been  most  important  in  relation  to  theories  of  the 
atonement.  (>n  the  one  hand,  justice  has  been  de- 
fined as  "  general  **  or  "  rectoral "  and  "  distribu- 
tive," where  "  general  "  justice  refers  to  the  well- 
being  and  "  distributive  "  to  what  is  due  the  indi- 
vidual. In  the  atonement  the  latter  was  conceived 
as  suspended  in  favor  of  the  former  (cf.  E.  A.  Park, 
The  AtonemerUf  Ditamrsea,  etc.,  Boston,  1S59). 
On  the  other  hand,  it  has  been  maintained  that  jus- 
tice (righteousness)  must  be  satisfied  before  love 
could  offer  pardon  to  the  sinner  (see  Satisfaction). 
The  word  has  been  employed  also  to  designate  the 
original  state  of  man  as  one  of  integrity,  obedience 
to  God,  and  harmony  of  all  personal  powers.  More- 
over, it  represents  that  renewed  condition  in  which 
man  as  forgiven  stands  toward  God  and  his  law— 
a  putative  position  to  the  unmerited  favor  of  God. 
In  its  deepest  sense  justice  and  love  in  God  are 
identical,  while  in  man  justice  pertains  to  character 
and  voluntary  actions. 


27S 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jurisdlotion,  BoolesiastioAl 
JuBtlfioatioii 


X.  New  Teftament  Doetrine. 

Paul's  Dootrine  of  Rishteouaneai 

(ID. 
KelfttioDs  of  Faith  and  Righteous- 

neas  (i  2). 
Johannean  Doetrine  ({  3). 
Other    New- Testament    Writers 
(14). 
U.  History  of  the  Doctrine. 


JUSTIFICATION. 

Ftttristio   Doctrine   till   Augustine 

(ID. 
Augustine's  Teaohing  ({  2). 
Scholastic    and    Rmnan    Gatholio 

Teaohing  (f  3). 
The  Lutheran  Position  (f  4). 
Later  Views  ({  6). 
Ritschl  and  Domer  ({  6). 
III.  Doctrinal  Discussion. 


The  Fundamental  Position  ({  1). 

Justification  Establishes  New  Rela- 
tions with  (Sod  (i  2). 

Conditions  of  Justification  (f  3). 

Relations  of  Faith  and  Justifica- 
tion (i  4). 

Justification  and  Baptism  ({  6). 

Conclusion  (f  6). 

Additional  Note  ({  7). 


L  New-Testament  Doctrine:  In  the  Scriptural  pres- 
entation one  starts  naturally  with  Paul.  He  alone  of 
the  first  witnesses  of  the  Gospel  had  the  inner  expe- 
rience of  the  sharp  opposition  between  Old-Testa- 
ment piety  and  the  new  thing  in  Christ  out  of  which 
as  an  inevitable  interpretation  the  doctrine  of 
justification  arose.    After  his  conver- 

z.  Paul's  sion  he  was  completely  occupied  with 
Doctrine  of  the  contrast  between  his  own  right- 
Righteous-  eousness  and  God's  righteousness,  be- 
ness.  tween  the  works  of  the  law  and  faith, 
between  Law  and  Gospel.  Any  mis- 
take alleged  against  Paul's  earlier  life  could  not  be 
attributed  to  the  law;  nor  may  one  adduce  a  rad- 
ical distinction  between  Galatians  and  Romans. 
Both  afl&rm  that  the  law  was  given  "  because  of 
transgressions  "  (Gal.  iii.  19),  "  that  sin  .  .  .  might 
become  exceeding  sinful "  (Rom.  vii.  13);  in  the 
redemptive  history,  however,  both  see  in  the  law 
a  divine  ordinance,  and  in  faith  in  Christ  a  fulfil- 
ment of  this  law  (Rom.  xiii.  8,  10;  Gal.  v.  14). 
For  his  failure  to  fulfil  the  law  Paul  blames  neither 
the  law  nor  his  own  zeal  (Phil.  iii.  6).  A  bitter 
experience  had  convinced  him  of  the  impossibility 
of  a  perfect  righteousness  under  the  law.  One  who 
with  such  sincerity  and  eneigy  seeks  to  imify  his 
action,  can  hardly  have  failed  before  his  conversion 
to  struggle  with  the  doubt  (cf.  Rom.  vii.  7  sqq.) 
whether  he  could  really  fulfil  the  law  of  God.  As 
a  Pharisee  he  could  not  resolve  this  doubt  by  a  re- 
newed effort  after  a  righteousness  of  his  own,  and 
therefore  a  righteousness  proceeding  from  the  law. 
The  appearance  of  the  exalted  Lord  convinced 
him  tluit  the  one  he  was  persecuting  in  the  name 
of  God  was  the  Messiah.  This  experience  was  in- 
deed individual,  but  it  was  an  instance  of  the  uni- 
versal weakness  of  man's  fleshly  nature  (Rom.  viii. 
3)  which  no  law  could  quicken  (Gal.  iii.  21).  In 
the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  Paul  showed  that  with 
reference  to  justification  by  faith  the  Jew  has  no 
advantage  over  the  Gentile.  The  law  which  pro- 
nounces a  curse  upon  all  men  can  not,  however,  be 
given  for  this  purpose,  but  for  a  ''  schoolmaster,  to 
bring  us  to  Christ  "  (Gal.  iii.  24). 

The  righteousness  of  God  with  which  the  Gospel 
is  concerned  can  mean  only  either  an  attribute  or 
a  relation  of  God  (Rom.  i.  17,  19),  or  else  a  right- 
eousness created  by  God  (II  Cor.  v.  20 ; 

a.  Rela-    Rom.  x.  3).    In  any  case,  it  is  directly 

tions  of  opposed  to  Pharisaic  self-righteous- 
Faith  and  ness  under  the  law;  having  its  sole 
Righteous-  source  in  God,  man  is  only  a  recipient 
ness.  of  it.  The  significance  of  faith  ap- 
pears in  two  characteristic  passages 
of  Paul  (Rom.  iii.  26  and  II  Cor.  v,  21).  Thus 
righteousness  or  communion  with  God  is  possible 


in  Christ,  since  only  in  him  in  virtue  of  his  atone- 
ment is  there  righteousness.  This  divine  arrange- 
ment for  salvation  must  be  realized  by  the  suboidi- 
nation  of  man  in  the  form  of  faith  (Rom.  x.  3  sqq.). 
Legal  justification  being  impossible,  faith  in  Christ 
alone  remains.  The  distinction  between  law-works 
and  faith  was  for  Paul  the  fundamental  question  of 
religion,  viz.,  whether  communion  with  God  is  from 
man  or  from  God;  if  the  latter,  it  can  be  experi- 
enced by  faith  alone.  Faith  includes  an  intellec- 
tual element — related  to  historical  facts,  as  the 
death  and  resurrection  of  Jesus,  yet  only  so  far  as 
by  means  of  these  facts  Christ  has  become  what  he 
is  for  man.  According  to  its  peculiar  nature,  how- 
ever, faith  is  essentially  trust  in  the  person  of  the 
Lord  in  its  historical  and  present  meaning.  Where- 
ever  faith  is  there  is  also  a  condition  of  justification 
as  God's  act.  This  signifies  not  a  making  but  a 
declaring  righteous  (cf.  Luke  xviii.  14;  Matt, 
xii.  37;  Gal.  iii.  11;  Rom.  iii.  20,  iv.  4;  also  the 
notion  of  forgiveness  of  sin,  Rom.  iv.  7).  Fur- 
ther, this  meaning  accords  with  the  entire  under- 
standing of  Paulinism.  Moreover,  justification  is 
both  a  result  and  a  completion  of  the  historical 
redemptive  work  of  Christ.  This  has  its  continuity 
in  the  Word,  and  aims  at  the  justification  of  the  in- 
dividual. Paul  does  not  teach  empirical  sinlessness. 
He  refers  to  a  conflict  of  the  flesh  with  the  spirit 
and  does  not  underestimate  the  danger  of  a  Chris- 
tian's falling  into  sin.  He  even  applied  this  warn- 
ing to  himself  and  toward  the  end  of  his  hfe  knew 
of  remaining  imperfection;  but  this  does  not  des- 
troy the  Christian  position.  One's  safety  lies  in  a 
constant  renewal  of  that  which  the  Christian  has 
essentially,  i.e.,  Christ  and  his  righteousness. 
Joined  with  this  in  Paul's  thought  was  the  cer- 
tainty of  future  perfection  and  blessedness.  He 
urges  the  Christian  to  self-examination,  but  at  the 
same  time  to  a  looking  wholly  away  to  Christ  in 
faith.  But  faith  is  derived  from  the  Holy  Spirit, 
in  it  is  given  the  possession  of  the  Spirit — a  witness 
of  sonship,  and  even  pledge  and  seal  of  salvation. 
According  to  the  Synoptics  Jesus'  preaching  seems 
at  first  opposed  to  Paul's  message;  over  against 
his  doctrine  of  justification,  Jesus  emphasized  the 
permanent  demand  of  the  law,  the  judgment  of 
works  and  even  reward  for  the  same.  One  asks 
only  whether  Paul's  doctrine  is  a  necessary  infer- 
ence from  Jesus'  self-witness.  Jesus  connects  the 
kingdom,  salvation,  and  the  judgment  with  his  own 
person,  a  fact  which  the  disciples  first  understood 
after  his  suffering  and  death.  Two  remarks  of 
Jesus  concerning  the  meaning  of  his  death  (Matt. 
XX.  28,  xxvi.  28)  coincide  with  the  ideas  of  Paul. 
With  Jesus,  forgiveness  of  sin  occupies  a  central 
place,    likewise    dikaioeyni,    '*  righteousness,"    al- 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOa 


276 


though  this  both  agrees  with  and  diverges  from 
Paul's  view.  Paul's  presentation  of  the  kingdom 
of  God  as  a  gift  corresponds  with  that  of  Jesus. 
Jesus  distinctly  emphasises  the  mutual  relations  be- 
tween the  religious  and  the  ethical  aspect  of  son- 
ship.  On  the  ethical  side  as  a  condition  of  entering 
that  kingdom  there  is  repentance.  Faith  is  con- 
ceived as  the  right  relation  to  Christ — trust  not 
merely  in  his  wonderful  power  to  help,  but  in  his 
person.  Faith  affirms  that  in  him  the  kingdom  of 
God  has  come  and  that  he  is  the  Messiah.  Jesus 
complains  of  lack  of  faith,  prays  for  increase  of  his 
disciples'  faith,  and  he  designates  those  as  his  fol- 
lowers who  have  faith  in  him.  Of  this  the  Pauline 
teaching  is  only  a  continuation. 

The  self-witness  of  Jesus,  according  to  John, 
stands  in  dose  relation  to  the  Pauline  circle  of 
thought,  yet  with  its  own  characteristic  features. 
Paul's  secret  of  religion  recalls  John's  living  com- 
munion   with    God.    The    Sjmoptics 

3.  Johan-  designate  this  as  divine  sonship,  which 
nean       in  John  is  mediated  through  Jesus. 

Doctrine.  Here  both  the  person  of  Jesus  and 
faith  in  him  are  far  more  strongly  ac- 
centuated; also  the  saving  significance  of  his  death. 
The  central  good  is  the  "life,"  which  includes  the 
forgiveness  of  sins—a  present  salvation  and  a  future 
perfection.  In  sonship  the  ethical  and  religious 
elements  are  inseparable  and  conditioned  through 
faith  in  Jesus  and  a  new  birth,  wherein  one  discerns 
a  leaning  toward  the  Pauline  view  of  the  new  birth 
as  mediated  by  faith.  In  faith  the  aspect  of  trust 
is  not  lacking,  but  the  intellectual  element  is  con- 
spicuous. There  is  an  approach  to  Paul's  idea  of 
faith — the  mystic  fellowship  with  Christ.  Nor  is 
the  ethical  element  wanting:  "  he  that  is  bom  of 
God  doeth  no  sin"  is  an  ideal  judgment  and  is  to 
be  miderstood  empirically,  as  is  Paul's  statement 
that  the  Christian  is  dead  to  sin.  More  strongly 
than  Paul,  John  affirms  that  the  Christian  is  de- 
ceived who  declares  that  he  does  not  sin.  Divine 
sonship  is  traced  wholly  to  God's  love,  and  the 
Christian  is  led  to  ground  his  salvation  not  on  his 
love  to  God  but  on  God's  love  to  him,  guaranteed 
in  the  sending  of  his  Son  and  the  atonement  for  sin. 

In  the  rest  of  the  New-Testament  writings,  James' 
Epistle  mainly  demands  attention.  The  author's 
interest  is  wholly  practical.  The  Christian  com- 
munity is  presupposed,  but  the  content  of  faith  is 
never  developed  and  no  warning  to  the  Christian 
community  rests  on  it.    Owing  to  un- 

4.  Other    certainty  in  the  date  of  this  epistle, 
Hew-Testa-  no  intentional  polemic  against  Paul 

meat  can  be  affirmed.  One  must,  however, 
WritttB.  reckon  with  the  possibility  that  James' 
presentation  was  directed  against  a 
practical  abuse  of  Pauline  preaching.  James  holds 
that  a  separation  of  faith  and  works  is  impossible; 
rather  does  faith  prove  itself  alive  through  works. 
With  reference  to  other  passages  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment: at  Pentecost,  salvation  is  connected  with  the 
person  of  the  crucified  and  risen  Christ,  and  foigive- 
ness  of  sins  with  faith  in  him.  With  this  agrees  I 
Peter,  where,  however,  faith  appears  rather  as  trust 
in  the  redemptive  activity  of  Jesus,  and  the  ethical 
element  and  fear  before  God  are  strongly  accentu- 


ated. The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  aooordB  with 
Paul's  view  in  emphasising  perfection  (vii.  11)  in 
Christ's  work,  and  forgiveness  of  sins  in  baptism, 
as  well  as  the  enduring  high  priesthood  of  Christ. 

n.  History  of  the  Doctrine:  Outside  of  the 
canonical  Scriptures  one  seeks  in  vain  for  a  full  con- 
ception of  the  Pauline  doctrine  of  justification. 
Christianity  is  imperfectly  understood.  Men  were 
aware  of  something  completely  new  in  Christian- 
ity, but  could  not  specifically  distinguish  this  from 
the    law;     thus  Christianity  wss  in 

z.  Patristic  danger  of  becoming  a  new  law,  and 
Doctrine    faith  an  obedient  acceptance  of  re- 
till        vealed  doctrine,  to  be  completed  by 

Augustine,  works.  Of  the  Apostolic  Fathers, 
Clement  did  not  gain  complete  under- 
standing of  the  Pauline  faith.  For  salvation  faith 
and  works  are  combined,  and  even  forgiveness  of 
sins  is  mediated  through  love.  Ethical  action  is 
based  on  the  command  of  God.  For  Barnabas  the 
content  of  the  Gospel  was  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  yet 
he  teaches  that  the  way  of  light  is  the  fulfilling  of 
the  law.  In  the  Ignatian  Epistles  the  thought  not 
of  faith  but  of  the  indwelling  of  God  and  Christ  is 
prominent.  Ignatius  relates  faith  to  the  historical 
person  of  Christ  and  especially  to  his  death— a 
trust  which  rescues  from  death.  From  him  comes 
the  formula,  **  first  faith,  then  love."  The  Shep- 
herd of  Hermas  and  the  second  Clementine  Epistle 
are  the  classic  representatives  of  a  Christianity 
which  is  profoundly  convinced  of  the  essential 
significance  of  faith  as  the  foundation  and  power 
of  the  entire  Christian  position,  but  for  the  prac- 
tise of  the  Christian  life  lays  all  weight  on  obe- 
dience to  the  divine  requirements.  Faith  and 
works  are  the  saving  formula,  and  the  doctrine  of 
merit  is  adumbrated:  fasting  is  better  than  prayer, 
alms  better  than  both.  In  Hermas  appears  the 
thought  of  a  supererogatory  action  which  may 
hope  for  recompense  from  God.  By  TertuUian  and 
Cyprian  the  notion  of  merit  was  made  at  home  in 
the  Church.  Tertullian  also  marked  out  the  path 
by  which  the  Roman  Church  has  sought  to  adjust 
merit  to  the  religious  character  of  Christianity. 
He  knows  of  a  supematimil  endowment  by  which 
one  is  qualified  for  meritorious  action.  On  the 
other  hand,  he  does  not  know  of  a  grace  through 
which  one  becomes  pleasing  to  God.  Thus  the  en- 
tire Christian  life  is  under  the  stamp  of  fear.  The 
understanding  prepares  for  a  distinction  between 
natum  and  yralta,  but  uses  it  only  to  obliterate  the 
opposition  of  graHa  and  merit.  It  was  more  fatal 
still  that  the  doctrine  of  Tertullian  was  made 
effective  by  the  authority  of  Cyprian.  Almsgiv- 
ing is  paralleled  with  the  forgiveness  of  sins  through 
baptism.  No  longer  is  justification  by  faith  held 
in  the  Pauline  sense;  faith  is  acknowledgment  of 
the  truth;  it  is  trust  only  as  an  expectation  that 
God  will  not  withhold  reward  for  meritorious  deeds. 
Yet  one  must  not  conclude  that  for  actual  piety 
the  Evangelical  thoughts  of  the  Scriptures  had 
wholly  dittppeared.  These  were  stiU  influential 
for  personal  piety.  Augustine  reminds  those  who 
cavil  at  his  notion  of  grace  of  the  prayers  and  in- 
stitutions of  the  Chur^.  Even  the  Didache  had 
required  confession  of  sins  before  the  sacrifice  of 


5177 


REUGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDU 


JusttAoatioii 


the  Lord's  day.  And  Tertullian's  piety  was  not 
simply  self-righteousness,  as  one  may  see  from  his 
tractate  on  baptism  and  his  writing  concerning 
repentance.  Jovinian,  as  opposed  to  the  idea  of 
a  special  reward  for  supererogatory  action,  such  as 
that  of  virginity,  admits  only  a  Christian  position 
which  rests  on  Christ  and  is  established  by  faith 
and  baptism,  in  which  the  Father  and  Son  dwell  in 
the  believer. 

More  clearly  than  Augustine,  Ambrose  rests  sal- 
vation and  the  certainty  of  it  on  the  historical  work 
of  Christ.  Yet  he  advances  the  doctrine  of  merit, 
almsgiving,  and  especially  virginity.  To  Augus- 
tine more  than  to  any  one  the  Roman  Church  owes 
its  doctrine  of  justification.    For  him 

2.  Augus-  Christianity  is  a  present  rest  in  God 
tine's      — a  conception,  shaped,  although  not 

Teaching,  immediately,  by  his  experience,  first, 
of  distance  from  God,  and  then  by  the 
inward  commotion  of  a  finding  of  God.  His  earlier, 
differing  from  his  later,  teaching  on  sin  and  grace  is 
drawn  not  directly  from  his  conflict  with  Pelagius 
but  from  his  study  of  Paul  and  from  Neoplatonic 
sources.  His  personal  experience  is  for  him  the 
key,  and  as  with  Paul  and  later  with  Luther  sin 
and  grace  are  the  two  poles  of  all  Christian  knowl- 
edge. Outside  of  grace  mankind  is  a  ''mass  of 
lost  souls  "  which  may  through  God's  grace  be  re- 
united to  God.  According  to  Augustine  the  Law 
said:  " Do  what  thou  orderesti "  the  Gospel:  **  Give 
what  thou  orderesti "  That  is,  grace  is  preeminently 
a  power  of  religious  and  ethical  renewal.  Concern- 
ing forgiveness  of  sins  Augustine  holds  that  (1) 
baptism  as  foimdation  of  Christianity  confers  for- 
giveness of  sins;  (2)  forgiveness  is  bound  to  justi- 
fication; (3)  there  exists  a  continual  forgiveness 
even  for  the  baptized  Christian.  Fruitful  for  piety 
is  the  personality  of  Christ — his  inner  life,  his 
humility,  his  entire  manifestation  the  highest  proof 
of  love,  his  death  the  groimd  of  foigiveness  of  sins. 
But  grace  through  Christ  is  present  by  means  of 
"word  and  sacrament,"  not  clearly  connected  with 
Christ's  historical  work  but  in  the  strict  sense  crea- 
tive. As  operating  or  prevenient  it  establishes,  as 
cooperating  it  alone  sustains,  the  Christian  position. 
From  it  oomes  justification,  i.e.,  renewal,  which 
makes  one  actually  righteous;  instead  of  evil  con- 
cupiscence comes  good  concupiscence.  The  entire 
Christian  life  becomes  a  process  of  sanctification 
wherein  is  merit  which  the  Christian  must  gain  for 
himself.  He  teaches  a  justification  by  a  faith  that 
works  through  love.  In  De  fide  et  (yperibuSf  along 
with  faith,  works  are  so  emphasized  as  to  make  this 
writing  valuable  to  Roman  Catholic  histories  of 
dogma  to-day.  He  approaches  the  Reformation 
doctrine  when  he  gives  a  more  mystical  turn  to 
faith — such  a  union  with  Christ  that  all  that  is 
Christ's  becomes  ours.  In  love  to  God  a  present 
life  from  and  in  God  is  attained.  But  here  is  no 
personal  certainty  of  salvation. 

Scholastic  theology  adhered  to  Augustine's  di- 
dactic definitions,  at  the  same  time  it  was  influ- 
enced by  the  religious  impulse  originating  in  him. 
Yet  here  Semipelagianism  and  Augustinianism  ap- 
peared in  many  shades  of  conflicting  differences. 
According  to  the  Tridentine  confession,  justification 


is  not  simply,  but  includes,  forgiveness  of  sins. 
According  to  Thomas  Aquinas,  it  is  a  consequence 
of  forgiveness  of  sins — a  physical  inf u- 
3.  Scholas-  sion  of  grace.    Other  church  teachers 
tic  and     regard  the  connection  as  ethical,  thus 
Roman     its  elation  to  the  historical  redemptive 
Catholic    work  is  uncertain.     The  infusion  of 
Teaching,   grace    is    variously   interpreted:    the 
substance  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  planted 
in  men  (Peter  the  Lombard);  sanctifying  grace  is 
identified  with  love  (Duns  Scotus);  the  Tridentine 
seeks  to  combine  both  views.    Later  dogmatics 
side  with  Thomas.    According  to  the  Roman  teach- 
ing, justifying  grace  is  a  pure  gift  of  grace — a  heri- 
tage from  Augustine.    Merit  (merUum  de  condigno) 
is  first  grounded  on  sanctifying  grace,  while  the 
corresponding  action  of  man  is  rewarded  by  infu- 
sion of  justifying  grace  (tnentuin  de  congruo).    Con- 
cerning this  the  Tridentine  was  silent.    Later  the- 
ology teaches  that  grace  is  not  given  for  merit. 
Yet  if  one  does  what  he  can  he  may  humbly  hope 
that  God  will  lend  his  grace.    Others  do  not  admit 
a  psychological  necessity  of  a  preparation  for  re- 
ception of  grace.    In  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 
the  increase  of  grace  received,  eternal  life,  and  the 
winning  of  a  higher  glory  in  that  life  are  subjects 
of  himian  merit.    According  to  Thomas  the  three 
signs  of  a  state  of  grace  are:  joy  in  God,  scorn  of 
worldly  things,  consciousness  that  one  is  not  guilty 
of  mortal  sin. 

For  Luther  the  fundamental  question  was  con- 
cerning the  gracious  God,  and  how  one  might  be 
justifi«l  in  tbe  judgment  of  God.  Through  a  pain- 
ful experience  in  the  complete  renunciation  of  his 
own  righteousness,  he  understood  the  Pauline  word 
— ^by  grace  alone  through  faith  in  Christ.  Justifi- 
cation includes  not  merely  foigiveness, 
4.  The  which  has  precedence,  but  inner  justi- 
Lutheran  fication.  Grace  is  pardoning  merpy, 
Position,  and  faith  is  trust.  Christ  himself  in 
his  person  and  his  historical  work  is 
man's  righteousness.  The  law  can  only  increase  sin 
and  it  demands  God's  righteous  judgment  against 
the  sinner.  The  law  must  indeed  be  preached;  yet 
God's  proper  work  begins  when  he  comforts  the 
alarmed  conscience  by  the  gospel  of  forgiveness  in 
Christ.  Wherever  faith  lays  hold  on  Christ  and 
becomes  one  with  him,  Christ's  righteousness  be- 
comes our  righteousness;  God  declares  man  right- 
eous and  forgives  his  sin.  Thus  Christ  becomes  the 
power  of  a  new  life.  Later,  Luther  speaks  of  a  be- 
ginning, an  advancing,  and  a  completed  justification 
yet  to  be  hoped  for.  Never  could  faith  by  reason 
of  an  inner  quality  be  regarded  as  justifying.  The 
Christian  position  is  grounded  in  God's  gracious 
judgment.  Luther  warns  against  confusing  the 
certainty  of  salvation  with  the  feeling  of  it.  He 
combines  baptism  and  justification  but  without 
precise  theological  treatment.  Through  Melanch- 
thon  the  doctrine  of  justification  received  its  first 
symbolic  form  (The  Augsburg  Confeasioa,  q*v-)- 
We  are  righteous  before  God,  not  "by  our  own 
strength,  merits  or  works/'  but  by  faith  alone. 
Justification  is  grounded  in  Christ  and  is  mediated 
by  faith  alone.  In  the  "  Apology  "  the  impelling 
interest  of  the  Reformation  against  the  Roman 


Instlfloatlon 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


278 


doetrine  first  came  to  dear  expression.  In  the 
Formula  of  Concord  all  human  action  is  excluded 
as  a  condition  of  the  certainty  of  salvation;  justi- 
fication as  distinguished  from  regeneration  is  in- 
terpreted as  forensic,  the  righteousness  of  Christ 
is  imputed  so  that  sins  are  forgiven,  and  the  doc- 
trine of  justification  is  so  formulated  that  nothing 
whatever  in  man  but  simply  the  historical  work  of 
Christ  is  the  true  ground  of  salvation. 

The  later  dogmatists  distinguished  not  merely 

between  the  hmnan  and  the  divine  aspect  of  the 

appropriation  of  Christ's  righteousness  (Baier),  but 

within  faith  itself  a  certainty  before, 

5.  Later  in,  and  after  regeneration  (Quenstedt). 
Viewi.  The  certainty  of  salvation  was  to  be 
experienced  by  looking  wholly  away 
from  self  to  Christ  as  the  promise.  Thus  the  proc- 
ess of  justification  was  conceived  as  purely  trans- 
cendental for  which  faith  is  only  an  essential  pre- 
supposition. According  to  Burk,  who  presents  this 
view,  justification  is  withdrawn  from  all  vacillation 
of  the  inner  life  so  that  assurance  becomes  possible 
to  those  whose  peace  has  been  disturbed.  But  the 
question  arises  as  to  the  criteria  of  faith.  The 
Lutherans  presupposed  the  imiversality  and  prom- 
ise of  Christ's  redeeming  work;  to  the  Reformed 
who  restricted  this  to  the  elect,  personal  assmance 
of  salvation  must  be  gathered  from  the  works  of 
faith  as  si4)ematurally  caused.  Schleiermacher  co- 
ordinated justification  with  conversion;  to  be  taken 
up  into  living  communion  with  Christ  is,  as  a 
changed  form  of  life,  conversion,  as  a  changed 
relation  to  God,  justification.  He,  however,  con- 
ceives this  as  purely  general  and  progressively  real- 
ised. Some  theologians  resolve  the  objective  proc- 
ess of  justification  into  subjective  consciousness, 
others  emphasise  the  ethical  aspect.  Hengsten- 
berg  towand  the  end  of  his  life  distinguished  stages 
of  justification;  according  to  Beck,  in  justification 
mediated  through  Christ  one  enters  on  a  condition 
of  life  where  on  the  one  hand  all  earlier  sins  are 
wiped  out,  on  the  other  hand  a  new  ethical  condi- 
tion is  awakened  which  must  express  itself  in  right- 
eousness of  conduct;  with  Martensen  the  justify- 
ing power  of  faith  lay  in  God  beholding  in  it  the 
seed-corn  of  future  blessedness,  and  in  the  pure  will 
the  aheady  realised  ideal  of  freedom.  In  the  so- 
called  Borohohner  movement  (see  Bornholmerb), 
since  the  world  is  justified  in  Christ,  justification  is 
identified  with  his  redemptive  work  and  faith  is 
simply  a  becoming  aware  of  what  one  has  in  Christ. 

Ritschl  combines  justification  with  the  historical 
work  of  Christ.  In  Christ  the  community  is  so  far 
justified  as  God  reckons  to  the  community  belong- 
ing to  Christ  the  position  which  Christ  himself 
maintained  toward  God,  and  for  his  sake  admits  the 
community  to  fellowship  with  himself.  The  indi- 
vidual is  justified  on  the  ground  that 

6.  Ritichl  through  faith  in  the  Gospel  he  is  a 
and        member  of  the  community.    Justifi- 

Donier.  cation  and  reconciliation  have  the  same 
content.  Reconciliation  is  the  result  of 
justification.  Ritschl's  entire  treatment  has  en- 
during significance  on  account  of  the  many  problems 
involved,  especially  the  relation  of  justification  to 
the  historicfld  work  of  Christ  and  to  faith.    Dorner 


characteristically  emphasized  the  historical  deed  of 
reconciliation  in  relation  to  the  Christian's  present 
position:  faith  is  thus  simply  "  the  assiznilating 
organ  "  of  forgiveness  already  complete  so  far  as 
the  divine  aspect  is  concerned.  Justification  is 
identified  with  reconciliation:  the  central  signifi- 
cance, the  express  founding,  and  the  certainty  of 
justification  on  the  basis  of  the  historical  work  of 
Christ  is  a  peculiar  characteristic  of  Cremer's  the- 
ology. 

in.  Doctrinal  Discussion:  A  comprehensive  dis- 
cussion of  this  subject  must  be  limited  to  the  dear 
presentation  of  the  controlling  interest  and  the 
simplest  possible  designation  of  the  points  on  which 
it  depends.  Communion  with  God  and  personal 
assurance  of  this  stand  or  fall  together.  If  Chris- 
tianity is  a  present  personal  conmiunion  with  God, 

a  necessary  and  radical  implication  is 

I.  The      that  it  can  only  be  a  conscious  expe- 

Funda-      rience.    This   being   established,    one 

mental     has  further  to  ascertain  whether  the 

Position.    Christian  can  be  certain  of  it.    There 

is  finally  only  the  alternative,  the  initi- 
ative of  communion  with  God  is  wholly  from  God 
or  wholly  from  man.  Whenever  the  question  con- 
cerning communion  with  God  wakens  in  a  man,  it 
always  occurs  at  first  in  his  desire  to  make  himself 
pious,  and  so  to  work  in  fellowship  with  God.  This 
has  its  source  in  the  painful  consciousness  of  sepa- 
ration from  God  in  sin;  if  one  recognises  his  re- 
sponsibility for  this,  it  is  quite  natural  for  him  to 
establish  his  own  righteousness  before  God.  Yet 
in  all  such  attempts,  on  account  of  their  abiding 
imperfection,  one  does  not  escape  from  inward  un- 
certainty. This  has,  however,  its  objective  ground: 
only  from  God  hiniself  can  men  be  adnaitted  to 
communion  with  him.  It  is  therefore  a  more  cor- 
rect understanding  when  the  Catholic  view  refere 
the  initiative  in  the  entire  process  of  justification 
definitely  to  God,  and  sees  the  final  ground  of  justi- 
fication in  a  justifying  act  which  proceeds  from  God; 
this,  resulting  from  suitable  preparation  and  made 
fruitful  in  congruous  activity,  assures  one  of  eternal 
life.  In  reality,  however,  what  is  here  under  dis- 
cussion is  such  a  kind  of  mediation  as  brings  vividly 
to  consciousness  how  every  attempt  to  effect  recon- 
ciliation actually  points  man  after  all  to  his  own 
self-doing,  and  thrusts  him  into  inner  uncertainty. 
But  one  can  arrive  at  an  actual  assurance  of  a  gra- 
cious state  only  when  he  is  clear  that  this  rests 
solely  on  God's  offer,  and  that  nothing  remains  for 
him  except  in  faith  to  appropriate  this  divine  gift, 
or  rather  to  let  trust  in  it  be  begotten  in  him.  God 
has  completed  this  offer  of  himself  in  the  work  of 
Christ  in  which,  through  an  atonement  for  sin,  he 
has  reconciled  the  world  to  himself.  In  so  far,  then, 
certainty  of  salvation  is  based  wholly  upon  a  jus- 
tice outside  ourselves:  the  righteousness  which  has 
been  created  by  Christ's  imdertaking  in  man's  be- 
half is  the  real  groimd,  or,  on  the  ground  of  his  suf- 
ferings and  death,  he  now  represents  man  before 
God.  So  far,  however,  as  that  historical  work  of 
Christ  reaches  man  only  in  the  Word  and  the  sacra- 
ment therein  contained,  the  Word  and  the  sacra- 
ment are  the  ground  of  assurance.  Later  on,  these 
positions  will  require  completion  and  confirmation. 


970 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


JuBtiiloatioli 


But  they  designate  the  central  interest  which  can 
not  be  surrendered;  that  form  of  the  doctrine  of 
justification  can  akme  be  adequate  which  satisfies 
this  interest. 

It  is  now  plain  in  what  sense  justification  as  a 
forensic  act  is  to  be  understood.  If  communion 
with  God  is  established  only  by  him, 
a.  Jostiflca-  and  if,  on  the  other  hand,  both  on  ac- 
tioii  Estab-  count  of  the  personal  nature  of  this 
liahes  New  relation  of  communion  and  because  of 
Relations  the  remaining  imperfection  of  the  jus- 
with  God.  tified,  the  thought  of  a  magic  trans- 
formation is  excluded,  then  the  justi- 
fying act  of  God  on  which  the  Christian  position  is 
baaed  can  be  thought  of  only  in  the  form  of  a  gra- 
cious judgment  of  God  which  is  not  analytic  but 
synthetic.  In  a  word,  since  the  justifying  act  of 
God  does  not  first  of  aJl  contemplate  the  establish- 
ing of  a  new  ethical  quality  in  man,  but  the  found- 
ing of  a  new  relation  to  God,  it  muat  be  imderstood 
not  as  the  confirmation  of  an  ethical  quality  exist- 
ing in  man,  but  simply  as  a  judgment  of  God's  gra- 
cious will  which  passes  over  the  sinner  and  in  and 
with  forgiveness  of  sins  justifies  and  takes  him  up 
into  communion  with  God.  Even  faith,  without 
which  there  can  be  no  justification,  may  not,  as  a 
meritorioi]s  attainment,  be  made  the  real  ground 
of  justification,  nor  may  the  continuance  of  the 
state  of  justification  be  grounded  in  part  on  the 
life-work  of  the  Christian  as  a  completing  of  God's 
act  of  justification.  On  the  contrary,  from  begin- 
ning to  end,  the  Christian  position  rests  exclusively 
on  God's  gracioi]s  judgment,  so  that  this,  in  spite 
of  remaining  imperfection,  depends  solely  on  affirm- 
ing the  judgment  of  faith.  As  a  matter  of  terms, 
one  may  question  whether  God's  relation  to  the 
sins  of  the  justified  person  is  to  be  interpreted  as 
daily  forgiveness  or  with  older  dogmaticians  as  a 
oontinuoi]s  justification.  According  to  the  former 
phraseology,  the  fundamental  chsjracter  of  God's 
justifying  act  comes  indeed  to  the  clearest  possible 
expression,  but  one  may  doubt  whether  the  believer 
can  avoid  thinking  of  the  daily  forgiveness  of  sins 
as  a  constant  and  radical  renewal  of  his  relation  to 
God.  In  any  case,  by  the  acceptance  of  the  notion 
of  a  justification  continually  renewed  one  is  not 
warranted  in  supposing  that  the  Christian  position 
is  composed  of  ever  new  additions.  On  the  con- 
trary, a  continuoi]s  state  of  grace  is  grounded  in  the 
original  divine  act  of  justification. 

If,  however,  the  continuity  of  this  gracioi]s  state 
is  due  to  the  historical  work  of  Christ,  but  origi- 
nates and  is  sustained  by  the  gracioi]s  judgment  of 
justification,  it  follows  at  once  that  under  all  cir- 
cnmistances  justification  and  the  historical  work  of 
Christ  must  be  brought  into  the  closest  connection. 
But  the  limits  within  which  this  con- 
3.  Condi-   nection  is  to  be  sought  are  designated 
tions  of  Jos-  by  the  following  propositions:  (1)  jus- 
tification,   tification  may  not  be  identified  with 
the  historical  work  of  Christ — ^the  Bib- 
lical  connection   between   justification   and   faith 
would  be  obscured  and  the  reality  of  a  reciprocal 
communion  of  God  and  man  lost.    (2)  It  would  be 
a  relapse  into  the  Roman  Catholic  way  of  think- 
ing to  see  in  the  historical  work  of  Christ  only  the 


general  ground  of  possible  justification — ^manifestly 
the  final  decisive  ground  of  the  divine  justifying 
act  of  God  must  then  be  somehow  sought  in  man 
himself.  If  one  carries  through  the  combination 
already  suggested  in  the  Biblical  presentation,  then 
an  adjustment  between  the  apparently  divergent 
interests  is  possible  only  when  justification  is  un- 
derstood as  an  actual  fulfilment  of  God's  offer  of 
himself  as  completed  in  the  historical  work  of 
Christ.  Paul  does  not  conceive  that  the  reconcilia- 
tion in  Christ  renders  the  demand  ''  be  ye  reconciled 
to  God  "  (II  Cor.  V.  20)  superfluous;  rather  he 
sees  in  the  word  of  reconciliation  the  necessary  ac- 
complishment of  reconciliation.  On  the  other 
hand,  he  believes  that  in  the  Gospel  righteousness 
is  disclosed  and  made  efficacious.  A  combination 
of  these  two  lines  of  thought  compels  one  to  see 
that  God's  historical  offer  of  himself  in  the  work  of 
Christ  endures  in  his  Word  and  so  reaches  the  in- 
dividual. It  is  not  the  fact  that  God  has  reopened 
the  way  of  access  to  himself  in  his  historical  rev- 
elation, while  man  must  work  his  way  through 
to  God  in  reliance  on  the  divine  deed;  on  the  con- 
trary, self-disclosure  of  God  in  the  Word  effectively 
reaches  the  individual,  and  wherever  through  God's 
offer  of  grace  one  lets  himself  be  won  to  trust  in 
this,  the  judgment  of  justification  is  passed  upon 
him,  and  this  both  objectively  and  subjectively 
establishes  the  condition  of  justification. 

The  same  conclusion  follows  from  the  answer  to 
the  other  question — What  position  and  meaning 
belong  to  faith  in  the  act  of  justification?  That 
faith  alone  can  be  regarded  as  justifying  is  clear 
from  the  foregoing  (III.,  §  1);  there  it  was  re- 
marked that  the  justifying  power  of  faith  may  not 
be  found  in  its  ethical  quality.  If  fellowship  with 
God  rests  solely  on  Christ's  redemptive 
4.  Rela-  work  and  the  righteousness  procured 
tions  of  by  it,  then  faith  can  be  regarded  sim- 
Faithand  ply  as  the  assimilating  organ  and  as 
Justlfica-  justifying  only  on  accoimt  of  the  ob- 
tion.  ject  apprehended  by  it.  The  peculiar 
difficulty  first  emerges  in  the  question, 
how  this  imderstanding  of  faith  which  is  to  be 
maintained  imder  all  circimistanoes  b  consistent 
with  the  other  proposition  which  must  be  as  firmly 
emphasized,  that  only  where  faith  exist  is  there  jus- 
tification. Does  not  the  latter  position  indeed  in- 
volve that  somehow  on  man's  part  faith  appears  as 
an  efficient  condition  of  justification?  In  reality 
this  consequence  would  be  unavoidable  if  one  had 
to  suppose  that  man — always  of  course  under  the 
influence  of  the  Word — first  himself  ripens  faith  in 
Christ,  and  then  God  completes  the  judgment  of 
justification  on  the  ground  of  confirming  this  faith 
as  if  it  were  a  finished  achievement.  'The  element 
of  truth  in  such  a  view  is  that  in  fact  faith  in  the 
strict  sense  is  an  offering  of  Christ  to  the  wrath  of 
God,  and  precisely  for  this  reason  justification  comes 
to  pass  by  means  of  it.  Evidently  these  proposi- 
tions which  aim  to  complete  the  doctrine  of  justifi- 
cation really  point  to  such  a  method  as  will  not 
allow  faith  to  appear  in  any  way  as  real  ground  of 
justification.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  the  coQcli]sions 
just  indicated  are  to  be  drawn,  this  means  nothing 
less  than  that  the  original  interest  of  the  Ref ormar 


Jnstiftoatioii 


THE  NEW  6CHAFF-HERZ0G 


d80 


tion  doctrine  would  be  surrendered.  For  the  Chris- 
tian would  then  again  be  directed  to  ground  his 
aasuianoe  of  salvation  by  reflection  upon  himself, 
i.e.,  on  the  existence  of  faith  in  himself.  There 
would  be  no  place  for  a  simple  and  radical  ground- 
ing of  certainty  on  Christ  and  the  Word  to  which  he 
witnessed.  Manifestly  that  kind  of  judgment  of  jus- 
tification, which  amounts  to  a  confirmation  of  faith 
already  existing  in  man,  can  not  be  thought  of  as 
mediated  by  the  Gospel;  and  again  a  suggestion  of 
such  a  judgment  of  justification  could  not  be  pre- 
sented by  means  of  the  Gospel.  For  the  Word, 
whether  it  is  applied  to  the  individual  as  a  sacra- 
mental word  or  as  absolution,  can  never  establish 
the  existence  in  man  of  a  qualification  of  justifica- 
tion, but  remains  simply  an  active  offer  of  the  imi- 
versal  promise.  If,  therefore,  one  believes  that  the 
reality  of  the  process  of  justification  can  be  de- 
fended only  when  it  is  interpreted  as  confirmation 
of  existing  faith,  then  one  must  not  deceive  himself 
by  supposing  that  a  corroboration  of  such  a  justify- 
ing judgment  must  be  sought  in  an  immediate 
witness  of  the  Spirit,  or  won  by  reflection  on  the 
criteria  of  faith.  The  Reformed  way,  on  the  con- 
trary, which  allows  the  asstirance  of  salvation  to  be 
experienced  only  in  the  trust  springing  from  the 
promise,  points  in  another  direction — ^justification 
is  mediated  by  the  Gospel,  so  that  the  word  of 
promise  becomes  itself  a  justifying  judgment 
wherever  it  is  able  to  awaken  acceptance  in  man. 
Thus  the  position  is  fully  warranted  that  only  where 
faith  exists  is  there  justification,  and  faith  justices 
only  because  it  makes  Christ  avail  before  God :  Christ 
is  indeed  the  central  content  of  the  Word  and  he 
it  is  wiio  is  apprehended  in  the  Word.  Accordingly 
justification  takes  place  before  God  and  not  in 
the  heart  of  man — ^in  the  strict  sense  an  act  of 
God,  and  not  a  conscious  process  in  man.  Only  in 
this  way  is  it  seriously  maintained  that  every  action 
of  God  necessarily  aims  at  establishing  a  present 
communion  with  himself.  But  this  is  manifestly 
not  attained  by  a  purely  transcendent  process. 
Where  justification  is  mediated  by  the  Gospel,  the 
meaning  is  that  this  rightly  demands  trust  for  and 
m  itself;  where  man  trustfully  accepts  this,  he  has 
what  he  believes;  justification  and  a  state  of  com- 
munion with  God  is  subjectively  and  objectively 
realized.  One  can  make  this  plain  to  himself  in 
the  simplest  possible  way  with  reference  to  abso- 
lution. Absolution  is  not  confirmation  of  a  faith 
existing  in  man,  nor  an  ineffective  announcement 
of  a  forgiveness  bound  to  conditions;  just  as  little 
does  it  bring  forgiveness  to  all  who  hear  it  irre- 
spective of  their  faith;  but  being  an  efficacious 
offer  of  forgiveness,  it  Is  really  forgiveness  wher- 
ever it  is  received  in  faith.  Thus  understood,  jus- 
tification and  certainty  ooncemiog  it  are  grounded 
in  faith.  This  excludes  neither  a  possible  nor  an 
actual  series  of  degrees  in  faith  and  in  certainty; 
the  completion  of  the  divine  justification  is  of  sig- 
nificance for  faith.  Here  then  the  Biblical  writers 
have  their  place,  according  to  whom,  where  faith 
and  justification  are,  there  the  Holy  Spirit  who  was 
already  active  in  man  for  this  end  becomes  for  the 
believer  a  personal  possession  in  such  a  way  that 
he  witnesses  to  the  existing  kinship  with  God  and 


appears  as  its  seal  and  pledge.  Hence  it  is  possi- 
ble to  apprehend  the  element  of  truth  in  the  dis- 
tinction of  faith  before  and  after  justification,  and 
in  the  distinction  of  justification  and  confirmation. 
The  last  intimations,  if  they  are  to  receive  con- 
crete form,  depend  on  the  answer  to  a  previous 
question  which  can  not  be  solved  in  this  article. 
The  foregoing  discussion  suffers  from  an  unavoid- 
able abstraction  In  that  it  can  not 

5.  Jostiflca-  show  whether  the  original  justification 
tion  and  is  mediated  by  the  Word  or  by  bap- 
Baptism,    tism,  in  the  case  of  children  or  adults. 

In  fkct,  manifold  difficulties  and  ob- 
scurities beset  the  treatment  of  the  subject  when  one 
does  not  seriously  consider  how  the  general  proposi- 
tions concerning  justification  are  necessarily  modi- 
fied according  as  they  are  put  to  the  test  in  a  com- 
munity of  those  who  were  baptised  in  infancy,  or 
are  maintained  in  the  mission  field.  It  Is,  e.g.,  plain 
how  the  question  of  the  relation  of  confirmation  to 
justification  gains  a  wholly  different  meaning  when 
It  is  put  on  the  basis  of  child-baptism.  Yet  these 
questions  can  not  be  settled  here  because  they  pre- 
suppose the  understanding  of  baptism  (see  Bap- 
tism, I.-II.).  Only  this,  however,  maybe  directly 
inferred  from  the  treatment  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
Scripture,  that  justification  and  baptism  are  to  be 
combined.  If  this  is  true  in  the  first  instance  of 
baptism  itself,  then  it  must  of  necessity  apply  to 
child-baptism,  if  only  this  is  regarded  as  a  real  bap- 
tism. Here  the  question  concerning  the  relation 
of  justification  and  faith  takes  on  a  new  meaning 
and  raises  serious  difficulties.  For  a  solution  of 
these  a  path  has  already  been  so  far  prepared  as  it 
was  expressly  emphasized  how  faith  springs  from 
the  divine  offer.  In  any  case,  one  must  believe 
that  in  the  baptism  of  adults  there  is  a  completion 
both  of  the  divine  offer  of  salvation  and,  under  its 
influence,  of  faith,  and  just  in  this  way  the  Chris- 
tian position  is  both  objectively  and  subjectively 
established.  With  reference  to  the  baptism  of 
children,  it  is  to  be  maintained  imder  all  circum- 
stances that  even  in  such  cases  faith,  which  affirms 
baptism,  must  somehow  grow  out  of  baptism.  But 
the  question,  whether  and  in  what  sense  one  is  to 
connect  the  origin  of  faith  with  baptism,  can  not 
here  be  settled. 

The  discussion  concerning  the  nature  of  Chris- 
tian assurance  begun  in  III.,  §  1,  may  now  be 
completed  so  far  as  need  be  In  accordance  with 
what  has  been  established  in  III.,  §§  2-5.    First 
then  one  may  formulate  the  slgnifi- 

6.  Condtt-  cance  of  Rom.  viii.  16  for  the  assurance 
lion.       of  salvation.    If  faith  in  the  historical 

divine  revelation,  by  which  the  Chris- 
tian position  is  created,  takes  place  only  by  the  Holy 
Spirit,  the  immanent  certainty  of  the  Christian  there- 
in given  could  not  maintain  itself  without  the  con- 
tinuous witness  of  the  Spirit.  This  repudiates  the 
Methodistic  view  which  will  experience  this  witness 
of  the  Spirit  in  an  inmiediate  feeling  of  peace;  pref- 
erable Is  the  Lutheran  view  which  has  the  entire 
economy  of  salvation  on  its  side  as  it  relates  the 
continuous  witness  of  the  Spirit  to  the  historical 
process  of  salvation,  mediating  this  by  the  Word 
and  the  sacrament.    Yet  the  strictly  supernatural 


ftai 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Justin 


character  of  that  witness  may  not  be  lost  sight  of; 
in  this,  as  well  as  in  the  possession  of  the  Spirit,  the 
Christian  has  the  pledge  of  his  salvation.  In  the 
same  way  may  be  defined  the  significance  of  self-ex- 
amination for  Christian  assurance.  If  the  Christian 
position  is  connected  with  faith,  the  serious  Chris- 
tian can  not  avoid  testing  faith  and  salvation  by  the 
criterion  of  the  whole  life.  On  the  other  hand,  it  can 
be  of  service  to  one  in  trouble  when  faith  is  hidden 
from  him  to  become  certain  of  it  by  means  of  its 
criteria.  In  both  of  these  ways  this  self-examina- 
tion is  to  be  conceived  as  a  point  of  departure. 
One  recognizes  the  normality  of  the  Christian  as- 
siirance  in  its  unreflecting  appeal  to  the  divine  deed 
which  produces  the  Christian  position.  All  finally 
comes  to  this,  that  the  pledge  of  faith  is  also  the 
pledge  of  certainty.  If  the  existing  Christian  posi- 
tion is  assured  to  faith  by  historical  divine  revels^ 
tion,  apparently  there  is  no  occasion  to  go  behind 
that  historical  revehition  to  an  eternal  counsel  of 
God.  Yet  in  reality  not  merely  the  Reformed  view 
but  also  the  Formula  of  Concord  makes  predestina- 
tion fruitful  for  Christian  assurance.  In  fact,  re- 
course to  this  can  not  be  dispensed  with  by  one 
who  seeks  an  assurance  not  simply  for  the  present 
but  also  for  the  future.  Only  one  must  add  im- 
mediately, certainty  concerning  one's  election  is  to 
be  sought  in  Christ  alone.  But  wherever  the  be- 
lieving Christian,  so  long  as  he  believes,  is  certain 
of  the  divine  election,  he  knows  that  his  entire  sal- 
vation, present  and  future,  is  in  the  hand  of  the 
eternal  God.  Two  points  yet  require  mention,  the 
brevity  of  which  beieirs  no  relation  to  their  signifi- 
cance: (1)  in  the  necessarily  personal  nature  of 
faith  and  assurance  of  salvation  one  may  not  for- 
get that  these  will  be  experienced  in  the  community 
of  believers  in  which  the  Word  and  the  sacrament 
are  in  use;  and  (2)  this  is  in  precise  analogy  to  the 
first — ^the  energy  with  which,  in  the  matter  of  the 
certainty  of  salvation,  the  entire  life  is  related  to 
God  and  to  God  alone,  may  not  obscure  the  other 
truth,  that  after  all  man  meets  God  only  in  the 
concrete  reality  of  an  individual  life,  and  he  there- 
fore experiences  and  maintains  the  certainty  of  sal- 
vation in  the  limitless  riches  of  the  concrete  situa- 
tions of  this  life.  Only  where  this  is  understood 
does  one  avoid  isolating  the  witness  of  the  Spirit 
from  the  actual  life.  And  now  it  is  possible  to 
make  fruitful  the  profoimd  thought  of  James,  that 
the  Christian  is  blessed,  and  that  too  not  by  means 
of  his  deed  but  in  his  deed.  (L.  H.  Ihmels.) 

While  a  majority  of  critical  authorities  favor  the 

forensic  interpretation  of  dikaioun,  "  pronouncing 

righteous,"  as  the  only  meaning  in  Paul's  writings, 

there  is  a  not  inconsiderable,  number  of  scholars 

who  defend  the  view  that  it  also  sig- 

7.  Addi-  nifies  ''  making  or  becoming  actually 
tional  Note,  righteous."  Among  the  passages  cited 
to  substantiate  the  latter  claim  are 
Rom.  iii.  24,  26,  28,  30,  vi.  7;  Gal.  ii.  16,  20,  v.  6. 
That  this  word  is  there  and  in  other  places  used  in  a 
real  sense  is  evident  from  a  variety  of  considerations, 
such  as,  the  forensic  view  is  inconsistent  with  an  in- 
telligibie  interpretation  of  Paul's  words  referred  to 
above;  the  real  interpretation  alone  meets  the  exe- 
getical  and  rational  demands;  and  in  all  the  passages 


dikaiosyra,  "righteousness,"  is  used  in  the  proper 
sense  as  the  basis  of  the  judgment.  Two  further 
argimients  for  this  position  are  adduced:  the  prin- 
ciple of  character  running  through  the  whole  of  life 
is  one  and  the  same,  being  that  on  which  the  final 
judgment  is  based;  faith  iK^ch  works  by  love  is 
the  essential  principle  of  righteousness  and  is  ac- 
cordingly an  inward  quality  of  ethical  excellence. 
Even  when  a  forensic  judgment  is  signified  by  di- 
kaioun,  this  is  grounded  not  in  an  outside  condi- 
tion but  in  an  actual  inner  virtue.  It  does  not,  like 
works,  make  a  demand  on  God,  but  it  constitutes 
a  groimd  on  which  one  is  forgiven  who  forsakes  his 
sin  and  identifies  himself  with  Christ.  Some  of 
those  who  hold  this  general  view  of  dikaioun  restrict 
its  main  reference  to  the  initial  moment  of  convert 
sion,  while  others  extend  it  to  cover  the  entire  period 
of  Christian  experience — one  is  justified  according 
as  he  is  sanctified.  Justification  may  relate  to  that 
aspect  of  the  new  life  in  which  the  person  freely 
and  progressively  accepts  the  grace  of  God  in 
Christ,  while  sanctification  refers  to  the  gradual 
inner  purification  of  the  sources  of  desire,  thought, 
and  will.  C.  A.  B. 

Bxbzjoorapht:  On  the  N.  T.  ride  ooxuult  the  works  on 
N.  T.  theology.  especUlly  that  of  Beyaohlac;  the  liten^ 
ture  on  the  Apostle  Paul;  R.  A.  Liprius,  Di€  jMtUinitdte 
ReehtfertiQungtUkre,  Leiprio,  1868;  £.  Ricgenbaeh,  DU 
R0chtferUauno9l^hre  dea  Apo&teU  Paulut,  Stuttsvt.  1807; 
H.  Cramer,  Die  patUiniaehe  RedUfmHouno^Uhre^  Qatersloh, 
1000;  K.  F.  Nd^en.  Der  SehrifAweU  flkr  die  evanoeUecKe 
RedUfertiffungelekre,  Halle.  1001;  C.  Qemen.  Paulue,  eein 
Leben  und  Wirken,  2  toIb..  Qiessen,  1004;  C.  E.  Woods, 
The  Ooepel  of  Bightneu.  A  Study  in  Pauline  PhOcmopky, 
London,  1000. 

On  the  dogmatic  and  historical  sides  consult:  Q.  S. 
Faber.  T7te  PrimiHve  Doctrine  oS  /ut^i/lcaiion,  London. 
1830;  G.  Bull.  Harmony  of  St.  Paul  and  St.  Jamee  on 
JueHfleaiion,  2  vols.,  in  Library  of  Anglo-Caiholie  Theol- 
of/y,  Oxford,  1841  sqq.;  C.  A.  Heurtley.  Juetifloaiion,  ib. 
1846;  G.  Junkin,  A  TreaHee  an  JueHfleoHon,  Philadelphia, 
1850;  P.  D.  Burk,  Rechifertiguno  und  Vereieherung,  Stutt- 
gart. 1864;  C.  Chohnondely,  The  Proteetant  Doctrine  ofJue- 
tifieaUon  .  .  .  Confuted,  London,  1864;  J.  Buchanan,  The 
Doctrine  cf  JueUfleation,  Edinburgh.  1867;  A.  Ritschl. 
CriOeal  Hiet.  of  the  Chrietian  Doctrinee  <4  /vsfi/Ioolion 
and  ReconeiliaHon,  ib.  1872;  G.  Hodge.  SyetenutHe  The- 
ology, iii.  114  sqq..  New  York.  1873;  R.  N.  Davies,  A 
TreaHee  on  Juetifleaium,  New  York,  1878;  L  A.  Domer, 
Sytiem  of  Chrietian  Doctrine,  passim.  4  vols..  Edinbuxgh, 
1880-82;  J.  H.  Newman.  Leeturee  on  the  Doctrine  of  Jue- 
tifUxUion,  London.  1886;  J.  T.  Beck,  VorUeungen  Hber 
ehrisaiehe  Olaubenelehre,  2  vols..  Qatersloh.  1886-87;  T. 
R.  Birks.  JueiifieaUon  and  Imputed  Righteoueneee,  ib.  1887; 
J.  T.  O'Brien.  An  Attempt  to  Explain  and  Eetablieh  Ote  Doc- 
trine of  JueHfleaHan  by  Faith  only,  Dublin,  1887;  W.  O.  T. 
Shedd.  DogmaUe  Theology,  it  638  sqq..  New  York.  1888;  H. 
B.  Smith,  Syetem  of  Chrietian  Thet^ogy,  ed^  W.  8.  Karr,  pp. 
622-^662,  ib.  1800;  H.  Bushnell.  Viearioue  Saeriflee,  ii. 
177  sqq..  ib.  1801;  E.  V.  Oerhart.  Inetitutee  of  <^  Chxie- 
Uan  Religion,  u.  717-760.  ib.  1804;  J.  Miley.  SyetemaHc 
Theology,  ii.  308  sqq..  ib.  1804;  R.  V.  Foster.  SyetemaHc 
Theology,  pp.  678  sqq..  Nashville.  Tenn..  1808;  J.  Mao- 
pherson,  Chrietian  DogmaUce,  pp.  37(H387,  Edinburgh, 
1808;  J.  Wilhefan  and  T.  B.  Scannell,  Manual  of  Catho- 
lic Theology,  il  246  sqq.,  London,  1001;  H.  W.  Holden, 
Juetifleation  by  Faith,  ib.  1002;  A.  H.  Strong.  SyetemaHc 
Theology,  pp.  471-483.  New  York,  1002;  H.  C.  O.  Moule. 
Juetifleation  by  Faith,  London,  1008;  the  literature  on 
Luther,  and  in  general  the  works  on  the  history  of  doc- 
trine. 

JUSTIN:  A  Gnostic  writer  refuted  by  Hippol- 
ytus  (HcMT.,  V.  18-22,  x.  11;  ANF,  v.  69-73,  145). 
According  to  him  there  are  three  principles  in  the 
universe,  two  male — ^the  Good  and  the  Father  of 


Jnslia  Xaityr 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


S82 


an  things,  alio  eaDed  Elohim — nod  one  female, 
called  &ien  and  Israel,  who  had  the  form  of  a 
snake  from  her  waist  downwaid.  From  the  inter- 
eoune  of  Ekrfiim  and  Eden  arose  twelve  paternal 
and  twelve  maternal  angels;  through  irfiose  medi- 
ation men  were  formed  from  the  noble  parts  of  Eden, 
and  from  the  ignoble  parts  animals  Men  were 
provided  with  a  soul  by  Eden  and  with  a  spirit  by 
Elohim.  Eden  was  deserted  by  Elohim,  who  went 
aloft  to  sit  at  the  right  hand  of  the  Good.  Eden 
now  filled  the  world  with  sin  and  evil,  and  fought 
with  Elohim,  having  the  maternal  angels  on  her 
side.  Elohim  sent  Baruch,  the  third  paternal 
angel,  to  aid  the  spirit  of  man  whieh  had  been 
overcome  by  Naas,  "  the  serpent,"  the  third  ma- 
ternal angeL  Baruch  found  Hercules  who  per- 
formed his  twelve  labors  against  Eden,  but  at  last 
was  overcome  by  Eden  by  means  of  Omphale. 
Finally  Baruch  found  Jesus  who  withstood  the  ser- 
pent, which  brought  about  his  crucifixion,  when 
his  spirit  returned  to  Elohim,  but  his  body  and 
soul  to  Eden.  The  initiated,  who  faithfully  keep 
the  oath  of  Elohim  to  keep  the  mysteries  and  not 
to  turn  from  the  Good  to  the  creature,  enter  into 
the  Good  and  drink  of  the  water  of  life.  To  under- 
stand more  fully  the  relation  of  Justin  to  the  other 
Gnostics  see  QpHms.  (G.  KbOoeh.) 

Bibuookapht:  W.  MdDer.  O— cfcldbto  dcr  Kommoloiru  in  der 
grisehiaehm  Kinhe,  pp.  241-248,  Halle.  1860;  A.  Hilsen- 
feld.  in  ZWT,  y  (1862).  446^452;  idem.  Dm  KeUerge^ 
•ekiekit  dea  UrehriaienivimM,  pp.  64,  67.  270.  277,  Leipne, 
1884;  Q.  Sslmoii.  in  DCB.  iit  587-«8»;  idem,  in  Uerma- 
dkcna.  zi  (1886),  389-402;  H.  Stlhelin,  in  TI/.  vi  3  (1891). 

JUSTU  KARTTB. 


Lilis  and  Writinss  (f  1). 

The  "  Apology  "  (f  2). 

The  "  Dialosue  "  and  '* 

Jwtin'fl  Theolosy  (f  4). 

Hifl  (>ODTenion  and  Tearhingii  (f  6). 

Hifl  Doctrine  of  the  Losoe  (f  6). 


"  (f  8). 


[The  facts  erf  the  life  of  Justin  Martyr,  the  famous 
Christian  apologist  of  the  second  century,  so  far  as 
they  are  known,  are  gathered  chiefly  from  his  own 
writings.  He  was  bom  at  Flavia  Neapolis  (the 
ancient  Shechem  and  modem  Nablus)  in  Pales- 
tine probably  about  114.  He  suffered 
I.  Life  martyrdom  at  Rome  under  Marcus 
and  Aurelius  when  Rusticus  was  prefect  of 
Writings,  the  city  (Le.,  between  162  and  168). 
He  calls  himself  a  Samaritan,  but  his 
father  and  grandfather  were  doubtless  Greek  or 
Roman,  and  he  was  brought  up  in  heathen  customs. 
It  seems  that  he  had  property,  studied  philoso- 
phy diligently,  became  converted  to  Christianity 
(see  below,  §  5),  and  thenceforth  devoted  his  life 
to  teaching  what  he  considered  the  tme  philosophy, 
still  wearing  his  philosopher's  gown  to  indicate 
that  he  had  attained  to  the  tmth.  He  probably 
traveled  widely  and  ultimately  settled  in  Rome  as 
a  Christian  teacher.]  The  earliest  mention  of  Justin 
is  found  in  Tatian  {OraJtio  ad  Oraeco8f  xviii.,  xix.), 
who  calls  him  "  the  most  admirable  Justin,"  quotes 
a  saying  of  his,  and  says  that  the  Cynic  Crescens 
laid  snares  for  him.  Irenaeus  (Haer,  I.,  zxviii.  1) 
speaks  of  his  martyrdom,  and  of  Tatian  as  his  dis- 
ciple; he  quotes  him  twice  (IV.,  vi.  2,  V.,  zxvi.  2), 


and  shows  his  influence  in  other  places.    Tertul- 
lian  (AdvenuM  ValeniimanM,  v.)  calk  him  a  phi- 
losopher and  martyr,  and  the  eariiest  antagonigt^of 
heretics.    Hippolytus  and  Methodius  also  nvention 
or  quote  him.    Ekisebtus  deals  with  him  at  some 
loigth  (Hial.  SDcf.,  iv.  18),  and  names  the  following 
works:    (1)  The  "  Apology  "  addressed  to  Antoni- 
nus Pius,  his  sons,  and  the  senate;    (2)  a  second 
"Apokgy"  addressed   to  Marcus   Aurelius  and 
Verus;    (3)  the  "  Discourae  to  the  Greeks,"  a  dis- 
cussion with  Greek  philosophers  on  the  character 
of  their  gods;    (4)  a  "  Hortatofy  Address  to  the 
Greeks  ";    (5)  a  treatise  "  On  the  Sovereignty  of 
God,"  m  which  he  makes  use  of  pagan  authorities 
as  weQ  as  Christian;    (6)  a  work  entitled  ''The 
Ptahnkt ";    (7)  a  treatise  m  scholastic  form  "  On 
the  Soul ";   (8)  the  "  Diakgue  with  Trypho."   He 
implies  that  a  number  of  odier  works  were  in  cir- 
culation;  from  Irenaeus  he  knows  of  the  apokigy 
**  Against  Marcion,"  and  from  Justm's  "  Apology  " 
(i.  26)  of  a  '<  RefutaUon  of  all  Heresies  "  {Hid. 
ecd.,  IV.,  zL  10).    Epiphanius  iHaa-.,  zlvL  1)  and 
Jerome  (De  vir.  lU,,  iz.)  mention  Justin.     Rufinus 
borrows  from  him  the  Latin  original  of  Hadrian's 
letter.    After  Rufinus  Justin  was  not  known  in  the 
West  for  a  long  time,  and  the  Eastern  writers  got 
their  knowledge  of  him  mainly  from  Irenaeus  and 
Eusebius,  or  from  spurious  wfvks.    The  Ckranuxm 
Patehale  is  possibly  independent  in  asrogning  his 
martyrdom  to  the  year  165.    A  considerable  num- 
ber of  other  works  are  given  as  Justin's  by  Arethas, 
Photius,  and  other  writers;   but  their  spuriousness 
is  now  generaUy  admitted.    The  Expontio  ruiae 
fidei  has  been  ass^pned  by  Dr&seke  to  Apollinaris 
of  Laodicea,  but  it  is  probably  a  work  of  as  late  as 
the  sixth  century.    ll>e  Cokortatio  ad  Graeoos  has 
been  attributed  to  Apollinaris  of  Laodicea,  Apol- 
linaris of  Hien^wlis,  and  others.    The  Epikaia  ad 
Zenam  H  Serenum,  an  exhortation  to  Chiistian  liv- 
ing, is  dependent  upon  Clement  of  Alexandria,  and 
is  assigned  by  Batiffol  to  the  Novatian  Bishop  Si- 
sinnius  (c.  400).    The  extant  work  under  the  title 
"  On  the  Sovereignty  of  God  "  does  not  correspond 
with  Eusebius'  description  of  it,  though  Hariiack 
regards  it  as  still  possibly  Justin's,  and  at  least  of 
the  second  century.    The  authw  of  the  smaller 
treatise  "  To  the  Greeks  "  can  not  be  Justin,  be- 
cause he  is  dependent  on  Tatian;   Hamack  places 
it  between  180  and  240.    For  another  work  wrongly 
attributed  to  Justin,  see  Diognstub,  Efistlb  to. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  authenticity  of  the  two 
"  Apologies  "  and  the  "  Dialogue  with  Trypho  "  is 
universally  admitted.    They  are  preserved  only  in 
the  5acro  parallda;   but,  besides  that  they  were 
known  by  Tatian,  Methodius,  and  Eusebius,  their 
influence  is  traceable  in  Athenagoras,  Theophilus, 
the  pseudo-Melito,  and  especially  Tertullian.   Euse- 
bius speaks  of  two  "  Apologies,"  but  he  quotes  them 
both  as  one,  which  indeed  they  are  in  substance. 
The  identity  of  authorship  is  shown  not  only  by 
the   reference   in   the   "  Dialogue,"   cxx.,  to  the 
"  Apology,"  but  by  the  unity  of  treatment.    Zahn 
has  shown  that  the  "  Dialogue "  was  originally 
divided  into  two  books,  that  there  is  a  conside^ 
able  lacuna  at  chap.  Ixxiv.,  as  well  as  at  the  be- 
ginning, and  that  it  is  probably  based  on  an  actual 


S8d 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jiutln  Xartyr 


occurrence  at  Ephesus,  the  personality  of  the  Rabbi 
Tarphon  being  employed,  though  in  a  Hellenized 
form.  The  treatise  "  On  the  Resurrection/'  of 
which  extensive  fragments  are  preserved  in  the 
Sacra  paraUeUif  is  not  so  generally  accepted.  Even 
earlier  than  this  collection,  it  is  referred  to  by  Pro- 
oopius  of  Gaza  (c.  465-528),  and  Methodius  ap- 
palls to  Justin  in  support  of  his  interpretation  of 
I  Cor.  XV.  50  in  a  way  which  makes  it  natural  to 
assume  the  existence  of  a  treatise  on  the  subject, 
to  say  nothing  of  other  traces  of  a  connection  in 
thought  both  here,  in  Irenaeus  (V.,  ii.-xiii.  5),  and 
also  in  Tertullian,  where  it  is  too  close  to  be  any- 
thing but  a  conscious  following  of  the  Greek.  The 
"  A^tinst  Marcion  "  is  lost,  as  is  the  "  Refutation 
of  all  Heresies  "  to  which  Justin  himself  refers  in 
**  Apology,"  i.  26;  H^gesippus,  besides  perhaps 
Irenaei]s  and  Tertullian,  seems  to  have  used  it. 

Of  the  date  of  the  **  Dialogue  "  it  can  only  be 

said  that  it  was  later  than  the  "  Apology  ";    the 

time  of  composition  of  the  latter,  however,  can  be 

determined    with    comparative    closeness.    From 

the  fact  that  it  was  addressed  to  Antoninus  Pius, 

Blarcus  Aurelius,  and  Verus,  its  composition  must 

fall  between  147  and  161.    The  refer- 

2.  The     enoe  to  Felix  as  governor  of  Egypt, 

*' Apology."  since   this   can   only   be   the   Lucius 

Munatius  Felix  whom  the  Oxyrhyn- 

chus  papyri  give  as  prefect  Sept.  13, 151,  fixes  the 

date  still  more  exactly.     Its  occasion  is  evidently 

a  recent  occurrence,  and  the  Chramcon  of  Euse- 

bius  gives  152-153  as  the  date  of  the  attacks  of 

Cresoens.    What   is   designated   as   the   "  Second 

Apology  ''  was  written  as  a  supplement  to  the  first, 

on  account  of  certain  proceedings  which  had  in  the 

mean  time   taken   place   in   Rome  before  Lollius 

Urbicus  as  prefect  of  the  city,  which  must  have 

been  between  150  and  157. 

The  purpose  of  the  "  Apology  "  is  to  prove  to 
the  emperors,  renowned  as  upright  and  philosoph- 
ical men,  the  injustice  of  the  persecution  of  the 
Christians,  who  are  really  the  representatives  of 
true  philosophy.  Chaps.  i.-xii.  give  the  prelimi- 
nary negative  proof;  chap.  xiii.  begins  a  positive 
exposition  of  what  Christianity  really  is.  Chris- 
tians are  the  true  worshipers  of  God,  the  Creator  of 
all  things;  they  offer  him  the  only  sacrifices  worthy 
of  him,  those  of  prayer  and  thanksgiving,  and  are 
taught  by  his  Son,  to  whom  they  assign  a  place 
next  in  honor  to  him.  This  teaching  leads  them 
to  perfect  morality,  as  shown  in  their  teacher's 
woids  and  their  own  lives,  and  founded  on  their 
belief  in  the  resurrection.  The  doctrine  of  the 
Logos  made  flesh  is  specially  emphasized  in  xxi., 
xxii.  What  interferes  with  belief  in  this  fact  is  the 
deceitful  work  of  demons  (xxiii.-xxvi.),  in  contrast 
with  which  Christian  righteousness  is  still  further 
described  (xxvii.-xxix.).  Then  follows  the  proof 
that  Christ  is  the  Son  of  God  from  Old-Testament 
prophecy,  fulfilled  in  every  detail  (xxx.-l.),  no 
matter  what  evil  spirits  may  pretend  (liv.-lvii.) ; 
even  Plato  learned  from  Moses  (lviii.-lx.).  The  re- 
maining chapters  (lxi.-lxvii.)  give  a  glimpse  of  the 
daily  iSe  of  Christians  at  the  time — baptism,  com- 
munion, and  Sunday  worship.  The  supplemen- 
tary or  "Second  Apolpgy  "  depicts  the  behavior 


of  the  Christians  under  persecution,  of  which  the 
demons  are  again  set  forth  as  the  instigators. 

In  the  "  Dialogue,"  after  an  introductory  sec- 
tion (i.-ix.),  Justin  undertakes  to  show  that  Chris- 
tianity is  the  new  law  for  all  men  (x.-xxx.),  and  to 
prove  from  Scripture  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ  (xxxi.- 
cviii.).  The  concluding  section  (cix.-cxlii.)  dem- 
onstrates that  the  Christians  are  the 

3.  The      true  people  of  God.    The  fragments  of 

"  Dialogue"  the  work  "  On  the  Resiurection  "  be- 

and       gin  with  the  assertion  that  the  truth, 

**  Resur-    and  God  the  author  of  truth,  need  no 

rection."  witness,  but  that  as  a  concession  to 
the  weakness  of  men  it  is  necessary 
to  give  arguments  to  convince  those  who  gain- 
say it.  It  is  then  shown,  after  a  denial  of  un- 
founded deductions,  that  the  resurrection  of  the 
body  is  neither  impossible  nor  unworthy  of  God, 
and  that  the  evidence  of  prophecy  is  not  lacking 
for  it.  Another  fragment  takes  up  the  positive 
proof  of  the  resurrection,  adducing  that  of  Christ 
and  of  those  whom  he  recalled  to  Ufe.  In  another 
the  resurrection  is  shown  to  be  that  of  what  has 
gone  down,  i.e.,  the  body;  the  knowledge  concern- 
ing it  is  the  new  doctrine  in  contrast  with  that  of 
the  old  philosophers;  the  doctrine  follows  from  the 
command  to  keep  the  body  in  moral  purity. 

Flacius  discovered  "  blemishes  "  in  Justin's  the- 
ology, which  he  attributed  to  the  influence  of  pagan 
philosophers;  and  in  modern  times  Semler  and  S. 
G.  Lange  have  made  him  out  a  thorough  Hellene, 
while  Semisch  and  Otto  defend  him  from  this 
charge.  In  opposition  to  the  school  of  Baur,  who 
considered  him  a  Jewish  Christian,  A.  Ritschl  has 
pointed  out  that  it  was  precisely  because  he  was  a 
Gentile  Christian  that  he  did  not  fully 
4.  Justin's  imderstand  the  Old-Testament  f  oundar 

Theology,  tion  of  Paul's  teaching,  and  explained  in 
this  way  the  modified  character  of  his 
Paulinism  and  his  l^gal  mode  of  thought.  M.  von 
Engelhardt  has  attempted  to  extend  this  line  of 
treatment  to  Justin's  entire  theology,  and  to  show 
that  his  conceptions  of  God,  of  free  will  and  right- 
eousness, of  redemption,  grace,  and  merit  prove  the 
influence  of  the  cultivated  Greek  pagan  world  of 
the  second  century,  dominated  by  the  Platonic 
and  Stoic  philosophy.  But  he  admits  that  Justin 
is  a  Christian  in  his  unquestioning  adherence  to  the 
Church  and  its  faith,  his  unqualified  recognition  of 
the  Old  Testament,  and  his  faith  in  Christ  as  the 
Son  of  God  the  Creator,  made  manifest  in  the  flesh, 
crucified,  and  risen,  through  which  belief  he  suc- 
ceeds in  getting  away  from  the  dualism  of  pagan 
and  also  of  Gnostic  philosophy. 

In  the  opening  of  the  "  Dialogue,"  Justin  relates 
his  vain  search  among  the  Stoics,  Peripatetics,  and 
Pythagoreans  for  a  satisfying  Imowledge  of  God; 
his  finding  in  the  ideas  of  Plato  wings  for  his  soul, 
by  the  aid  of  which  he  hoped  to  at- 
5.  His  tain  the  contemplation  of  the  God- 
Conversbn  head;  and  his  meeting  on  the  sea- 
and  shore  with  an  aged  man  who  told  him 
Teachings,  that  by  no  human  endeavor  but  only 
by  divine  revelation  could  this  blessed- 
ness be  attained,  that  the  prophets  had  conveyed 
this  revelation  to  man,  and  that  their  words  had 


JiifltiB  Xartyr 
Justinian  I 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


d84 


been  fulfilled.  Of  the  truth  of  this  he  aasured  him- 
self by  his  own  investigation;  and  the  daily  life  of 
the  Christians  and  the  courage  of  the  martyrs  con- 
vinced him  that  the  charges  against  them  were  un- 
founded. So  he  sought  to  spread  the  knowledge 
of  Christianity  as  the  true  philosophy.  He  had, 
like  others,  the  idea  that  the  Greek  philosophers 
had  derived,  if  not  borrowed,  the  most  essential 
elements  of  truth  found  in  their  teaching  from  the 
Old  Testament.  But  at  the  same  time  be  adopted 
the  Stoic  doctrine  of  the  "  seminal  word,"  and  so 
philosophy  was  to  him  an  operation  of  the  Word 
— ^in  faict,  through  his  identification  of  the  Word 
with  Christ,  it  was  brought  into  immediate  connec- 
tion with  him.  Thus  he  does  not  scruple  to  de- 
clare that  Socrates  and  Heraclitus  were  Christians 
(Apol,,  i.  46,  ii.  10).  His  aim,  of  course,  is  to  em- 
phasise the  absolute  significance  of  Christ,  so  that 
all  that  ever  existed  of  virtue  and  truth  may  be 
referred  to  him.  The  old  philosophers  and  law- 
givers had  only  a  part  of  the  Logos,  while  the  whole 
appears  in  Christ.  While  the  heathen,  seduced  by 
demons,  had  deserted  the  true  God  for  idols,  the 
Jews  and  Samaritans  possessed  the  revelation  given 
through  the  prophets  and  awaited  the  Messiah. 
The  law,  however,  while  containing  command- 
ments intended  to  promote  the  true  fear  of  God, 
had  other  prescriptions  of  a  purely  pedagogic  na- 
ture, which  necessarily  ceased  when  Christ,  their 
end,  appeared;  of  such  temporary  and  merely  rela- 
tive regulations  were  circumcision,  animal  sacri- 
fices, the  Sabbath,  and  the  laws  as  to  food.  Through 
Christ  the  abiding  law  of  God  has  been  fully  pro- 
claimed. In  his  character  as  the  teacher  of  the 
new  doctrine  and  promulgator  of  the  new  law  lies 
the  essential  nature  of  his  redeeming  work.  The 
idea  of  an  economy  of  grace,  of  a  restoration  of  the 
union  with  God  which  had  been  destroyed  by  sin, 
is  not  foreign  to  him.  It  is  noteworthy  that  in  the 
'*  Dialogue  "  he  no  longer  speaks  of  a  "  seed  of  the 
Word  "  in  every  man,  and  in  his  non-apologetic 
works  the  emphasis  is  laid  upon  the  redeeming  acts 
of  the  life  of  Christ  rather  than  upon  the  demon- 
stration of  the  reasonableness  and  moral  value  of 
Christianity,  though  the  fragmentary  character  of 
the  latter  works  makes  it  difiicult  to  determine 
exactly  to  what  extent  this  is  true  and  how  far  the 
teaching  of  Irenaeus  on  redeimption  is  derived  from 
him.  Still,  it  is  safe  to  say  that  Justin's  theology 
is  characterized  throughout  by  an  ethical  strain. 
Faith  does  not  justify  but  is  a  preliminary  to  jus- 
tification, which  is  accomplished  by  repentance, 
change  of  heart,  and  a  sinless  life  according  to  God's 
commandments.  Baptism  confers  the  remission 
only  of  previous  sins;  the  Christian  must  there- 
after show  himself  worthy  of  union  with  God  by  a 
life  without  sin.  In  the  Eucharist  he  shows  his 
devotion  by  offering  bread  and  wine  and  by  prayer, 
reoeiviog  in  return  the  food  consecrated  by  a  for- 
mula of  Christ's  institution,  which  is  the  flesh  and 
blood  of  the  incarnate  JesuE,  and  by  which  our 
flesh  and  blood  are  nourished  through  a  kind  of 
transformation  (hata  metaboUn), 

Justin  is  confident  that  his  teaching  is  that  of  the 
Church  at  large.  He  knows  of  a  division  among 
the  orthodox  only  on  the  question  of  the  millen- 


nium and  on  the  attitude  toward  the  noJlder  Jew- 
ish Christianity,  which  he  personally  is  willing  to 
tolerate  as  IcMig  as  its  professors  in  their  turn  do 
not  interfere  with  the  liberty  of  the  Gentile  con- 
verts; his  twtlUnitrtfMiwm  sccms  to  have  no  con- 
nection with  Judaism,  but  he  believes  firmly  in  a 
millAnniiim^  and  generally  in  the  primitive  Chris- 
tian eschatology. 

His  use  of  the  kiea  of  the  Logos  has  always  at- 
tracted attention.    It  is  probably  too  much  to  as- 
sume a  direct  connection  with  Philo  in  thia  particu- 
lar.   The  idea  of  the  Logos  was  widely 
6.  His      familiar  to  educated  men,    and   the 
Doctrine    designation  of  the  Son  of  God  as  the 
of  the      Logos  was  not  new  to  Christian  the- 
Logos.      ology.    The  significance  is  clear,  how- 
ever, of  the  manner  in  which  Justin 
identifies  the  historical  Christ  with  the    rational 
force  operative  in  the  universe,  which  leads  up  to 
the  daim  of  all  truth  and  virtue  for  the  Christians 
and  to  the  demonstration  of  the  adoration  of  Christ, 
which  aroused  so  much  opposition,  as  the  only 
reasonable  attitude.    It  is  maialy  for  this  justifi- 
cation of  the  worship  of  Christ  that  Justin  employs 
the  Logos-idea,  though  where  he  explicitly  deals 
with  the  divinity  of  ^  Redeemer  and  his  relation 
to  the  Father,  he  makes  use  of  the  Old  Testament, 
not  of  the  Logos-idea,  which  thus  can  not  be  said 
to  form  an  essential  part  of  his  Christology. 

The  importance  which  he  attaches  to  the  evi- 
dence of  prophecy  shows  his  estimate  of  the  Old- 
Testament  Scriptures,  which  are  to  Christians  ab- 
solutely the  word  of  God,  spoken  by  the  Holy 
Ghost,   and  confirmed  by  the  fulfilment    of  the 
prophecies.    Not  less  divine,  however,  is  the  teach- 
ing of  the  apostles,  which  is  read  in  the  assembly 
every  Lord's  Day — though  he  can  not  use  this  in 
his ''Dialogue  "as  he  uses  the  Old  Testament.  The 
word  of  the  apostles  is  the  teaching  of  the  Divine 
Logos,  and  reproduces  the  sayings  of  Christ  au- 
thentically.   As  a  rule  he  uses  the  synoptic  Gosp 
pels,  but  has  a  few  unmistakable  references  to  John. 
He  quotes  the  Apocalypse  as  inspired  because  pro- 
phetic, naming  its  author.    The  opposition  of  Mar- 
cion  prepares  us  for  an  attitude  toward  the  Pauline 
epistles  corresponding  to  that  of  the  later  Church. 
Distinct  references  are  found  to  Romans,  I  Cor- 
inthians,   Gaktians,    Ephesians,    Colossians,    and 
II  Thessalonians,  and  possible  ones  to  Philippiaiis, 
Titus,  and  I  Timothy.    It  seems  likely  that  he 
also  Imew  Hebrews  and  I  John.  The  apologetic  char- 
acter of  Justin's  habit  of  thought  appears  again  in 
the  Acts  of  his  martyrdom  (ASB,  Apr.,  ii.  108  aqqr, 
Ruinart,  Acta  martyrum,  Regensburg,   1859,  105 
sqq.),  the  genuineness  of  which  is  attested  by  in- 
ternal evidence.  (N.  Bonwbtbch.) 
Biblioorapht:   Lists  of  literature  are  given  in  ANF,  Bib- 
liography, pp.  21-26,  and  in  J.  M.  Baldwin.  DicHanarv  tif 
Philotophy  and  Ptydtotogy,  ill  1,  pp.  285-286.     The  best 
edition  of  the  Opsra  is  by  J.  C.  T.  Otto.  2  vols.,  Jens* 
1843,  reproduced  by  W.  TroUope.  3  vols..  London,  1845- 
1847,  and  in  Ccrput  apologetarum  ChriMtianonan,  3  vok. 
Jena,  1876^1,  and  in  MPO,  vl  227-800,  1671-1600.  ef. 
1 181-1564.    The  editio  prineejf  was  by  R.  Stephanus,  Psria. 
1551  (Greek),  followed  by  one  by  F  Sylbuzg.  Heidelbof, 
1593  and  often  (Greek  and  Latin);  and  that  by  P.  Marsom. 
Paris.  1742  (the  best  before  Otto,  oritioal).    There  bsTB 
been  many  editions  of  the  single  works.    The  best  Eng. 


885 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


JttitiB  Kartyr 
JusttnlMi  I 


tnuulationa  u«  in  th«  JOUfrarv  </  A*  FtUktn,  ed.  E.  B. 
PuBey.  J.  Keble,  and  J.  H.  Newman,  Oxford,  1861.  and 
in  ANF,  I  163-302. 

On  the  life  and  worka  of  Justin  oontult:  K.  Semiaoh, 
Jtukn  der  M&rturm',  2  toIb.,  Bredau.  1840-42,  Eng.  tranal.. 
Edinburgh,  1844;  idem,  DU  apo9Mi»ehen  DtnkwQrdio- 
Awifm  dM  MOrtyrtn  JuaHnu§,  Hamburg,  1848;  J.  C.  T. 
von  Otto,  D*  JtuHni  MartyrU  aeriptU  «t  dodrtna,  Jena, 
1841;  A.  Hilgenfeld,  KriiUt^  Unitr9uehuno9n  liber  die 
Svana^ienJuatina,  Halle.  1850;  J.  Kaye.  8om»Aeantnt  <4 
thM  Life  and  WrUinff  of  Juatin  Martyr,  Cambridge,  1858; 
O.  Volkmar.  Ueber  JutUn  .  .  .  und  aein  VerhOUniaa  lu 
unaem  Evantfelitn,  Zurich.  1863;  C.  G.  Setbert,  JuatinuB 
der  VeHheidioer  dea  ChrialmUhuma  vor  dam  TKron  der 
Caaaartn,  Elberfeld,  1860;  C.  E.  Freppel.  Laa  Apologialaa 
ehrHiena  au  U.  aUda;  8.  JuaHn,  Paris.  1860;  W.  M6ller. 
Dia  Koamologia  in  dar  griaokudntn  Kireha  bia  auf  Orioanaa, 
pp.  112-188.  HaUe.  1860;  D.  H.  de  Puiseau,  Da  Chria- 
MoQie  van  JuaHn  Martyr,  Leyden,  1864;  J.  Donaldson, 
Critical  HiaL  <4  Chriatian  lAUratura  and  Doetrina,  ii.  62- 
344,  London,  1866;  L.  Aub<.  8,  JuaHn,  philoaapha  at 
martyr,  Paris,  1876;  J.  Drummond.  in  Thaoloffieal  Re- 
view, zii  (1876),  471  sqq..  ziv  (1877).  ^66  sqq..  xvi  (1870), 
360  sqq.;  [W.  R.  Caasel.]  Supernatural  Relioion,  i.  283- 
428.  u.  271-316.  iu.  16-17.  London.  1876  (brilliant  but 
eritioised  as  rationalistic):  B.  F.  Westcott.  Hiat  ef  thia 
Canon  of  the  N.  T.,  pp.  50-177.  ib.  1876;  M .  von  Engel- 
hardt,  D<u  Chriatentum  JuaUna  dee  MOrtyrera,  Erlangen, 
1878  (reviews  previous  discussions);  A.  StAhlin,  Jualin 
der  MOrtyrer  und  aein  neueater  Beurtheiler,  Leipsio,  1880 
(opposes  Engelhaidt):  T.  Zahn  in  ZKG,  viii  (1886).  1- 
84;  F.  W.  Farrar.  lAvee  of  the  Fathera,  i.  03-117.  New 
York,  1880;  G.  T.  Purves,  The  Taatimony  of  Juatin  Mar- 
tyr to  Barly  Chriatianity,  ib.  1880;  Mrs.  M.  E.  Martin.  lAfa 
of  Juatin  Martyr,  London.  1800;  W.  Smith,  Dictionary 
of  Oreak  and  Roman  Biography  and  Mythology,  ii.  682- 
687.  ib.  1800;  C.  (Clemen.  Dia  religionaphiloaophiaehe  Be- 
detUung  dee  atoiadirchriaUichen  EudamoniemtM  in  Juatin*a 
Apologie,  Leipsie,  1801;  E.  Huth,  Juatin  Martyr,  Paris, 
1804;  L.  Waterman.  The  Poat-Apoatolic  Age,  pp.  141-166 
et  passim.  New  York.  1808;  8.  Juatin  et  tea  apologiatea  du 
9.  aiieU,  Paris.  1007;  A.  L.  Feder.  Juatin  dee  MOrtyrera 
hahevonJaauaChriatua,  Freiburg.  1008;  W.  Walker,  Qraal' 
eat  Men  of  the  Chriatian  Church,  Chicago.  1008;  KrOger. 
Hieiory,  pp.  106-117;  Hamack.  LiUeratur,  passim,  consult 
Index;  idem.  Dogma,  vols.  i.-iv.,  passim;  idem  in  TU,  i. 
130-106.  Leipsio.  1882;  Oillier.  Auieura  aaeria,  i.  406-448; 
Neander.  Chriatian  Church,  i.  661-771  et  passim;  Schaff, 
Chriatian  Churdi,  ii  710-726  et  passim;  Moeller.  Chriatian 
Churdk,  i,  172-176;  DCB,  iii  660-687  (should  not  be 
overlooked).  The  subject  is  treated  at  greater  or  less 
length  in  the  works  on  the  church  history  of  the  period, 
one  phase  appears  in  the  discussions  on  the  Fourth  Gos- 
pel, another  in  the  treatises  on  the  History  of  Doctrine, 
while  the  works  on  the  Introduction  to  the  N.  T.  are  also 
to  be  consulted. 

JUSTINIAN   L,   EMPEROR  OF  THE  EAST. 

Life  (f  1).  Ecclesiastical  Policy  (f  3). 

Religious  PoUcy  (f  2).  RelaUons  with  Rome  (f  4). 

Writings  (f  6). 

Flsviiis  Anicius  Julianus  Justinianus  was  bora, 
probably  May  11,  483,  at  Tauresium  (120  m.  n.w. 
of  Saloniki);  d.  at  Constantinople  Nov.  13  [14], 
565.    Coming  to  Constantinople  during  his  youth, 

he  completed  the  usual  course  of  edu- 
X.  Life,     cation,  busying  himself  mainly  with 

jurisprudence  and  philosophy.  His 
mother  being  a  sister  to  the  highly  esteemed  Gen- 
eral Justin,  Justinian's  military  career  was  one  of 
rapid  advancement,  and  a  great  future  was  opened 
up  for  him  when,  in  518,  Justin  assumed  the  gov- 
ernment. Consul  in  521,  later  in  command  of  the 
army  of  the  east,  he  was  virtual  regent  a  long  time 
before  Justin  made  him  associate  emperor,  on  Apr. 
1,  527.  Four  months  later  he  became  the  sole  sov- 
ereign. His  administration  was  of  world-wide 
moment,  constituting  a  distinct  epoch  in  the  his- 


tory of  the  Byzantine  Empire  and  the  Eastern 
Church.  He  was  a  man  of  unusual  capacity  for 
work,  temperate,  affable,  lively;  but  also  unscrupu- 
lous, and  crafty.  He  was  the  last  of  the  emperors 
who  attempted  to  restore  the  Roman  Empire  to 
its  former  glory.  For  this  end  were  his  great  wars 
and  his  colossal  activity  in  building  directed. 
Starting  from  the  premise  that  the  existence  of  a 
commonwealth  rested  upon  arms  and  laws,  he  paid 
particular  attention  to  legislation,  and  wrought  a 
lasting  memorial  for  himself  by  codifying  the  Ro- 
man law  {Codex  Justinianus,  NoveUae  Constitu- 
tionea).  In  this  article,  however,  there  will  be  con- 
sidered only  his  participation  in  religious  and  eccle- 
siastical movements,  by  means  of  statecraft  and 
legislation. 

Justinian's  religious  policy  was  upheld  by  the 
imperial  conviction  that  the  unity  of  the  empire 
unconditionally  presupposed  unity  of  faith;    and 

with  him  it  was  a  matter  of  course 

3.  Religiooflthat  this  faith  could  be  only  the  or- 

FoUcy.      thodox.    Those   of  a  different  belief 

had  to  recognise  that  the  process 
which  had  been  begun  by  imperial  legislation  from 
Constantius  down  was  now  to  be  vigorously  con- 
tinued. The  Codex  contained  two  statutes  (Cod., 
I.,  xi.  9  and  10)  which  decreed  the  total  destruc- 
tion of  Hellenism,  even  in  the  civil  life;  nor  were 
the  appertaining  provisions  to  stand  merely  on 
paper.  The  sources  (Malalas,  Theophanes,  John 
of  Ephesus)  tell  of  severe  persecutions,  even  of  men 
in  high  positions.  But  what  proved  of  universal 
historic  account,  was  the  ruling  whereby  the  em- 
peror, in  529,  abrogated  philosophical  and  juridical 
instruction  at  the  University  of  Athens,  thus  put- 
ting an  end  to  this  training-school  for  Hellenism. 
And  the  Christian  propaganda  went  hand  in  hand 
with  the  suppression  of  paganism.  In  Asia  Minor 
alone,  John  of  Ephesi]s  claimed  to  have  converted 
70,(X)0  pagans  (cf.  F.  Nau,  in  Revue  de  VorierU  ehri- 
tien,  ii.,  1897,  482).  Christianity  was  also  accepted 
by  the  Heruli  (Ptocopius,  BeUum  Gothicum,  ii.  14; 
Evagrius,  Hiet,  ted.,  iv.  20),  the  Huns  dwelling  near 
the  Don  (Procopius,  iv.  4;  Evagrius,  iv.  23),  the 
Abasgi  (Procopius,  iv.  3;  Evagrius,  iv.  22)  and  the 
Tzani  (Procopiuf ,  BeUum  Persicum,  i.  15)  in  Cau- 
casia. The  worship  of  Ammon  at  Augila  in  the 
Libyan  desert  (Procopius,  De  AedificixB,  vi.  2)  was 
abolished;  and  so  were  the  renmants  of  the  wor- 
ship of  Isis  on  the  island  of  Philae,  at  the  first  cata- 
ract of  the  Nile  (Procopius,  BeUum  Peraieum,  i. 
19).  The  Presbyter  Julian  (DCB,  iii.  482)  and  the 
Bishop  Longinus  (John  of  Ephesus,  Hist,  eod.,  iv. 
5  sqq.)  conducted  a  mission  among  the  NabataMuis, 
and  Justinian  attempted  to  strengthen  Christian- 
ity in  Yeman  by  despatching  thither  an  ecclesiastic 
of  Egypt  (Procopii]s,  BeUum  Peraieum,  i.  20;  liala- 
las,  ed.  Niebuhr,  Bonn,  1831,  pp.  433  sqq.).  The 
Jews,  too,  had  to  suffer;  for  not  only  were  their 
civil  rights  restricted  (Cod.,  I.,  v.  12),  and  their  re- 
ligious privileges  threatened  (Procopius,  Hielaria 
Aroana,  28);  but  the  emperor  interfered  too  in  the 
internal  affairs  of  the  synagogue  (Nov.,  cxlvi.,  Feb. 
8,  553),  and  forbade,  for  instance,  the  use  of  the 
Hebrew  language  in  divine  worship.  The  recal- 
citrant were  menaced  with  corporal  penalties,  exile 


JuBtinla2&  I 
Juvenal 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


286 


and  loss  ci  property.  The  Jews  at  Borium,  not 
far  from  Syrtis  Major,  who  reBisted  Belisarius  in 
his  Vandal  campaign,  had  to  embraoe  Christianity; 
and  their  synagogue  was  changed  into  a  church 
(Prooopius,  De  Aedificiis,  vi.  2).  The  emperor  had 
much  trouble  with  the  Samaritans;  refractory  to 
Christianity,  as  they  were,  and  repeatedly  in  in- 
surrection. He  opposed  them  with  rigorous  edicts, 
but  yet  could  not  prevent  a  fresh  outbreak  against 
the  Christians  from  taking  place  in  Samaria  toward 
the  dose  of  his  reign.  It  was  no  less  consistent 
with  his  policy,  that  the  Manicheans,  too,  were  per- 
secuted severely,  both  with  exile  and  threat  of 
capital  punishment  (Cod.,  I.,  v.  12).  At  Constan- 
tinople, on  one  occasion,  not  a  few  Manicheans,  after 
strict  inquisition,  were  executed  in  the  emperor's 
very  presence:  some  by  burning,  others  by  drown- 
ing (F.  Nau,  in  Revue  de  VarierU,  ii.,  1897,  p.  481). 
The  like  despotism  was  also  shown  in  the  empe- 
ror's ecclesiastical  policy.  He  regulated  everything, 
both  in  religion  and  in  law.  At  the  very  begin- 
ning of  his  reign,  he  deemed  it  proper  to  promul- 
gate by  law  his  belief  in  the  Trinity  and  the  incar- 
nation; and  to  threaten  all  heretics 
3.  Ecdesi-  with  the  becoming  penalties  (Cod.,  I., 
astical  i.  5);  whereas  he  subsequently  de- 
Policy,  dared  that  he  designed  to  deprive  all 
disturbers  of  orthodoxy  of  the  oppor- 
tunity for  such  offense  by  due  process  of  law  (MPO, 
Ixxxvi.  1,  p.  993).  He  made  the  Nicseno-Constan- 
tinopolitan  creed  the  sole  symbol  of  the  Church 
{Cod.,  I.,  i.  7),  and  accorded  legal  force  to  the 
canons  of  the  four  ecumenical  councils  (Novellae, 
cxxxi.).  The  bishops  in  attendance  at  the  Synod 
of  Constantinople  in  536  recognised  that  nothing 
could  be  done  in  the  Church  contrary  to  the  em- 
peror's will  and  command  (Mansi,  Concilia,  viii. 
970B);  while,  on  his  side,  the  emperor,  in  the  case 
of  the  Patriarch  Anthimus,  reinforced  the  ban  of 
the  Church  with  temporal  proscription  (NoveUae, 
xlii.).  Bishops  without  niunber  had  to  feel  the 
tyrant's  wrath.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  true,  he 
neglected  no  opportunity  for  securing  the  rights  of 
the  Church  and  clergy,  for  protecting  and  extend- 
ing monastidsm.  Indeed,  were  not  the  despotic 
character  of  his  measiues  so  glaring,  one  might  be 
tempted  to  call  him  a  father  of  the  Church.  Both 
the  Codex  and  the  Novellae  contain  many  enact- 
ments regarding  donations,  foimdations,  and  ad- 
ministration of  ecclesiastical  property;  election 
and  rights  of  bishops,  priests  and  abbots;  monastic 
life,  residential  obligations  of  the  clergy,  conduct  of 
divine  service,  episcopal  jurisdiction,  etc. 

From  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century  onward  in- 
creasingly arduous  tasks  confronted  the  emperors 
of  the  East  in  the  province  of  ecclesiastical  polity. 
For  one  thing,  the  radicals  on  all  sides 
4.  Rda-    felt  themselves  constantly  repelled  by 
tions  with  the  creed  which  had  been  adopted  by 
Rome,      the  Council  of  Chalcedon  with  the  de- 
sign of  mediating  between  the  dog- 
matic parties.    The  letter  of  Leo  I.  to  Flavian  of 
Constantinople  passed  far  and  wide,  in  the  East, 
for  a  document  of  Satan;  so  that,  where  such  was 
the  case,  nobody  cared  to  hear  aught  of  the  Church 
of  Rome.    The  emperors,  however,  had  to  wrestle 


with  a  twofold  problem.  In  the  first  place,  the 
imity  between  East  and  West,  between  Byzantium 
and  Rome,  was  to  be  preserved;  and  this  was  pos- 
sible only  if  they  swerved  not  from  the  line  defined 
at  Chalcedon.  In  the  next  place,  the  factions  in 
the  East  which  had  been  stirred  up  and  disaffected 
on  account  of  Chalcedon  must  be  restrained  and 
(Micified.  This  problem  was  the  more  difiicult  be- 
cause the  dissenting  groups  in  the  East  excelled  the 
party  for  Chalcedon  in  the  East  both  in  numerical 
strength  and  in  intellectual  ability;  and  so  the 
course  of  events  showed  the  two  aims  to  be  incom- 
patible: whoever  chose  Rome  and  the  West  must 
renounce  the  East,  and  vice  versa.  For  the  prog- 
ress of  affairs  under  Zeno  and  Anastasius  see  Mono- 
PHT8ITX8.  Justinian  entered  the  arena  of  ecclesi- 
astical statecraft  shortly  after  his  imde's  accession 
in  518,  and  put  an  end  to  the  schism  that  had  pre- 
vailed between  Rome  and  Byzantiimi  since  483. 
The  recognition  of  the  Roman  see  as  the  highest 
ecclesiastical  authority  (cf.  Novellae,  cxxxi.)  re- 
mained the  cornerstone  of  his  policy  in  relation  to 
the  West,  although  he  thus  grievously  offended 
those  of  the  East,  and  though  he  felt  himself  en- 
tirely free  to  show  a  despotic  front  toward  the  pope 
(witness  his  behavior  toward  Silverius  and  Vigilius). 
But  the  controversies  in  the  East  were  alone  suffi- 
cient to  keep  the  emperor  busy  all  through  his  reign; 
and  he  plainly  paid  much  more  attention  to  them 
than  to  the  external  affairs  of  the  realm.  Yet  his 
policy  bore  marks  of  greatness,  and  strove  with 
large  understanding  to  satisfy  the  religious  instincts 
of  the  devout  in  the  East,  a  signal  proof  of  which 
was  his  attitude  in  the  Theopaschite  (Xintroversy 
(see  Thkopaschiteb).  At  the  outset  he  was  of 
the  opinion  that  the  question  turned  on  a  quibble  of 
words.  By  degrees,  however,  he  came  to  under- 
stand that  the  formula  at  issue  was  not  only  ortho- 
dox, but  might  also  be  used  as  a  conciliatory  meas- 
ure toward  the  Monophysites,  and  made  a  vain 
attempt  to  do  this  in  the  religious  conference  with 
the  Severians,  in  533.  Again,  he  reviewed  the  same 
approvingly  in  the  religious  edict  of  Mar.  15,  533 
(Cod.,  I.,  i.  6),  and  congratulated  himself  that  Pope 
John  II.  admitted  the  orthodoxy  of  the  imperial 
confession  (Cod.,  I.,  i.  8).  The  serious  blunder  that 
he  had  made  at  the  b^;inning  by  abetting  after 
Justin's  accession  a  severe  persecution  of  the  Mono- 
physite  bishops  and  monks  and  thereby  embittering 
the  population  of  vast  regions  and  provinces,  he  rem- 
edied eventually.  His  constant  aim  now  was  to 
win  the  Monophysites,  yet  not  to  surrender  the 
Chaloedonian  faith.  For  many  at  court,  he  did 
not  go  far  enough:  the  Empress  Theodora  espe- 
cially would  have  been  glad  to  see  the  Monophysites 
favored  unreservedly.  Justinian,  however,  was  re- 
strained in  that  policy  by  the  complications  that 
would  have  ensued  with  the  West.  Neither,  for  that 
matter,  could  he  escape  these  issues;  for  instance, 
the  Three  Chapter  Controversy  (q.v.;  see  also  Vig- 
ilius). In  the  condemnation  of  the  Three  Chap- 
ters Justinian  tried  to  satisfy  both  the  East  and  the 
West,  but  succeeded  in  satisfying  neither.  Although 
the  pope  assented  to  the  condemnation,  the  West 
believed  that  the  emperor  was  acting  contrary  to 
the  decrees  of  Chalcedon;  and  though  many  dele- 


987 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Jafltinian  I 
Juvenal 


S&tes  were  found  in  the  East  subservient  to  Justin- 
ian, yet  there  were  many,  especially  the  Monophy- 
sites,  left  unsatisfied.  So  the  emperor's  efforts  were 
wasted  on  an  impossible  task;  the  more  bitter  for 
him  because  during  his  last  years  he  took  greater 
interest  in  theological  matters. 

It  can  not  be  doubted  that  Justinian  also  took  an 
actual,  personal  hand  in  the  theological  manifes- 
toes which  he  put  forth  as  emperor;   although,  in 
view  of  the  author's  exalted  position, 
5.  WritingB.  it  is  a  difficult  matter  to  ascertain 
whether  the  dociunents  current  under 
his  name  are  the  direct  product  of  his  pen.    Apart 
from  letters  to  the  Popes  Hormisdas,  John  II., 
Agapetus  I.,  and  Vigilius,  and  sundry  other  composi- 
tions (collected  in  MPL,  bdii.,  Ixvi.  and  Ixix.),  the 
following  documents  may  be  noted  (all  to  be  found 
in  MPQ,  Izzxvi.  l,pp.  945-1152):   (1)  the  edict  on 
Origen's  heterodoxies,  in  543  or  544;   (2)  smnmons 
to  the  bishops  assembled  at  Constantinople  on  oc- 
casion of  the  council  of  553,  with  reference  to  their 
sitting  in  judgment  on  errors  in  circulation  among 
the  monastic  followers  of  Origen  at  Jerusalem; 
(3)  an   edict   on   the   Three   Chapters,   probably 
framed  in  551;    (4)  an  address  to  the  council  of 
553,   concerning  the  Antiochian  theology;    (5)  a 
document  probably  antedating  550,  addressed  to 
some  unnamed  defenders  (perhaps  Scythians)  of 
the  Three  Chapters;    (6)  writ  of  excommunication 
against  Anthimus,  Severus  and  companions;  (7)  an 
address  to  some  Egyptian  monks,  with  a  refutation 
of  Monophysite  errors;    (8)  fragment  of  a  docu- 
ment, mentioned  in  (7),  to  the  Patriarch  Zoilus  of 
Alexandria.    The  theology  upheld  in  these  wri- 
tings agreed,  in  general,  with  that  of  Leontius  of 
Byzantitmi  (q.v.);  that  is,  it  aims  at  the  final  solu- 
tion of  the  problem  by  interpreting  the  Chalce- 
doman  ssrmbol  in  terms  of  the  theology  of  Cyril  of 
Alexandria.    Two  points  are  worth  noting  in  this 
connection.    First,  the  clever  way  in  which  the 
emperor,  or  his  representative,  contrives  to  defend 
the  reputation  and  the  theology  of  Cyril;  secondly, 
his  antagonism  to  Origen:  a  clear  sign  of  the  char- 
acteristic disinclination  of  that  age  for  independent 
thinking;  at  least  among  personages  of  weight  and 
influence.    A  word  or  two  should  be  subjoined  on 
the  subject  of  Aphthartodooetism;    a  doctrine  pro- 
fessed by  the  emperor  toward  the  close  of  his  life. 
Evagrius  reports  {Hist,  ecd,,  iv.  39),  and  other 
sources  confirm  the  point,  that  Justinian  promul- 
gated an  edict  in  which  he  declared  Christ's  body 
to  be  incorruptible  and  not  susceptible  to  natural 
suffering,  and  commanded  bishops  everywhere  to 
accept  this  doctrine.    The  fall  of  the  Patriarch 
Eutychius  (q.v.)  is  associated  with  this  final  phase 
of  the  imperial  policy.    The  sotu^es  saw  a  lament- 
able deciiiie  from  the  right  faith  in  Justinian's  latter 
conduct.    The  train  of  thought  underlying  Aph- 
thartodooetism, however,  is  not  necessarily  unortho- 
dox (see  Julian  of  Halicarnassus)  ;    because  it 
need  not  be  opposed  to  the  acceptance  of  the  essen- 
tial identity  of  Christ's  nature  with  human  nature. 
Hence  it  is  not  necessary  to  regard  Justinian's  final 
theological  views  as  those  of  an  old  man,  to  be  dis- 
regarded in  surveying  the  aims  of  his  full-bodied 
activity.  G.  KbOoeb. 


Bibuoorapht:  Gibbon.  Dtelin§  and  Fall,  chap«.  zl.-xliv.; 
C.  W.  F.  Walch,  HiatorUderKeiMereien,  toIb.  vL-^riii,  Leip- 
nc,  177a-78:  J.  B.  Bury.  Hut.  0/  the  Later  Roman  Empire, 
2  vols.,  London,  1880;  A.  Knecht,  Die  RelioionepolHik 
Kaiaer  Juatiniane  I.,  WOribuTK,  1896:  idem.  Sytem 
dee  ittetinianieehen  KirchenvermUgenereehiee,  Stuttgart, 
1005;  W.  H.  Button,  The  Chtirdi  of  the  Sixth  Century, 
London,  1807;  C.  Diehl,  Juetinien  et  la  culture  infan- 
tine, Paria,  1001;  G.  PfannrnttOer,  Die  kirchliche  Oe- 
eetagebung  Juetinian*,  Berlin,  1002;  W.  Norden,  Dae 
PapBttum  und  Byzanz,  ib.  1003;  J.  Pargoire.  L'6gliee 
bvManHne,  597-847,  Paria,  1006;  W.  G.  Holmes.  The  Age 
of  Juetinian  and  Theodora,  2  Tola.,  London,  100&-O7; 
Hefele,  ConeUiengeechichie,  vol.  ii.,  Eng.  tr&nal.,  vol.  iv.; 
DCB,  ill  638-560  (elaborate  diaouasion);  Neander,  Chrie- 
tian  Church,  vol.  iii.  paasim;  Schaff,  Chriatian  Churdi, 
iii.  768  aqq.  et  paaaim;  the  literature  under  the  articlea 
referred  to  in  the  text.  Conault  further:  F.  A.  Biener, 
Oeeehiehte  der  NoveUen  Juetiniane,  Berlin,  1824;  J.  Cau- 
vet,  L'Emperewr  Juetinien  et  eon  auvre  Uffielative,  Gmu, 
1880. 

JUSTUS:  First  bishop  of  Rochester  and  fourth 
archbishop  of  Canterbury;  d.  at  Canterbury  Nov. 
10,  627.  He  was  sent  to  England  with  Mellitus 
(q.v.)  and  others  in  601.  Augustine  (q.v.)  conse- 
crated him  bishop  for  West  Kent  in  604  and  Ethel- 
bert,  king  of  Kent,  built  him  a  church  at  Rochester. 
In  617  during  the  heathen  reaction  imder  Eadbald, 
with  Mellitus  he  fled  into  Gaul,  but  was  recalled 
after  a  year  and  restored  to  his  bishopric  (see  Lau- 
rence of  Canterbury;  Melx.itu8).  He  succeeded 
Melliti]s  as  archbishop  in  624,  consecrated  Romanus 
as  his  successor  at  Rochester,  and  sent  Paulinus 
(q.v.)  to  Northumbria.  He  received  the  pallium 
from  Boniface  V. 

Bibuoorapht:  Bede,  Hiet.  ecd.,  i,  29,  ii.  3,  4,  8.  18;  Had- 
dan  and  Stubbe,  Couneile,  ill  72-^1;  W.  F.  Hook,  Livee 
of  the  Arehbiehope  of  Canterbury,  i.  09-109.  London,  1860; 
W.  Bright,  Chaptere  of  Early  Englieh  Church  Hiet.,  pas- 
sim, Oxford,  1897;   DCB,  iii.  692-693. 

JUVENAL,  ju've-nal:  First  patriarch  of  Jeru- 
salem; d.  c.  458.  Of  his  life  little  is  known,  and 
the  date  and  place  of  his  birth,  consecration,  and 
death  are  also  uncertain.  The  aim  of  his  life  was  to 
make  Jerusalem  one  of  the  important  sees  of  Chris- 
tendom, and  the  Council  of  Nicsea  had,  as  a  matter 
of  fact,  accorded  the  bishop  of  Jerusalem  special 
rank  and  honor,  though  it  placed  him  imder  the 
jiirisdiction  of  the  metropolitan  of  Ctesarea.  Ju- 
venal endeavored  to  realize  the  concession,  and  took 
the  first  step  in  this  direction  by  transcending  his 
authority  in  consecrating  in  the  neighborhood  a 
certain  Peter  bishop  of  a  newly  converted  tribe  of 
Saracens,  and  attaching  him  as  so-called  bishop  ''of 
Tarembolae"  (i.e.,  "of  the  camp")  to  the  see 
of  Jerusalem,  most  probably  in  425.  This  was  con- 
sidered a  distinct  breach  of  canon  law  by  the  met- 
ropolitan of  Csesarea.  The  resulting  difficulties 
came  to  a  head  at  the  Council  of  Ephesus  in  431. 
The  conditions  of  the  time  favored  Juvenal.  Nes- 
torius,  patriarch  of  Constantinople,  was  accused  of 
heresy;  Cyril  of  Alexandria  was  temporarily  im- 
prisoned; John  of  Antioch  held  a  separate  council; 
and  the  see  of  Rome  was  represented  only  by 
legates.  To  Juvenal,  therefore,  in  Cyril's  absence 
fell  the  right  of  precedence  in  signing  the  resolu- 
tions; or,  in  case  Cyril  was  present,  Juvenal's  name 
came  second.  Juvenal  did  not  hesitate  to  make 
the  most  of  these  conditions.  He  summoned  John 
of  Antioch  to  proceed  at  once  to  Ephesus,  ranked 


JnTvnal 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


388 


tlie  see  of  Jeruaalem  aa  on  a  par  with  that  of  Rome 
and  gave  it  the  title  "  apostolie/'  which  he  denied 
to  Antioeh.  These  tndicatioDB  show  plainly  that 
Juvenal  aspired  not  only  after  an  independent  aee 
within  the  arehbishoprie  of  Gtesarea,  but  after  su- 
periority over,  or  at  least,  equality  with,  that  of 
Antioch.  He  aimed  to  have  the  three  bishopries 
of  Palestine  attached  to  Jerusalem,  and  also,  if  pos- 
sible, those  of  Phenieia  and  Arabia.  The  result 
would  be  to  make  the  holy  city  the  principal  see  in 
the  Orient. 

Several  bishops  who  had  been  ordained  by  Ju- 
venal and  were  present  at  Ephesus,  si4>ported  lus 
daims;  this  fact,  and  the  absence  of  the  above- 
mentioned  bishc^  from  the  principal  sees  were  ex- 
tremely favorable  to  his  ambitions.  Cjrril  of  Alex- 
andria i^peared,  however,  at  the  fourth  session  of 
the  coundl,  and  at  once  took  charge  of  the  pro- 
ceedings. He  saw  the  danger  not  only  for  the  see 
of  Antioch  but  for  that  of  Alexandria  in  the  exist- 
ence of  a  masterful  bishc^  of  Jerusalem.  He 
therefore  opposed  every  plan  of  JuvenaL  Neither 
did  the  idea  of  a  new  competitor  for  supremacy  in 
Christendom  please  the  fancy  of  the  l^tes  of  the 
Roman  see.  It  could  not  be  foresemi  what  compli- 
cations might  arise  in  favor  of  Jerusalem,  particu- 
larly since  pilgrimages  to  the  hxAj  city  were  be- 
coming more  frequent  every  year.  But  Juvenal 
had  gained  an  advantage  of  which  he  made  the 
most  He  ordained  several  new  bishc^  in  Pales- 
tine without  having  any  stipulated  right  by  canon 
law.  His  influence  was  growing  constancy,  and 
Maximus  of  Antioch  at  the  Council  of  Chaloedon 
in  451  acknowledged  Juvenal's  claims  to  the  three 
sees  of  Palestine  on  condition  that  the  latter  aban- 
don his  claims  to  the  sees  of  Phenida  and  Arabia. 
The  council  confirmed  the  agreement. 

Juvenal  had  numerous  difficulties  with  the  mon- 

ophysitic  monks  of  Palestine;  and  even  his  life  was 

threatened.    He    introduced    the    celebration    of 

Christmas  on  Dec.  25,  possibly  to  win  the  favor  of 

Rome.    See  Jbrubalbm,  Patriarchatb  of;  and 

IfoNOPHTBrTss,  §  2.  (F.  Kattknbubch.) 

Bduoorapht:    Souroee  «ra:    The  aets  of  the  eoaneUa  of 

Ephesos  and  Chaloedon,  giiren  in  Hefele,   ConolMiigv- 

•oUeftts,  vol.  it  paatun.  Ens.  tranal.,  voL  iii.  paaBon;   the 

letters  of  Leo  the  Great  Enc  trand.  in  NPNF,  2  aer., 

▼ol.  laL,  cf.  pp.  06.  82.  86.  07;   EvacrioB.  Hi*t  eed..  iL, 

in  MPO,  bcxxvi  2.    Consult:  M .  Le  Quien.  Oritna  CArie- 

Hanug,  ill  110  aqq..  164  aqq..  Paris,  1740;  Vailhe.  in  Betni^ 

<isronen<,iv(1800).44M|q.;  DCB.  ili  fi05  sqq.;  Neander, 

CkriaUan  Chttreh,  vol.  ii.  pasnm, 

JUVEHCUS,  ju-ven'cus,  CAIDS  VETTIUS  AQXH- 
LUITJS  (or  AQUILIUS):  Spanish  presbyter  and 
Teligious  poet,  in  the  reign  of  Constantine  the  Great, 
(o  whom  he  refers  at  the  dose  of  his  principal  poem. 
This  is  a  rendering  of  the  Gospels  into  Latin  dao- 
tj^c  hexameters,  with  a  dose  adherence  to  the 
original  text,  and  contains  3,210  lines.  The  pro- 
logue speaks  of  earlier  poets  such  as  Homer  and 
Veigil,  whose  names  are  well-nigh  immortal  though 
their  subjects  were  only  the  deeds  of  men,  and  their 
narratives  fictitious;  places  on  a  much  higher  plane 
the  acts  of  Christ;  and  hopes,  under  the  guidance 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  to  create  a  work  that  shtdl  worth- 
ily set  them  forth,  last  beyond  the  conflagration  of 
the  world,  and  save  the  author  himself  from  the 
file.    The  events  of  the  life  of  Christ  are  narrated 


now  from  one  Evangelist  and  now  from  another, 
in  what  seemed  to  the  author  chronological  order. 
Matthew  is  throughout  his  main  source,  and  Mark 
does  not  seem  to  be  used  at  alL  The  division  into 
four  books  seems  to  have  been  an  afterthought, 
intended  to  correspond  with  the  number  of  the 
Evangelists.  Juvencus  adheres  closely  to  the 
scriptural  account,  and  is  apparently  withheld  by 
reverence  from  any  attempt  to  enlarge  upon  it. 
Efe  was  evidently  at  home  in  classical  literature, 
and  his  diction  is  full  of  Vergilian  echoes;  the  verse 
IB  fiowing  and  for  its  period  strikingly  correct.  This 
first  Christian  epic,  although  it  mside  no  pretense 
to  be  a  complete  narrative  or  a  scientific  harmony 
of  the  Gospels,  and  although  it  does  not  offer  mudi 
help  in  the  way  of  exegesis,  of  the  history  of  dognoa, 
or  of  textual  criticism  (it  is  based  on  the  Itala  as  a 
text),  was  yet  highly  regarded  in  the  early  Church 
and  continued  to  be  prised  throughout  the  Middle 
Ages,  being  frequently  used  as  a  text-book  in  schools. 
Its  popularity  is  attested  by  the  large  number  of 
manuscripts  in  which  it  is  preserved.  A  work  by 
Juvencus  on  the  sacraments  mentioned  by  Jerome 
has  been  lost.  Some  of  the  later  manuscripts  give 
under  the  name  of  Juvencus  two  other  poems,  De 
IttudibuM  Domim  and  Triumphua  Chri&ti,  of  148  and 
108  verses.  The  former  is  probably  older  than 
Juvencus  and  the  work  of  a  rhetorician  from  Augus* 
todunum  (Autun).  The  6,000  verses  on  the  Oki- 
Testament  history  which  Oudinal  Pitra  discovered 
and  attributed  to  Juvencus  are  now  thought  to  have 
been  written  by  a  fifth-century  Gallic  Cyprian  (not 
the  famous  Carthaginian  bishop).  The  style  is  dry 
and  jejtme,  and  the  poetical  execution  far  inferior 
to  that  of  Juvencus.  Nor  is  it  possible  now  to  at- 
tribute to  him  the  Liber  in  Oenetim  (1441  verses) 
which  Marttoe  published  in  1723  from  a  Codex 
Corbeiensis,  and  which  GaUand,  Arevolo,  Gebser, 
B&hr,  Teuffel  and  others  believed  to  be  his. 

(K.  LKIMBACHt.) 
BnuooBAVHT:  Tbe  poem  has  <iften  been  edited  and  printed 
flinee  the  editio  prinoepe  of  Feria.  1440,  is  in  MPL,  xix.; 
ed.  C.  Harold,  Leipae,  1886;  and.  ed.  J.  Huemer.  in  CSEL 
zziT..  Vienna.  1801.  Oonault:  J.  Huemer.  in  Wientr 
StmUm,  ii  81-112.  Vienna.  1880;  A.  R.  Gebeer.  Du- 
atrtoHo  d»  ,  .  .  Jwena  vtte  «t  acripiU,  Jena.  1827;  A. 
Ebert.  AOgemaime  OatdUcAte  tUr  LUmUur  dm  MittelaUen. 
I  100  eqq.,  Leipsic.  1880;  J.  T.  Hatfield.  A  Study  </ 
/wwneMt.  Bonn,  1800;  OuIIiBr.  AiiteMre  aocr^  iil  116- 
118;  DCB,  iil  608-500. 

JUXONy  WILLIAM:  Archbishop  of  CaDte^ 
bury;  b.  at  Chichester  (57  m.  s.w.  of  Ixmdon),  bap- 
tised in  Oct.,  1582;  d.  in  London  June  4,  1663. 
He  received  his  education  at  St.  John's  ColletTP, 
Oxford;  became  vicar  of  St.  Giles,  Oxford,  1609; 
rector  of  Somerton,  Oxfordshire,  1615;  head  of  St. 
John's,  1622,  and  vice-chancellor  1626-27,  and  in 
1626,  dean  of  Worcester;  became  bishop  of  Lon- 
don in  1633;  on  Mar.  6,  1635-36,  he  became  lord 
high  treasurer,  a  difficult  post;  he  attended  Charles 
I.  to  the  scaffold  as  his  most  faithful  servant; 
was  deprived  of  his  see  in  1649;  and  in  1660  was 
recognised  as  the  only  eligible  candidate  for  tbe 
primacy,  and  was  elected.  He  left  a  well-desenned 
reputation  for  strict  honesty,  lojralty  to  Church  and 
king,  and  great  charity  to  the  poor. 

Bibuooraprt:  W.H.  Karah,Af«iiio«rt  oTAreUMop /«»««• 
London,  1800;  DNB,iaaL  283-287. 


289 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


^uvenftl 


K 


KAABAf  WaAya:  The  pre-Mohammedan  sanp- 
tuary  at  Mecca,  adopted  by  the  Mdhammedans  as 
the  chief  sanctuary  of  their  faith.  It  is  situated 
in  the  heart  of  Mecca,  the  sacred  city  of  Islam  (see 
MoHAiocBD,  Mohammbdanibm),  in  a  court  approxi- 
mately 535  feet  by  355  feet  which  forms  an  irregu- 
lar oblong,  the  long  axis  of  which  is  approximately 
n.e.-s.w.,  while  its  sides  are  only  approximately 
parallel.  The  wall  which  bounds  the  enclosure 
does  not  preserve  its  direction  throughout  on  any 
one  of  the  four  sides,  while  on  the  northeastern  and 
southwestern  sides  are  projections  forming  two 
large  halls.  The  wall  is  pierced  by  nineteen  un- 
gated entrances.  On  the  inside  and  next  to  the 
bounding  wall  a  triple  or,  in  some  places,  a  quad- 
ruple, colonnade  a  little  over  twenty  feet  in  height 
limits  the  open  area,  while  each  group  of  four  col- 
umns supports  a  small  dome  as  a  part  of  the  roof 
of  the  oolcmnade.  The  ground  level  of  the  area 
inside  the  walls  is  lower  than  that  outside.  The 
Kaaba  itself  is  near  the  center  of  the  enclosure,  a 
structure  in  the  form  of  a  trapezium,  no  two  sides 
exactly  parallel,  with  its  long  axis  transverse  to 
that  of  the  court,  the  diagonals  being  nearly  in  the 
direction  of  the  cardinal  points,  one  comer  of  the 
building  being  said  by  the  Arabs  to  face  the  North 
Star.  The  structure  is  about  fifty-five  feet  by 
forty-five,  and  between  thirty-five  and  forty  feet 
in  height,  built  of  the  common  gray  stone  of  the 
district,  the  courses  of  which  are  irregular.  Its 
roof  is  nearly  flat,  yet  sufficiently  inclined  to  shed 
the  rainfall  easily.  The  main  structure  rises  from 
a  sloping  base  two  feet  in  height.  It  has  no  win- 
dows and  but  one  door,  placed  on  the  eastern  side 
about  six  feet  from  the  southeast  comer  and  seven 
feet  from  the  groimd.  At  the  southeast  comer  is 
the  Black  Stone,  an  irregular  oval  about  seven 
inches  in  diameter,  the  pieces  of  which  it  is  com- 
posed being  joined  by  cement.  It  has  an  uneven 
surface,  though  it  is  wom  smooth  by  the  constant 
kissing  and  rubbing  to  which  it  has  for  ages  been 
subjected  by  the  faithful.  It  is  described  now  as 
being  a  deep  reddish  brown,  but  whether  it  is  ba- 
saltic or  a  meteorite  is  undetermined,  with  proba- 
bilities in  favor  of  the  latter.  It  is  set  in  the  wall 
about  fifty  inches  from  the  pavement,  and  is  sur- 
rounded by  a  border  of  composite  cement  so  set 
as  to  form  a  boss,  and  this  is  supported  by  a  circle 
of  gold  or  silver  or  gilt.  In  tliue  northeast  comer 
is  another  stone  of  the  material  common  about 
Mecca,  eighteen  inches  by  two  in  size,  set  horizon- 
tally in  the  wall,  which  receives  a  secondary  ven- 
eration, being  mbbed  by  pilgrims  with  the  right 
hand  but  never  kissed.  A  slight  hollow  in  the 
northeastem  side  in  the  pavement  is  lined  with 
noarble  and  is  hallowed  as  the  place  where  Abra- 
ham and  Ishmael  mixed  the  material  with  which 
they  built  the  Kaaba.  The  roof  is  sustained  by 
three  cross  beams,  each  supported  in  the  center  by 
a  column  covered  with  decorated  aloe  wood.  In 
the  northem  comer  is  a  small  door  leading  to  a 
staircase  and  the  roof,  used  only  by  the  attend- 
VI.-19 


ants  for  puiposes  of  work.  The  roof  of  the  Kaaba 
is  covered  by  a  robe  or  mantle  which  hangs  over 
the  sides.  This  is  made  at  Cairo  by  a  family  in 
which  the  monopoly  is  hereditary,  and  is  made  of 
coarse  silk  and  cotton.  The  interior  of  the  court 
about  the  Kaaba  has  three  levels:  (1)  a  pavement 
of  marble  immediately  surrounding  the  Kaaba  in 
an  irregular  oval,  about  which  is  an  oval  of  small 
columns   between    which    lamps   are    suspended; 

(2)  a  second  pavement  about  twenty  feet  broad 
and  slightly  higher  than  the  interior  pavement; 

(3)  a  pavement  six  inches  higher  and  about  forty 
feet  in  width,  surrounding  the  two  inner  pavements. 
Between  the  outer  edge  of  this  last  and  the  colon- 
nade the  ground  is  graveled  except  where  the  stone 
walks  lead  to  several  of  the  gates.  There  are  a 
number  of  smaller  structures  at  different  points  of 
the  outer  pavement  which  serve  various  purposes, 
one  of  them  covering  the  sacred  well  Zem  Zem. 
The  lowest  pavement  next  the  Kaaba  is  that  upon 
which  the  sevenfold  circuit  of  the  building  is  made 
by  the  pilgrims. 

Arabic  legend  asserts  that  the  present  structure 
b  the  tenth  in  historical  order,  llie  first  was  built 
by  the  angels  before  the  creation;  the  second  by 
Adam;  the  third  by  Seth,  and  was  destroyed  in  the 
deluge;  the  fourth  by  Abraham;  the  fifth  by  the 
Amfdikah,  descendants  of  Shem;  the  sixth  by  the 
Beni  Jurham,  about  the  Christian  era;  the  seventh 
by  Kusay  bin-Kilab,  fifth  in  order  of  ascent  among 
Mohammed's  paternal  ancestors;  the  eight  in  Mo- 
hanmied's  twenty-fifth  (thirty-fifth)  year;  the 
ninth  in  686  a.d.  (64  a.h.)  by  Abdullah  bin-Zubaye, 
nephew  of  Ayesha,  after  the  Black  Stone  had  been 
split  by  fire  or  by  the  weapons  of  an  enemy;  the 
tenth  between  1652  and  1662  a.d.,  after  the  partial 
destruction  of  the  house  by  flood  in  1652.  The 
ceremony  of  drcumambulation  was  performed 
about  eil  of  these,  according  to  Arab  tradition. 
That  the  Kaaba  has  a  high  antiquity  is  made  cer- 
tain by  Diodorus  Siculus  who  asserts  that  "  there 
is  in  this  country  (Arabia)  a  temple  greatly  revered 
by  all  the  Arabs."  The  very  univereality  of  rever- 
ence asserted  here  and  supported  by  Arab  tradition 
guarantees  an  early  origin  for  the  stmcture. 

Geo.  W.  Gilmobb. 
Bduooraphy:  TIm  foregmng  deaoription  of  tb«  Kaaba  is 
taken  from  a  careful  oompariBon  of  the  acoounte  of  R.  F. 
Burton,  Narraiiv€  «/  a  PUgrimoife  to  Meeeah  and  Medinah, 
chaps.  zxvi.~xzx.,  and  Appendix,  London,  1879;  A. 
Sprenger,  Dom  Leben  und  die  Ldire  dea  Mohamnud,  ii. 
340-347,  3  vols.,  Berlin,  1861-05;  and  J.  L.  Burckhardt, 
TraveU  in  Arabia,  pp.  136  sqq.,  London,  1820.  The  his- 
tory is  taken  from  W.  Muir,  Life  of  Mahomet,  vol.  L,  pp. 
ccx.  sqq.,  London,  1861;  and  A.  P.  Gaussin  de  Perceval, 
Eeeai  eur  Phietoire  dee  Arabee  avant  Vielamieme,  L  170- 
175.  Paris.  1847. 

KABASILAS,  ka-bd^fii-los:  Two  metropolitans 
of  Thessalonica  during  the  fourteenth  century. 
Nilos,  the  elder,  lived  about  1340  under  John  Gan- 
tacuzenus,  and  belonged  to  the  strict  anti-Roman 
party,  so  that  his  writings  were  first  noticed  among 
the  Protestants  (e.g.,  De  primatu  -papas,  ed.  M. 
Flacius  Illyricus,  Frankfort,  1553).    Far  more  im- 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


290 


portant  was  his  nephew  Nikokos  (d.  1371).  Of  his 
life  the  only  details  known  are  that  he  was  origi- 
nally bursar  at  Constantinople  and  sided  with  the 
Palaeologiy  but  afterward  became  a  friend  of  John 
Gantacuzenus,  who  used  him  on  political  missions. 
In  the  Hesychastic  controversy  (see  Hestchastb) 
he  sided  with  the  monks  of  Athos,  and  was  later 
appointed  metropolitan  of  Thessalonica.  Nikoiaos 
is  known  as  a  philosopher,  but  more  especially  as 
a  theologian.  Among  his  philosophical  writings 
special  mention  may  be  made  of  one  directed  against 
skeptidsm  (ed.  Elter  and  Radermacher  in  Analeda 
Graeca,  Bonn,  1899.)  The  most  important  of  his 
theological  writings  was  his  "  Seven  Books  con- 
cerning the  Life  in  Christ "  (ed.  W.  Gass,  Greifs- 
wald,  1849).  The  line  of  thought  is  briefly  this. 
True  to  the  development  of  Greek  theology,  Ka^ 
basilas  regards  the  summum  bonum  as  exaltation 
above  the  sensual,  the  introduction  into  life  and 
immortality,  as  given  through  Christ.  Man  is  to 
be  transplanted  from  the  present  world  to  the  fu- 
ture. Tliis  transfer  is  made  by  C^hrist  himself. 
The  life  in  Christ  which  transfers  man  to  the  other 
world  is  perfected  through  the  sacraments  and  the 
himian  will.  Baptism  means  to  man  the  begin- 
ning of  a  new  existence.  The  second  sacrament, 
that  of  unction,  is  unction  of  the  spirit,  and  initi- 
ates man  into  the  true  Christian  calling.  The 
Eucharist  adds  the  third  degree  of  perfection,  and 
produces  an  inward  change,  causing  a  mystic  kin- 
ship with  Christ.  By  the  side  of  this  physiological 
myisticism  stands  a  non-monastic  system  of  ethics. 
Kabasilas  teaches  that  the  will  must  conform  un- 
reservedly to  the  sacramental  influences,  being 
thereby  supplied  with  a  train  of  pious  thoughts. 
Through  joy  and  sadness  it  becomes  purified. 
Finally  the  climax  of  love  is  reached,  and  with  it 
perfect  altruism.  Kabasilas  indulges  in  lofty  ex- 
pressions when  he  describes  the  power  of  love,  de- 
claring that  as  once  it  had  caused  God  to  descend 
to  man,  so  now  it  breaks  the  bonds  of  selfish  isola- 
tion and  constrains  man  to  live  for  God,  and  not 
for  self.  This  power  of  love  rises  to  complete  self- 
renimciation  and  self-foigetfulness,  and  this  is  the 
state  of  him  in  whom  sacrament  and  will  work  to- 
gether in  perfect  harmony.  Phiupp  Meter. 
Biblioorapht:  The  Works  are  in  MPO,  d.  Ck>nault: 
Fabrieiu»-Harles,  BibliotKeca  Qraeea,  x.  20-30;  Demetra- 
kopuloe,  Graeda  orOiodoxia,  pp.  76  eqq.,  83  sqq.,  Leipsic, 
1872;  Krumbacher.  Ge9chichte,  pp.  10&-110.  158-15Q; 
W.  Oaoa,  Die  Myatik  <Ua  NikolaoB  KabatUat,  Leipsic.  1899. 

KABIR:    Hindu    religious   leader.    See    India, 
I.,  3,  {  3;  Sikhs,  Sikhism. 

KADESH.    See  Nbqeb. 

KAEHLER,   kSaer,  CARL   MARTIN    AUGUST: 

German  Protestant;  b.  at  Neuhausen  (7  m.  n.e.  of 
Kdnigsberg),  Jan.  6,  1835.  He  studied  law  at 
KOnigsberg  (1853-54),  and  theology  at  Heidel- 
berg (1854-55),  Halle  (1865-^),  and  Tlibingen 
(1858-59);  became  privat-docent  at  Halle,  1860; 
associate  professor  of  theology  at  Bonn,  1864; 
went  in  a  similar  capacity  to  Halle,  1867,  and  has 
been  fuD  professor  of  systematic  theology  and  New- 
Testament  exegesis  in  Halle  since  1879.  His  wri- 
tings include:  Augtut  TMuckj  ein  Lebenaabriaa 
(Halle,  1877);    Jidiua  MaUer,  der  hdUische  Dog- 


matiker  (1878);  NetUestamentHche  Schriften  in 
genauer  Wiedergabe  ihres  Gedankenganges  darge- 
sUUt  (3  vols.,  comprising  Hebrews,  Galatians,  and 
Ephesians,  1880-94);  Die  Wissenschaft  der  chriM- 
liehen  Lehre  (3  parts,  Erlangen,  1883-87);  Der  so- 
genanrUe  hittoritehe  Jetnis  und  der  geschickUiche 
Chri9tu8  (1896);  Jesus  und  das  AUe  Te^ament 
(Leipsic,  1896);  Dogmatisehe  Streiifragen  (2  vols., 
(1898);  Wiedergeboren  durch  die  Auferstehung  Jesu 
ChrisH  (1901);  and  Die  SakramerUe  als  Gnadenmir 
Ui  (1903). 

KAEHLERy  LUDWI6  AUGUST:  German  Prot- 
estant; b.  at  Sommerfeld  (44  m.  s.s.e.  of  Frank- 
fort-on-the-Oder),  Prussia,  Mar.  6,  1775;  d.  at 
KOnigsberg  Nov.  7,  1855.  He  attended  the  Royal 
School  at  Meissen,  the  Gymnasium  at  Gorau,  and 
the  University  of  Erlangen,  and,  after  spending 
two  and  a  half  years  as  private  tutor,  became 
assistant  pastor  at  Kanig,  near  Guben,  in  1798. 
Here  he  found  leisure  to  write  a  number  of  ro- 
mances, some  of  which  won  even  Goethe's  approval. 
He  declined  a  call  to  the  office  of  general  superin- 
tendent of  Lower  Lusatia,  but  in  1809  entered 
upon  the  diaconate  at  Guben.  Ten  years  later  he 
was  called  to  KOnigsberg  as  consistorial  counselor, 
professor  of  theology,  and  superintendent  of  the 
Lobenicht  parish.  He  took  an  important  part  in 
the  direction  of  the  provincial  Ghurch,  and  after 
Borowski's  death  officiated  four  years  as  acting 
general  superintendent.  In  1841  he  resigned  all 
his  offices  on  account  of  a  paralytic  stroke.  Kah- 
ler  was  one  of  the  chief  representatives  of  a  rs-  ' 
tionalistio-idealistic  school,  which,  like  that  of 
Schleiermacher,  rejected  both  supematuralism  and 
the  older  rationalbm  of  the  Enlightenment.  He 
was  largely  imder  the  influence  of  the  philosophy 
of  Kant  and  Jacobi.  His  principal  works  are: 
Geschichte  von  Cottbus,  wdhrend  der  Jahre  1813-H 
(Cottbus,  1814);  Supematuralismus  und  RaJtiorud' 
ismus  in  ihrem  gemeinschafUichen  Ursprunge,  ihrer 
Zwietrachi  und  hohem  Einheit  (Leipsic,  1818); 
Pkilagatkos:  Andeutungen  uber  das  Reich  des  Guten 
(KOnigsberg,  1823);  the  unfinished  ChrisUiche  Sit^ 
tenlekre  (1st  section  of  part  1,  1833);  and  Wissen- 
schafUicher  Abriss  der  chrisUichen  SiUenlehre  (2 
parts,  1835-37).  Hermann  Hering. 

Bibliogbapht:    S.  A.  Kihler,  Ludwig  Xu^uaC  KiMer,  .  . . 

MUtheUungen  Uber  win  Leben  %ind  teine  Sckn/ten,  Konigs- 

berg.  1856  (by  his  son). 

KAFTAN,  kOf'tdn,  JULIUS  WILHELH  MAR- 
TIN: German  Protestant;  b.  at  Loit  (a  village 
near  Apenrade,  35  m.  n.  of  Schleswig),  Schleswig- 
Holstein,  Sept.  30,  1848.  He  was  educated  at  the 
universities  of  Erlangen,  Berlin,  and  Kiel  from 
1866  to  1871,  and  in  1873  was  appointed  associate 
professor  of  systematic  theology  at  Basel,  where 
he  was  promoted  to  a  full  professorship  in  the  same 
subject  in  1881.  Since  1883  he  has  been  professor 
of  apologetics  and  the  philosophy  of  religion  at 
Berlin.  He  has  written  SoUen  und  Sein  in  ihrem 
Verkdltnis  zu  einander  (Leipsic,  1872);  Die  Predi^ 
des  Evangdiums  im  modernen  GeisiesUben  (Basel, 
1879);  Das  Evangdium  des  Apostels  Pavlus  in  Prr- 
digten  der  Gemeinds  dargdegt  (1879);  Das  Wesen  der 
chrisUichen  Rdigion  (1881);  Das  Ld>en  in  Ckrisfo 


aoi 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


KabasilM 


(sermons,  1883);    Die  Wahrheit  der  chrisOicken  Re- 
iigion  (1888);  and  Dogmatik  (Tubingen,  1897). 

KAHNIS,  ha'nis,  KARL  FRIEDRICH  AUGUST: 
German  Lutheran  theologian;  b.  at  Greiz  (49  m. 
8.S.W.  of  Leipsic)  Dec.  22, 1814;  d.  at  Leipsic  June 
20,  1888.  Despite  the  poverty  of  his  parents,  he 
was  educated  at  the  gymnasium  of  his  native  town, 
and  after  acting  as  private  tutor  for  several  years 
began  the  study  of  theology  at  Halle.  He  was  at 
first  an  ardent  Hegelian,  but  becom- 
Eailier  ing  conscioi]s  that  Hegelianism  failed 
Life.  to  recognize  the  value  of  individual 
Professor  effort,  personality,  and  the  influence 
atBreslau.  of  the  Christian  faith,  he  passed  to 
orthodox  Lutheranism.  The  transi- 
tion may  be  dated  from  the  publication  of  his  Dr. 
Ruge  und  Hegd:  Ein  Beitrag  zwr  Wiirdigung  Hegel- 
acher  Tendemen  (Quedlinberg,  1838).  At  the  in- 
vitation of  Hengstenberg,  Kahnis  went  in  1840  to 
Berlin,  where  he  studied  imder  Neander,  Marhein- 
eke,  Twesten,  and  others.  To  Tholuck's  LiUer- 
ari9cker  Ameigerfiir  chrisUiche  Thedogie  he  contrib- 
uted a  criticism  of  Strauss,  which  appeared  in 
expanded  form  under  the  title  Die  modeme  Wieeen- 
schaft  dee  Dr.  Strausa  und  der  Glavbe  unserer  Kirche 
(Berlin,  1842).  In  1842  he  became  privat-docent 
and  then  spent  two  happy  years  in  close  relation- 
ship with  Neander,  Steffens,  and  the  circle  of  ro- 
manticists who  gathered  about  Ludwig  von  Ger- 
lach.  In  1844  he  was  called  to  Breslau  as  professor 
extraordinary  to  represent  the  orthodox  party  in  a 
rationalistic  faculty,  but  in  his  inaugural  speech 
De  Spiritus  SancH  pereona  he  departed  from  the 
accepted  doctrine  of  Trinitarianism,  ranking  the 
Son  as  subordinate  to  the  Father,  and  assigning  the 
last  place  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  he  described 
as  the  impersonal  principle  of  life,  binding  together 
the  other  two.  This  first  venture  of  Kahnis  into 
the  field  of  theology  is  important  for  his  subse- 
quent development.  Hampered  to  a  large  extent 
in  his  academic  work  by  the  lack  of  harmony  be- 
tween himself  and  his  colleagues,  he  devoted  him- 
self to  scientific  investigation  in  theology,  the  first 
results  being  his  Lehre  vom  heUigen  Geiste  (Halle, 
1847),  which  marked  no  departure  from  the  doc- 
trines enunciated  in  his  earlier  work,  yet  voiced  his 
protest  against  the  liberalism  of  the  times. 

After  the  revolution  of  1848,  in  which  Kahnis 
supported  the  king  and  the  established  order,  he 
came  to  believe  that  the  safest  defense  against  irre- 
ligion   was    in   rigid   orthodoxy,   and 
Professor    gradually  drifted  into  an  attitude  of 
at  Leipsic.   opposition  to  the  Union  (the  consoli- 
dation of  the  Lutheran  and  Reformed 
churches  in  Prussia  effected  by  a  royal  decree  in 
1817).    He  strove  to  preserve  the  integrity  of  the 
Lutheran  creed.    Convinced  at  last  that  the  Lu- 
theran confession  possessed  neither  a  logical  nor  a 
legal  basis  under  the  Union,  he  joined  the  old  Lu- 
theran party  in  Nov.,  1848,  a  step  by  which  his 
academic  activity  at  Breslau  became  still  more  dif- 
ficult.   In  1850,  therefore,  he  gladly  accepted  a 
call  to  Leipsic,  where  he  succeeded  Harless  in  the 
chair  of  dogmatics,  to  which  he  later  united  that 
of  church  history.     In  the  following  year  the  Uni- 


versity of  Erlangen  gave  him  the  degree  of  D.D., 
and  he  acknowledged  this  honor  by  his  Lehre  vom 
Abendmahle  (Leipsic,  1851),  one  of  the  best  formu- 
lations of  the  type  of  Lutheranism  taught  at  Er- 
langen. His  professorial  work  at  Leipsic  was  at- 
tended with  success,  but,  feeling  himself  out  of 
sympathy  with  the  prevailing  tone  in  the  faculty, 
he  would  have  accepted  a  call  to  Erlangen  in  1856 
had  not  the  authorities  promised  to  fill  the  first 
vacancy  in  the  faculty  by  a  theologian  entirely  in 
agreement  with  his  own  views.  In  the  same  year, 
Luthardt  was  called  from  Marburg,  and  he  and 
Kahnis,  together  with  Delitzsch,  who  came  to  Leip- 
sic from  Erlangen  in  1867,  constituted  a  triimivi- 
rate  which  raised  the  xmiversity  to  an  unrivaled 
eminence  in  the  realm  of  theology.  In  addition  to 
his  academic  duties,  Kahnis  found  time  for  much 
useful  labor  in  the  field  of  practical  Christianity. 
From  1851  to  1857  he  was  a  member  of  the  board 
of  missions,  from  1853  to  1857  edited  the  Sdcheische 
Kirchennund  SchulblaU,  and  from  1866  to  1875  was 
one  of  the  editors  of  the  Niednereche  Zeitechrift  fur 
htstoriscke  Theologie.  At  Leipsic  in  1854  he  pub- 
lished Der  xnnere  Gang  dee  deutachen  Proteetantia- 
mu8  eeit  MiUe  dee  vorigen  Jahrhunderte  (Eng.  transl. 
by  T.  Meyer,  Internal  History  of  German  Protestant^ 
ism  since  the  Middle  of  Last  Century,  Edinburgh, 
1856),  expanded  in  the  second  edition  (1860)  so  as 
to  include  the  entire  period  from  the  Ileformation. 
These  same  years  witnessed  a  literary  controversy 
with  Nitzsch  over  the  question  of  the  Union  and 
confessional  latitudinarianism,  a  controversy  in 
which  Kahnis  sought  to  demonstrate  the  lack  of 
doctrinal  unity  prevailing  among  the  supporters  of 
the  movement. 

In  1860  Kahnis  became  canon  of  the  cathedral 
at  Meissen  and  in  1864-^5  he  was  rector  of  Leipsic 
University.  Before  that  time,  however,  his  relig- 
ious views  had  imdergone  the  change  which  found 

expression     in    his    Lulhcrische    Dog- 

Later     matik  (3  vols.,  Leipsic,  1861-^).    The 

Views  and  character  of  the  work  was   foreshad- 

Works.     owed  in  the  second  edition  of  Der  In- 

nere  Gang,  which  revealed  an  approxi- 
mation to  rationalism,  the  abandonment  of  his  old 
belief  in  inspiration,  a  readiness  to  admit  the  ne- 
cessity of  progress  in  doctrine,  and  an  insistence 
upon  the  importance  of  recognizing  the  facts  of 
htmian  nature  and  natural  morality.  The  five  di- 
visions of  the  Dogmatik  deal  with  the  history  of 
Lutheran  dogmatics,  religion,  revelation,  creed, 
and  system.  The  problem  which  Kahnb  set  him- 
self was  the  derivation  of  the  doctrines  of  the 
Lutheran  Church  from  the  basic  principle  of  justi- 
fication by  faith,  and  the  proof  of  their  verity  by 
the  sole  authority  of  the  Scriptures.  He  found  the 
nature  of  Christianity  in  the  community  of  salva- 
tion between  man  and  God  through  Christ  in  the 
Holy  Spirit,  seeking  his  proof  in  history,  philosophy, 
and  the  common  facts  of  life.  It  was  not  the  sys- 
tem he  advanced  that  aroused  opposition,  but  the 
liberal  attitude  assumed  by  him  toward  the  higher 
critics  of  the  New  Testament,  his  readiness  to 
adopt  the  most  of  their  theories,  and  his  conse- 
quent modification  of  the  doctrine  of  inspiration, 
as  well  as  his  dissent  from  the  dogma  of  the  Church 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOO 


809 


in  respect  to  the  TVinity  and  the  Lord's  Supper. 
Hengstenbei^  was  the  most  prominent  among  those 
who  now  accused  Eahnis  of  apostasy.  In  1864  he 
published  the  second  volume  of  his  DogmaHk,  where- 
in he  traced  the  history  of  the  development  of  dqgma 
in  connection  with  the  history  of  the  Church,  so  as  to 
prove  the  Lutheran  doctrines  of  the  present  day 
the  logical  result  of  this  twofold  development.  The 
third  volume,  Das  System,  which  appeared  in  1868, 
was  disappointing,  partly  because  its  contents  re- 
peated the  matter  contained  in  the  first  two  vol- 
umes, and  partly  because  it  contradicted  the  basic 
principle  of  investigation  laid  down  in  the  first  part. 
In  1871  he  published  at  Leipsio  a  condensation  of 
the  historical  portion  of  the  work  under  the  title 
ChristerUum  und  LuUiertum,  a  treatise  written  in 
a  masterly  fashion  and  constituting,  together  with 
the  third  edition  of  Der  innere  Oang,  the  best  of  his 
literary  productions.  After  the  completion  of  his 
Dogmaiik,  Kahnis  devoted  himself  especially  to  his 
historical  studies,  wherein  his  work  may  be  charac- 
terised as  marked  less  by  the  modem  spirit  of  pain- 
ful research,  than  by  a  strong  sympathy  with  his 
subject  and  an  exceptional  charm  of  style.  To 
this  period  belong  his  Deutschs  ReformaHon  (Leip- 
sic,  1872)  and  his  Gang  der  Kvnke  in  LebenMdem 
(1887).  His  success  as  a  teacher  was  due  both  to 
the  graciousness  of  his  personality  and  his  lofty 
conception  of  his  duties.        (Johannks  Kunzb). 

Bduoobapht:  F.  J.  Winter.  Karl  Fritdrieh  Auenat  KahnU, 
Lcipflio,  1806;  C.  Sehwari,  Zur  OfchiehU  der  fMiMUm 
ThtdlogiB,  pp.  311-317.  Leipdo.  1804. 

KiORBS,  ka'!-r«i  (KAIRIS),  THBOPHILnS: 
Modem  Greek  liberal;  b.  on  the  island  of  Andros 
Oct.  19,  1784;  d.  on  the  island  of  Syra  Jan.  12, 
1853.  After  attending  the  academy  at  Cydonia, 
he  studied  for  eight  years  in  Pisa  and  in  Paris, 
coming  under  the  influence  of  Count  Frayssinous 
(q.v.)  and  imbibing  the  political  doctrines  of  the 
French  Revolution.  Returning  to  his  fatherland 
in  1810.  he  taught  in  Smyrna  and  in  Cydonia. 
After  the  succenful  termination  6L  the  War  of 
Liberation,  in  which  he  took  an  active  part,  he  was 
admitted  to  the  priesthood  and  formed  the  plan 
of  founding  an  orphan  asylum  on  Andros  espe- 
cially for  the  sons  of  those  who  had  fallen  in  the 
war.  He  collected  funds  for  the  project  by  a 
journey  to  western  Europe  and  in  1835  opaneA  an 
institution  which  soon  became  the  resort  of  all 
Greeks  who  would  leam  modem  culture  in  their 
native  land.  Then  rumors  were  spread  that  the 
fasts  were  not  observed  on  Andros,  that  the  cus- 
tomary prayers  were  not  offered  in  the  school,  and 
that  scientific  doctrines  were  taught  which  were  at 
variance  with  those  of  the  Church.  Writings  were 
disseminated,  treating  of  the  "  Fear  of  God/' 
asserting  the  purely  human  character  of  the  Scrip- 
tures and  attacking  ecclesiastical  dogmas  and  mys- 
teries. The  national  synod  felt  called  upon  to  in- 
terfere and  by  an  official  ordinance  of  July  10, 
1839,  demanded  from  KaXres  a  statement  of  Ids  be- 
lief. He  attempted  to  evade  the  issue,  claiming 
that  he  was  no  theologian  and  had  not  taught  dog- 
matic theology;  in  philosophy,  however,  he  had 
taught  the  existence  of  God  and  immortality  as 
well  as  a  final  judgment.    When  the  synod  re- 


newed its  demand  he  asked  for  a  few  months  more 
time  and  offered  to  close  his  orphan  asylum  and  go 
wherever  the  authorities  might  require.  The 
synod,  influenced  by  the  narrowly  orthodox  patri- 
arch Gregory  VI.  (q.v.),  had  him  brought  to  Athens 
and  put  him  on  trial  Oct.  21,  1833.  He  repeated 
his  former  declarations,  adding  that  he  had  taught 
nothing  contrary  to  Christianity,  refused  to  give  a 
more  detailed  exposition  of  his  faith,  and  offered 
to  leave  the  country.  By  intervention  of  the  gov- 
ernment he  was  sent  for  further  reflection,  first  to 
a  monastery  on  the  island  of  Sdathus,  then  at  his 
own  request  to  a  more  healthful  and  agreeable 
place  of  confinement  in  a  monastery  on  Thera. 
Persisting  in  his  course,  in  Oct.,  1841,  he  was 
deposed  and  excommunicated.  He  then  lived 
abroad,  most  of  the  time  in  London,  until  1844, 
when  he  was  permitted  to  return  to  Andros.  Pro- 
tected by  an  old  school  friend,  the  minister  Koletti, 
he  resumed  his  former  activity  more  boldly  than 
ever.  Koletti  died  in  1847,  however,  and  when 
KiOres  published  (Athens,  1849)  his  most  impor- 
tant book,  TvuoTudi^  the  best  exposition  of  his  re- 
ligious system,  his  opponents  made  formal  chaige 
against  him  under  a  section  of  the  criminal  law, 
declaring  that  all  adherents  of  religious  sects  not 
recognized  by  the  government  should  be  treated 
as  members  of  forbidden  societies.    On  Dec.  21, 

1852,  Kalres  was  condemned  to  two  years  and  one 
month  imprisonment  in  Sjnra;  two  of  his  friends 
were  sentenced  for  shorter  terms.  The  judgment 
was  set  aside  by  the  Areopagus  on  appeal  Jan.  26, 

1853,  but  in  the  mean  time  Kalres  had  died  in 
prison  at  Syra.  (Phiupp  fifxTSR.) 

BnuooEAPBT:  C.  A.  Brandis.  MiUmhmaen  Uher  Orimken-  \ 
laiMi,  i.  29^-dfH,  UL  86^88,  Lel|>do.  1842;  J.  Weacnr.  Beir 
M0t  Mur  KmuUni9  dea  gegenwilrHeeH  Otiaiu  und  ZuMandm 
dtr  gritehieehM  Kirehs,  pp.  11-13,  Berlin.  1880;  A.  D. 
KyriakcM-RauMh,  OMddehU  der  orimlaUaekm  Kirdkm,  ' 
pp.  101-194.  Ldpdo.  1002;  E.  Gurtiiu.  Kin  LdmubM  in 
Britfmi,  ed.  F.  Ourtiua,  pp.  16fi.  216,  Bariin.  1003;  Fur- 
ther Uter»ture  in  Qreek  ia  givwi  in  Haook-Heraog,  RE, 
zix.  660-070. 

KAISBRy  koi'ier  (KAESBR),  LBOHHARD:  Ger- 
man reformer;  b.  at  Rab  (a  market-town  near 
Sch&rding,  8  m.  s.s.w.  of  Passau)  about  1480;  exe- 
cuted at  SchArding  Aug.  16,  1527.  He  was  edu- 
cated at  Leipsic,  uid  about  1517  became  vicar  of 
Waitsenkirohen,  but  in  accordance  with  the  Re- 
gensbuig  Edict  of  1524  was  dted  before  the 
consistory  of  Passau  for  preaching  Evangelical  doc- 
trines. After  a  brief  imprisonment,  he  was  per- 
mitted to  retum  to  his  congregation,  whereupon, 
in  defiance  of  the  duke's  prohibition  forbidding  his 
subjects  to  attend  the  University  of  Wittenbeig,  he 
matriculated  there  June  7,  1525,  and  for  a  year  i 
and  a  half  enjoyed  the  teaching  of  Luther  and  his 
colleagues.  Despite  personal  danger,  he  returned 
to  Rab  in  the  early  part  of  1527  on  account  of  his 
father's  mortal  illness,  and  himself  fell  sick.  De- 
nounced by  the  parish  priest  of  Rab,  Kaiser  was 
arrested  and  imprisoned  at  Passau  on  Mar.  11, 
1527.  He  refused  to  retract  his  views,  and  his 
trial,  because  of  the  prominence  of  his  family,  at- 
tracted wide  attention.  Luther  sent  him  a  letter 
of  consolation  (LuJthere  BrieJweeKed,  ed.  E.  L.  Ed- 
ders,  vi.  54-55,  Frankfort,  1895),  but  all  petitions,      I 


298 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


including  those  of  the  count  of  Schaumberg,  the 
margrave  of  Brandenburg,  and  even  the  elector  of 
Saxony,  were  in  vain.  On  July  18,  he  was  con- 
demned to  be  unfrocked  and  executed  and  the  sen- 
tence was  carried  out  on  Aug.  16,  when  he  was 
delivered  to  the  secular  arm  and  burned  at  the 
stake.  (T.  KoLns.) 

Bibuookaprt:  F.  Roth«  Bin  wanodiadm'  MOrlyrtr  mu 
<Um  Innviertd,  Halle.  1900;  V.  A.  Winter.  Gtthichie  der 
SchidttaU  der  wanQdiachen  Lekn,  i.  237  sqq.,  Mimieh, 
1809;  A.  Sehmid.  in  Zeitaehrift  fUr  aUoemnm  GeaehiehU, 
iv  (1887).  306  sqq. 

KAISBRSWERTH.  See  DiULOONBas,  III.,  2,  a; 
Flibdneb,  Thbodob. 

KALDI,  kol'di,  6Y0RGY:  Hungarian  Jesuit;  b. 
at  Tymau  (60  m.  e.  of  Vienna),  Hungary,  1570; 
d.  at  Presburg  (35  m.  e.  of  Vienna)  Oct.  30,  1634. 
He  held  various  positions  in  his  order,  preached  in 
Vienna,  taught  theology  at  OlmQtz,  and  finally  be- 
came head  of  the  college  at  Presburg.  He  translated 
the  Bible  into  Hungarian  (Vienna,  1626),  and  pub- 
lished a  part  of  his  sermons  (2  vols.,  Presburg,  1631). 
His  translation  of  the  Bible  (see  Bible  Vbbsionb, 
B,  ix.,  2)  has  been  frequently  reprinted. 
BiBUOORArHT:   A.  and  A.  de  Baoker.  Let  ^erivaine  da  la 

oompagnie  de  Jiaua,  ■.▼.,  7  vob.,  lA6ge,  1863-^1;    KL, 

vii  60,  ii.  770-771. 

KALISCH,  ka'Ush,  (HORITZ)  MARCUS:  Bib- 
lical scholar;  b.  of  Jewish  parentage  at  Treptow, 
Pomerania,  Prussia,  May  16,  1828;  d.  at  Rowsley 
(18  m.  n.n.w.  of  Derby),  Derbyshire,  England,  Aug. 
23,  1885.  He  studied  classical  and  Semitic  lan- 
guages at  the  universities  of  Berlin  and  Halle 
(Ph.D.,  1848),  and  Talmudic  literature  at  the  rab- 
binical college  in  Berlin.  On  the  subsidence  of  the 
revolutionary  movement  of  1848,  in  which  he  had 
been  actively  interested,  he  settled  in  London. 
From  1849  till  1853  he  was  secretary  to  the  chief 
rabbi,  N.  M.  Adler,  through  whom  he  obtained  a 
tutorship  in  the  fainily  of  Baron  Lionel  Rothschild. 
Throughout  the  remainder  of  his  life  he  was  inti- 
mate with  the  Rothschilds  and  their  munificence 
enabled  him  to  devote  himself  to  scholarly  work. 
He  pbumed  a  Hidorical  and  Critical  Commentary 
on  the  Old  Testament  with  a  New  Trandation,  and 
published  Exodus  (London,  1855),  Genesis  (1858), 
and  Levitieus  (2  vols.,  1867-72),  which  at  the  time 
of  publication  were  the  best  commentaries  on  the 
respective  books  in  the  English  language  and  are 
not  yet  wholly  superseded,  having  especial  value 
as  the  work  of  a  learned  Jew.  Ill  health  prevented 
the  continuation  of  the  work  and  also  interrupted 
a  projected  series  of  Bihle  Studies  after  the  appear- 
ance of  The  Prophecies  </  Balaam  (1877)  and  The 
Book  of  Jonah  (1878).  Kalisch  also  published  a 
Hebrew  granunar  (2  parts,  1862-63;  2d  ed.  of  part 
i.,  1875);  a  book  of  poems  in  German  (Leipsic, 
1868);  Life  and  Writings  of  Oliver  Goldsmith  (Lon- 
don, 1860);  and  Path  and  Goal;  a  Discussion  on 
the  Elements  of  CivUieation  and  (he  Conditions  of 
Happiness  (1880). 
Bibuoorapht:    H.   8.   Morais,  BminajU  laraaUtea  ef  the 

Nineteenth   Century,    PP.    170-173,   Philadelphia.    1880; 

DSB,  XXX.  237;    /£.  vii.  420. 

KALKAR,  kol'kflr,  CHRISnAN  ANDREAS 
HERMANN:  Danish  theologian;  b.  in  Stock- 
hokn  Nov.  27,  1803;    d.  at  Copenhagen  Feb.  2, 


1886.  He  was  the  son  of  a  Jewish  rabbi,  spent  his 
childhood  at  Gassel,  Germany,  where  his  father 
heki  a  high  position  in  the  Jewish  community,  and 
upon  the  latter's  death  went  to  Copenhagen  (1812), 
being  later  admitted  to  the  university  of  that  city. 
From  1819  to  1823  he  devoted  himself  to  the  study 
of  law,  but  on  being  baptized  chose  a  theolpgiciJ 
career,  and  was  graduated  in  theology  in  1826.  In 
the  following  year  he  was  appointed  adjunct  at  the 
Latin  school  of  Odense,  and  in  1834  became  rector. 
During  his  stay  in  Odense  he  published  a  commen- 
tary on  the  Old  Testament  (1836-38),  a  history  of 
the  Bible  (2  vols.,  1837-1839;  German  transl.,  Kiel, 
1839),  and  lectures  on  the  apostolic  history  (1840). 
In  1842  he  received  a  royal  stipend  enabling  him  to 
travel  through  European  countries  to  collect  mate- 
rial for  a  history  of  Denmark  during  the  Reforma- 
tion, and  on  his  return  was  appointed  minister  at 
Gladsaxe,  near  Copenhagen.  In  1845  he  published 
as  the  result  of  his  travels  "  Documents  relating  to 
the  History  of  Denmark  in  the  Time  of  the  Refor- 
mation," which  was  intended  as  an  introduction  to 
a  contemplated  Corpus  reformatorum  Danicorum, 
but  he  was  prevented  from  accomplishing  his  task 
by  a  fire  which  destroyed  his  collected  material.  In 
1847  he  published,  with  other  theologians,  a  new 
Danish  version  of  the  Bible,  with  maps  and  illus- 
trations. During  the  following  years  Kalkar  de- 
voted himself  more  to  the  history  of  missions,  and 
published  numerous  works  on  Protestant  and  Ro- 
man Catholic  missions  in  general  as  well  as  mis- 
sions among  Jews  and  Mohammedans.  As  a  his- 
torian in  this  field,  however,  he  displayed  a  lack  of 
critical  and  thorough  investigation,  which  detracts 
from  the  value  of  his  works.  In  1868  he  retired 
from  active  life,  and  spent  the  remainder  of  his  days 
in  Copenhagen,  enga^sd  in  literary  pursuits. 

(F.  NlBLSEMtO 

KALTEISENy  kolt-ai'aen,  HSINRICH:  Domin- 
ican; b.  at  Ehrenbreitstein  (2  m.  e.  of  Coblens), 
Rhenish  Prussia,  c.  1390;  d.  at  Coblenz  Oct.  3, 
1465.  He  early  entered  the  Dominican  convent  at 
Coblens,  and  studied  subsequently  at  Vienna  and 
at  Cologne,  where  he  became  professor  of  theology 
and  also  a  preacher  of  note.  Later  he  was  sta- 
tioned at  Mainz  as  inquisitor-general  for  Grermany. 
He  attended  the  Council  of  Basel,  and,  in  1433, 
made  himself  famous  by  a  three  days'  speech 
against  the  demand  of  the  Hussites  for  the  free 
preaching  of  the  word  of  God  (printed  by  Canisius, 
in  Thesaurus  monumentorum  ecdesiasticorum  et  his- 
toricorum,  ed.  J.  Basnage,  iv.  628-708,  Antwerp, 
1725).  During  his  residence  at  Basel  he  seems  to 
have  been  prior  of  the  Dominican  convent  there. 
In  1443  he  was  made  moffister  sacri  palatii  by 
Eugenius  IV.,  and  in  1452  Nicholas  V.  made  him 
titidar  archbishop  of  Trondhjem.  In  1463  he  re- 
tired to  the  cloister  of  his  order  at  Coblens.  Fried- 
rich  SteHl  edited  a  few  of  Ealteisen's  writings  in 
Ephemerides  dominicanthsacra  (DilUngen,  1692), 
but  most  of  his  works  remained  in  manuscript. 
Bibuoobaprt:   J.  Quetif  and  J.  Eoihard,  Scriptorea  ordinia 

praedieatorvm,  I  828.  FUris,  1719;  KL,  vii  68. 

KAMy  kOm,  JOSEPH:  Dutch  missionary  to  the 
Moluccas  or  Spice  Islands;  b.  at  Bois-le-Duc  (28 
m.  s.s.e.  of  Utrecht)  1770;  d.  on  the  island  of  Ain- 


Caimmin 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


894 


boyna,  Malay  Archipelago,  1833.  He  early  de- 
sired to  be  a  missioDary,  but  yielded  to  his  father's 
wishes  and  became  a  business  man.  At  the  age  of 
forty  he  resigned  his  position  as  court  messenger 
at  Amsterdam,  and  entered  the  missionary  sem- 
inary at  Berkei,  where  his  elder  brother  was  edu- 
cating candidates  for  the  Netherlands  Missionary 
Society.  The  Indian  colonies  being  at  that  time 
in  the  hands  of  the  English,  he  entered  the  service 
of  the  London  Missionary  Society,  in  whose  sem- 
inary at  Gosport  he  spent  a  year.  In  1813  he  was 
sent  to  the  Moluccas.  The  heathen  population 
there  had  been  forcibly  Romanized  by  the  Portu- 
guese in  the  sixteenth  century,  and  in  like  manner 
transferred  to  the  Reformed  CSiurch  by  the  Dutch 
at  the  beginning  of  the  seventeenth  century. 
When  Kam  appeared  on  the  scene,  everything  was  in 
a  sad  state  of  decline.  At  rare  intervals  a  preacher 
would  make  a  hasty  visit  to  the  islands  to  baptize 
children  by  throngs,  and  to  solemnize  marriages. 
Kam  took  up  his  abode  on  Ambo3ma,  where  in 
1817  he  was  appointed  government  preacher.  He 
now  developed  a  wonderful  activity  in  reviving 
the  defunct  Christian  congregations.  The  twenty 
thousand  or  more  baptized  members  were  organ- 
ized under  his  charge,  into  eighty  congregations, 
the  remotest  of  them  being  300  miles  away.  For 
his  journeys  he  had  a  vessel  built,  which  he  him- 
self commanded  as  captain.  Thanks  to  his  exer- 
tions seventeen  missionaries  were  sent  out  during 
the  years  1819-32,  including  Schwarz  and  Riedel, 
who  became  distinguished  for  their  success  in 
Celebes.  Honored  as  "  apostle  of  the  Moluccas," 
Kam  labored  on  indefatigably  till  his  end. 

R.  Grxtndemann. 

Biblioorapht:  L.  J.  van  Rhijn,  Reit  door  den  indi§ehen 
Archipel,  pp.  443  aqq..  Rotterdam.  1851;  £.  F.  Kruijf. 
Oe»diiedeni»  van  het  Nederlanithe  ZendeUnggenooUehap, 
Groningen,  1894;  P.  Wurm,  in  AUgemnns  MU&unM- 
ZeiUehrift,  1897.  pp.  305  aqq. 

KAMMIN,  kom'min,  BISHOPRIC  OF:  A  bish- 
opric named  from  the  town  of  Kammin  (Cammin) 
in  Pomerania,  near  the  Baltic  (38  m.  n.n.e.  of  Stet- 
tin). Among  the  companions  of  Otto  of  Bamberg 
(q.v.)  in  his  missionary  work  in  Pomerania  was  a 
priest  named  Adalbert,  who,  when  Otto's  plan  for 
the  erection  of  a  bishopric  at  Julin,  the  present 
Wollin,  was  carried  out,  became  its  first  bishop. 
At  Adalbert's  request,  Innocent  II.  took  it  in  1140 
under  papal  protection,  and  assigned  to  its  juris- 
diction, besides  the  town  of  Wollin,  ten  other  au- 
tra.  Nothing  was  said  about  its  inclusion  in  any 
ecclesiastical  province,  though  in  1160  the  imperial 
pope,  Victor  IV.,  placed  it  under  Magdeburg.  A 
little  later  Wollin  was  destroyed  in  the  war  between 
the  Danes  and  Saxons,  and  the  see  was  conse- 
quently transferred  to  Kammin  in  1175,  appar- 
ently once  more  as  an  exempt  bishopric.  This 
status  it  managed  to  retain,  except  between  1216 
and  1244,  when  it  was  again  subject  to  Magdeburg. 
Three  attempts  were  made  in  the  fourteenth  cen- 
tury to  assert  over  it  the  metropolitan  rights  of 
Gnesen,  but  the  Curia  decided  against  them  in 
1371.  The  Reformation  found  the  diocese  in  a 
state  which  facilitated  its  introduction.  Its  spread 
began  from  the  Premonstratensian  monastery  of 


Belbuck,  of  which  Bugenhagen  was  an  inmate. 
The  Dukes  Bogislas  X.  and  George  were  hostile  to  it; 
Bamim,  however,  forwarded  it,  and  after  the  death 
of  the  last  Roman  Catholic  Bishop  Erasmus  von 
Manteufel  (1544)  a  Protestant  was  appointed  in  his 
place,  and  the  estates  of  the  bishopric  and  the 
monasteries  secularized. 
BxBUOOBArar:    K.  F.  W.  HMMlbach.  J.  G.  L.  Koaecarten 

and  F.  von  Medbm,  Codex  diplonuUieue  Pomeraniae,  vol. 

L.  Greifflwald.  1843;    L.  Gieaebrecht.  Wendieehe  Geeckich- 

ten,  3  vols..  Berlin,  1843;   Pommeradtea  Urkundenbuch,  ed. 

R.  Klempin  and  R.  PrOniera.  3  vols..  Stettin.  1868-01. 

KAMPHAUSBll,  kOmp-hau'zen,  ADOLF  HER- 
MANN HEINRICH:  German  Protestant;  b.  at 
Solingen  (18  m.  n.n.e.  of  Cologne)  Sept.  10,  1829; 
d.  at  Bonn  Aug.  13,  1909.  He  studied  at  the 
University  of  Bonn  (Ph.D.,  1855),  where  he  was 
privat-dooent  for  a  few  months  before  he  went  to 
Heidelberg  as  private  secretary  of  C.  K.  J.  Bunsen. 
Still  in  the  service  of  Bunsen,  he  was  privat^ooent 
at  the  University  of  Heidelberg  from  1856  to  1859, 
when  he  returned  with  his  employer  to  Bonn;  there 
he  was  associate  professor  of  Old-Testament  exege- 
sis 1863-68,  full  professor  1868-1901.  From  1871 
to  1890  he  was  a  member  of  the  committee  for  the  re- 
vision of  Luther's  translation  of  the  Old  Testament. 
He  regarded  Christ  as  the  bodily  son  of  Joseph  and 
Mary,  and  held  that  the  Resurrection  was  an  ob- 
jective or  real  vision.  He  contributed  the  transla- 
tion of  the  Books  of  Kings,  Proverbs,  and  II  Mac- 
cabees to  E.  F.  Kautzsch's  HeUige  Schrift  des  Allen 
TestamenU  (Freiburg,  1894),  and  wrote  inde- 
pendently among  other  works  Die  Hagiographen 
des  Alien  Bundes  nach  den  vberlie/erten  Grundtexien 
abersetzt  und  mit  erkl&renden  Anmerkungen  versehen 
(Leipsic,  1868);  Die  Chronoiogie  der  hd^raiscken 
Kdnige  (Bonn,  1883);  Das  Buck  Daniel  und  die 
nenere  Geschichtsforschung  (Leipsic,  1892);  Book  of 
Daniel  in  The  Polychrome  Bible  (New  York,  1896); 
and  Das  VerhOUnis  des  Menschenop/ers  zur  isradi- 
tischen  Religion  (Bonn,  1896). 

KANT,  kflnt,  DfMANUEL:  German  philoso- 
pher; b.  at  Konigsberg,  Prussia,  Apr.  22,  1724;  d. 
there  Feb.  12,  1804.  His  father,  of  Scotch  descent, 
was  a  saddler  in  humble  circumstances,  his  mother 
a  woman  of  great  natural  force  and  fervent  piety. 
His  entire  life  with  exception  of  a  few 
Life  and  years  as  tutor  in  a  country  family  was 
Works,  spent  in  his  birthplace.  After  grad- 
uating from  the  University  of  K5nigs- 
berg  and  teaching  for  several  years,  in  1755  he  be- 
came privat^ooent,  in  1770  full  professor  at  the 
university.  Here  his  chief  subjects  were  logic, 
metaph3rsics,  physical  geography,  anthropology, 
moral  philosophy,  and  mathematics;  other  sub- 
jects were  natural  law,  encyclopedia  of  philosophy, 
natural  theology,  pedagogics,  theoretical  physics, 
mechanics,  and  mineralogy.  His  philosophical 
writings  fall  into  two  groups — ^the  dogmatic  or 
pre-critical,  influenced  by  Leibnitz  and  Christian 
Wolff,  until  1770;  the  critical,  due  in  part  to 
Hume's  influence  (1770-1804),  wherein  his  prin- 
cipal works  appeared,  combating  both  the  dog- 
matism of  Leibnitz  and  Wolff  and  the  empiricism 
of  Hume.  The  writings  of  the  earlier  period  may 
be  passed  over  here,  for  it  is  upon  the  great  sys- 


896 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Kammin 
Kftnt 


tematic  works  of  the  second  period  that  Kant's 
fame  rests.  His  new  point  of  view  is  first  seen  in 
the  Latin  dissertation  De  mundi  aennbHis  atgue 
itUelUgibilia  forma  el  principiis  (Kdnigsbei^,  1770); 
but  more  important  for  the  critical  philosophy 
were  the  epoch-making  Kritik  der  reinen  Vemunfi 
(Riga,  1783;  revised  ed.,  1787;  best  Eng.  transl. 
by  F.  Max  MuUer,  Critique  of  Pure  Reason,  2  vols., 
London,  1881,  1  vol.,  1897)  and  the  briefer  and 
more  popular  Prolegomena  zu  einer  jeden  kUnJtigen 
Metaphytxk  die  ale  Wiseenschaft  vnrd  auftreten 
konnen  (Riga,  1785;  Eng.  transl.,  Prolegomena  to 
Every  Fidwre  Metaphysic  which  can  appear  as  a  Sci- 
ence, London,  1819).  These  works  are  concerned 
with  epistemology  and  metaphysics.  Of  fundamen- 
tal importance  for  Kant's  ethics  and  religious  phi- 
losophy are:  Grundlegung  tur  Metaphysik  der  SiUen 
(Riga,  1785);  KriHk  der  praktischen  Vemunfi  (1788) ; 
Die  Religion  innerhalb  der  Oreruen  der  blossen  Ver- 
nur^i  (Kdnigsberg,  1793;  Eng.  transl..  Theory  of 
Religion,  Edinburgh,  1838);  and  Die  Metaphys^ 
der  SiOen  (2  parU,  Kdnigsberg,  1797;  Eng.  transl.. 
Metaphysics  of  Ethics,  3d  ed.,  with  introduction  by 
H.  Calderwood,  Edinburgh,  1871).  Other  works 
belonging  to  this  period  are:  Metaphysische  An- 
fangsgrunde  der  Natumvissenschaft  (Riga,  1786);  and 
Kritik  der  Urtheilskraft  (Berlin  and  Libau,  1790; 
Eng.  transl.,  Kritik  of  Judgment,  London,  1892). 
Kant's  works  were  edited  by  G.  Hartenstein  (10 
vols.,  Leipsic,  1838-39;  another  ed.,  in  chronologi- 
cal order,  8  vols.,  1867-69),  by  K.  Rosenkranz  and 
F.  W.  Schubert  (12  vols.,  1838-40),  and  by  J.  H. 
von  Kirchmann  (8  vols,  and  supplement,  Berlin, 
1868-73).  Other  translations  from  Kant  are:  Pro" 
legomena  and  Metaphysical  Foundations  of  Natural 
Science,  Translated  .  .  .  with  a  Biography  and  Inr 
troduction,  by  E.  B.  Bax  (London,  1883);  Critique 
of  Practical  Reason,  and  OOier  Works  onthe  Theory  of 
Ethics,  Translated  by  T.  K.  Abbott  (4th  ed.,  1889); 
and  Fundamental  Principles  of  the  Metaphysics  of 
Ethics  .  .  .  ,  translated  by  T.  K.  Abbott  (1895). 

Kant  characterized  his  metaphysical  standpoint 
as  transcendental  idealism  (see  Idealism).  In  his 
epistemology  he  taught  that  there  are  two  sources 
of  knowledge:  sensation — given  through  the  senses, 
and  thought — intuitions  of  space  and  time  and 
categories  of  the  understanding.  This 
Philoaophy  knowledge  is  restricted  to  phenomena. 
in  Outline.  By  pure  reason  a  priori  we  are,  how- 
ever, compelled  to  affirm  the  reality  of 
a  noumenal  world,  not  as  this  is  in  itself,  but  as  it 
appears  to  us,  and  then  only  as  to  its  form.  A 
basis  is  here  laid  for  the  later  divorce  of  theoretical 
knowledge  and  religious  faith,  as  in  Mansel's  Limits 
of  Rdigiaus  Thought  (London,  1858),  and  in  the 
theology  of  Albrecht  Ritschl  (q.v.).  Religion  is  the 
recognition  of  one's  duty  as  divine  commands. 
Commands  are  proved  to  be  divine  through  our 
sense  of  them  as  duties  (natural  religion);  whereas 
those  which  we  know  as  divine  commands  become 
our  duty  (revealed  religion).  Religion  is  essen- 
tially belief  in  God  as  a  good  will  realizing  itself 
in  nature  and  history,  evinced  by  neither  proph- 
ecy nor  miracle,  but  by  the  same  good  will  in  our- 
selves— its  object  to  develop  and  confirm  the  will 
of  good  in  us.    The  sovereign  test  of  the  Bible  is 


our  own  morality.  Sin,  which  presupposes  free 
causality,  is  an  extra-temporal,  voluntary  adop- 
tion by  the  reason  of  an  evil  motive,  but  incapable 
of  further  explication.  Regeneration  takes  place 
through  one's  becoming  aware  of  the  ideal  of  moral 
perfection,  and  forgiveness  through  the  ethical  re- 
production of  the  same  ideal  as  that  which  the 
Church  attributes  to  Christ.  The  Church  is  the  in- 
visible body  of  the  redeemed.  Kant  subjected  the 
traditional  theistic  arguments  to  a  searching  scru- 
tiny, with  the  result  that  these  lost  most  of  their 
cogency.  His  criticism  reached  the  foUowing  con- 
clusions: (1)  concerning  the  ontological  argimient — 
the  idea  does  not  prove  the  objective  existence  of 
its  content;  (2)  as  to  the  cosmological  argument, 
an  infinite  series  of  finite  causes  is  thinkable,  the 
cause  which  this  argument  postulates  is  not  a  nec- 
essary cause,  and  even  if  the  necessary  cause  were 
thus  reached,  this  would  not  be  the  God  of  theol- 
ogy; (3)  the  teleological  proof — mentioned  with 
respect— rests  on  the  unproved  assertion  of  uni- 
versal adaptation  and  teleology,  and  leads  to  an 
artificer  not  to  a  Creator;  (4)  the  moral  proof, 
drawn  from  conscience  and  feeling  of  responsibil- 
ity, the  universality  and  teleology  of  the  moral 
order,  is  invalid  in  the  light  of  pure  reason,  al- 
though it  holds  good  for  the  practical  reason. 
Kant's  denial  of  the  worth  of  the  theistic  aigu- 
ments,  to  which  must  be  added  freedom  and  im- 
mortality, means  not  that  these  are  finally  to  be 
rejected,  but,  incapable  of  proof  by  reasoning,  are 
removed  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  practical  reason. 
In  the  moral  consciousness  are  given  those  ideas 
of  God,  freedom,  and  inmiortaUty.  The  reason 
had  not  denied  freedom,  but  conceived  it  as  an 
intelligible,  not  as  an  empirical,  reality;  and  since 
freedom  was  the  absolute  condition  of  moral  re- 
sponsibility, the  practical  reason  postulated  im- 
mortality as  the  sphere  within  which  this  moral 
problem  was  to  be  solved,  and  God  as  the  guaran- 
tor both  of  the  moral  order  and  the  ultimate  real- 
ization of  the  good  will.  The  only  good  without 
qualification  is  a  good  will.  The  categorical  im- 
perative as  addressed  to  the  will  compels  a  teleo- 
logical interpretation  of  reality  and  a  recognition 
of  the  autonomy  of  the  practical  reason.  In  the 
summum  honum  virtue  and  happiness  must  be 
thought  of  as  combined,  but  virtue  is  supreme  and 
is  alone  worthy  of  happiness.  Owing  to  the  su- 
premacy of  the  practical  reason,  man  is  to  act  as 
if  the  postulates  of  the  moral  consciousness  were 
proved.  Kant's  ethical  teaching  is  marked  by 
'*  vigor  and  rigor."  Duty  stands  in  no  relation  to 
feeling.  Duty  is  for  duty's  sake  alone.  The  moral 
law  admits  of  no  exceptions.  His  categorical  im- 
perative enjoins,  "  Act  only  on  that  maxim  which 
thou  canst  at  the  same  time  will  to  become  a  uni- 
versal law." 

Kant's  philosophy  as  a  whole  may  now  be  char- 
acterized:   (1)  We  know  phenomena,  not  things 
in  themselves.    (2)  Objects  are  scientifically  known, 
i.e.,  by  the  reason,  a  priori,  since  they 
Summary,  are    created    by   the    understanding. 
(3)  Our  knowledge  is  objectively  valid 
for  phenomena  or  for  possible  experience,  but  not 
outside    of    these.    (4)  Things-in-themselves    are 


Xant 
KandtM 


THE  NBW  SCHAFF-HERZOQ 


296 


intelligible  ideal  realities,  beloogiiig  to  the  unity 
of  the  All-Real  Being,  teledogically  related  to  the 
highest  good.  (5)  Philosophy  euhninates  not  in 
the  theoretical  but  in  the  practical  reason,  giving 
rise  to  a  rational  working  faith  (of.  F.  Paulsen,  In^ 
manud  Kani,  Eng.  transl.,  pp.  115-116,  New  York, 
1902.  The  philosophy  of  Kant  has  been  profoundly 
influential  in  religious  thought.  First,  in  the  fur- 
ther working  out  of  the  dualism  involved  in  his 
epistemolpgy  (neo-Kantian  theolpgy);  secondly, 
in  the  transcendence  of  that  dualism  in  the  asser- 
tion of  the  ultimate  unity  of  thought  and  being 
(idealistic  theolpgy);  thirdly,  in  the  supremacy  of 
the  practical  reason  as  related  on  the  one  hand  to 
theological  constructicm  and  on  the  other  to  per- 
sonalism  as  the  solution  of  the  conflict  between 
naturalism  and  religion  (cf.  R.  Otto,  Naturalism 
and  Rdigion  (London,  1906).    Bee  Panthxism,  §  5. 

C.  A.  BXCKWITH. 
Bibuoomapht:  The  liteimtan  upon  Kani  is  enormou»— 
eC  Um  Ibi  of  work*  in  J.  M.  Biddwin.  DieHonary  <^  Phi- 
UMopktf  and  Ptyeholoffv,  iu.  1,  pp.  286-^20,  New  York, 
1905.  On  the  life  the  beet  rinde  book  ie  F.  Paulsen.  Im- 
WMmuci  Kant,  atin  Ldmn  und  Mint  Ldirw^  8tutts»rt,  1808, 
Enc  trmnal.,  Immanud  Kant,  hU  Hf»  and  Dodn'fM,  New 
York,  1002;  L.  E.  Borowaki,  DanteUuno  ds9  Ubw  und 
CharakUt  KanU,  KOnicsbers.  1804  (revieed  by  Kut  him- 
■elf);  H.  Bohmidt,  ImmnanuU  Kant%  Ltbmt,  Halle.  1868;  K. 
Fieeher,  Kanta  L§ben  und  dis  Orundlaifen  MifMr  Lahre, 
Mannheim,  1860;  J.  H.  W.  Stuckenberc  Lift  qf  Immanua 
Kant,  London.  1882;  ,M.  Kronenbeii,  Kant,  9ein  LtUn 
und  aeint  Lthn,  Munidi,  1801. 

On  his  philosophy  consult:  J.  Bami,  PAOMopAie  da 
Kant,  Paris,  1861;  M.  B.  W.  Bolton,  Kant  and  Hamiiion, 
London,  1866;  K.  Fiseher,  Commentary  on  Kanffa  *'  Cri- 
tidtpftkB  Pm  Roaaon,**  ib.  1866;  C.  DOwell.  Kanta  Ro- 
hffionapkUoaopkia,  FOrstenwalde.  1872;  J.  Kaftan,  Dia 
ralioionaphiloaopkiacka  Anaehauung  Kanta,  Basel,  1874; 
F.  Pauben,  Varaueh  ainar  SntwiekahtnoagaadiidUa  dar 
kanOachan  Srkmnimaatkaone,  Leipsio,  1876;  E.  Caiid, 
Tka  PhUoaophy  af  Kant  Bxplainad  and  Examiinad,  Lon- 
don, 1877;  idem,  Tha  CriHeal  PhUoaophy  cf  Enunanu^ 
Kant,  2  toIs..  QlasBOW,  1880;  C.  Ritter,  Kant  und  Huma, 
Halle,  1878;  J.  G.  Sohurman.  Kantian  Sthiea  and  tka 
Bikiea  of  Svoluiion,  London,  1881;  J.  H.  StirUng.  Taxt- 
book  to  Kant,  ib.  1881;  Q.  8.  Morris,  Kanta  Critiqua  of 
Pura  Raaaon,  Chioaco,  1882;  O.  Thiele.  Dia  Philoaophia 
Immanud  Kanta,  2  vols..  Halle,  1882-87;  W.  Wallaoe. 
Kant,  Oxford,  1882;  J.  MoCosh.  A  Critieiam  qf  tha  Cril- 
ieal  PhUoaophy,  New  York,  1884;  J.  P.  Mahaffy,  Kanta 
Critieal  PhUoaophy  for  BnoHah  Raadara,  2  toIs..  London. 
1880;  J.  Royoe,  Tha  SpirU  ttf  Modam  PhUoaophy,  Bos- 
ton, 1802;  T.  H.  Graen,  Worka,  ed.  R.  L.  Nettlediip,  U. 
2-165,  London,  1803;  C.  W.  Hodge,  Kantian  Bpiatemol- 
ogy  and  Tkaiam,  Philadelphia,  1804;  V.  Basoh,  Baaai  .  .  . 
awr  VaathtHqua  da  Kant,  Paris.  1806;  A.  Cresaon,  La  Mo- 
rata  da  Kant,  ib.  1807;  W.  M.  Washington,  Tha  Formal 
and  Maiarial  BUmanta  cf  Kanta  Bihiea,  New  York,  1808; 
T.  Ruyasen,  Kant,  Paris,  1000;  H.  8.  Chamberlain,  /m- 
manual  Kant,  dia  ParaiynlidUeaU  ala  EinfUhruno  in  daa 
Work,  Munich,  1006;  G.  Gerland,  ImmanvtO,  Kant,  aaina 
gaographiaehan  und  anihropologiadien  AHmten,  Berlin,  1006; 
J.  Guttmann,  Kanta  Cfottaabagriff  in  aainer  poatHvan  Bnt- 
wtdUiifv,  ib..  1006;  M.  Apel,  Komnuntar  au  Kanta  "Pro- 
taoomona,**  ib..  1008;  O.  Ewald,  KanU  krititchor  Idaaiiamua 
<da  Orundtaga  von  Brkanntwiathaorie  undBthik,  ib.,  1008;  J. 
WatM»,  Tha  PhUoaophy  cf  Kant  Bxplainad,  Glasgow.  1008. 

KANTZ,  KASPAR:  Refonner  of  NOrdlingen; 
b.  at  NOrdlingen  (38  m.  n.n.w.  of  Augsburg)  in  the 
last  quarter  of  the  fifteenth  century;  d.  there  Dec. 
6,  1M4.  Some  time  before  1501  he  appears  to 
have  entered  the  monastery  of  the  Carmelites  in 
NOrdlingen  and  in  1501  went  to  the  University  of 
Leipsic.  In  1602  he  became  bachelor,  1505  master, 
1511  lnblu!U8,  and  1515  senierUiaHus,  He  returned 
to  his  native  city  and  became  prior  of  the  monas- 


tery, but  was  deposed  in  1518,  although  he  was 
allowed  to  remain  in  the  monastery.  Whatever 
may  have  been  the  reason  for  his  deposition,  it  is 
certain  that  at  a  very  early  time  he  advocated  the 
ideas  of  the  Reformation.  After  the  church  of  the 
Carmelites  had  opened  its  doors  to  the  Gospel, 
there  followed  the  church  of  St.  Geoige,  where  Bil- 
lican  preached  from  Nov.,  1522.  Although  the 
city  council  considered  public  sentiment,  it  was 
averse  to  all  decisive  measures,  and  when  Kanta 
openly  announced  from  the  pulpit  that  he  had 
taken  a  wife,  he  was  expelled  from  the  city  on  June 
26,  1523.  From  one  of  his  sermons,  printed  in 
1524,  he  appears  to  have  been  recalled.  In  1530 
he  applied  in  vain  for  the  position  of  "  Latin  sdiool- 
master"  in  NOrdlingen.  In  the  list  of  preachers 
he  appears  as  diacanu9  first  in  1535,  but  before  that 
time  he  held  the  position  of  German  schoolmaster. 
On  June  21,  1535,  he  was  placed  as  preacher  at  the 
head  of  the  churches  in  NOrdlingen  in  place  of  the 
wavering  Billican.  The  first  church  order  of  NOrd- 
lingen of  1538  was  his  work.  He  also  promoted 
catechetical  instruction,  which  had  been  neglected 
by  Billican,  and  succeeded  in  bettering  the  moral 
conditions. 

Kants  was  the  real  reformer  of  NOrdlingen.  He 
enriched  Evangelical  devotional  literature  by  wri- 
tings which  bear  comparison  with  those  <^  the 
more  famous  men  of  the  sixteenth  century.  He 
deserves  an  honorary  place  in  the  histoiy  of  the 
Evangelical  church  service  because  he  drew  up  and 
put  in  practise  a  German  Evangelical  mass  four 
years  before  Luther's  German  mass,  imder  the  title. 
Van  der  EuangeUachen  Mes8Z.  MU  CkrMicken 
OtbeUen  vor  vnd  nadi  der  empfahung  dee  SaeramenU 
(1522).  It  was  the  first  attempt  to  arrange  a  Ger- 
man celebration  of  the  Lord's  Supper  according  to 
Evangelical  principles  in  close  relation  to  the  Ro- 
man formulary.  Kants  also  wrote  an  excellent 
book  for  the  sick,  Wie  man  den  krancken  vnnd  iSter- 
benden  menechen  ermanen,  trdeten,  vnnd  OoU  be- 
/Men  eoU,  daa  er  von  diaer  Welt,  seligklieh  abecfunde 
(Augsburg,  1539;  Strasburg,  1556;  Nuremberg, 
1568,  and  1580;  Tabingen,  1577),  which  was  read 
also  by  the  Roman  Catholics.  He  published  also 
Die  Hietofia  dee  leydee  Jeeu  Ckrieti  nach  den  vier 
EuOgdieten,  Vnd  aueh  von  der  Jttden  Oeierlam; 
mii  troeUicher  ausslegung  (Augsburg,  1538;  en- 
larged 1539;  Nuremberg,  1555),  a  book  distm- 
guished  by  its  religious  depth,  and  left  a  cate- 
chism (NOrdlingen,  1542),  besides  composing  some 
hymns.  (C.  Gbtsr.) 

Biblzoobapht:  C.  Geyer.  Kaopar  Kanta,  In  BaitHoa  tur 
hayariaehan  Kird»moaadiidtta,  ed.  T.  Kolde.  v.  101-127. 
Erlansen.  1808;  idem.  Die  N&rdUngar  eoanoaUaekan  Kir- 
dtenordnungen  daa  18.  Jahrhundarta,  pp.  1-23,  Moniefa, 
1806;  J.  D.  Haakh.  in  V.  L.  von  8e<^ndorr.  HiaL  Lu- 
^eraniami,  iil  183  eqq..  Leipeie.  1002;  A.  Steiefaele.  Daa 
Biatum  Auaaburg,  ill  064-«5fi.  1024  aqq..  Augsbuzi.  1872; 
H.  Beek.  Die  Erhauunyalitteratur  der  avangaUadien  Kircha 
Dautaehlanda,  i.  168  aqq..  Eriangen.  1883;  idem.  Dia 
raligidaa  Volkalitteraiur  der  evanoaliat^en  Kirehe  Dautaeh- 
landa,  p.  40.  Gotha.  1801;  J.  Smend,  Dia  eaangeliatken 
deutachen  Maaaen,  paanm.  QOttingen,  1806. 

KAPFF,  SIXT  KARL:  German  Protestant;  b. 
at  GQglingen  (20  m.  n.w.  of  Stuttgart),  WOrttem- 
berg,  Oct.  22,  1805;  d.  in  Stuttgart  Sept.  1,  1879. 
From  early  childhood  he  was  rdigiously  disposed, 


M7 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Kant 
KandtM 


and  at  the  Univeraity  of  TQbiDgen  he  engaged  in 
daily  prayer  with  his  intimate  friend,  Wilhelm 
Hofad^r.  After  filling  the  poaitions  of  vicar  at 
Tuttlingen,  teacher  in  the  Fellenbeig  school  at 
Hofwyl,  Switzerland,  and  repetent  in  TQbingen,  he 
became,  in  1833,  paator  of  the  colony  of  Pietists  at 
Komthal,  near  Stuttgart.  In  1843  he  was  made 
Dekan  at  Mtlnsingen,  and  in  1847  at  Herrenberg. 
He  was  transferred  to  Reutlingen  in  1850,  and  to 
Stuttgart  in  1852,  where,  for  the  remainder  of  his 
life  he  was  PrdUU  and  the  greatly  beloved  and  in- 
fluential pastor  of  the  StiftMrche, 

Kapff  combined  the  genial  manners,  trustfulness, 
and  sympathetic  warmth  of  the  Swabian  character. 
He  was  a  friend  to  ministers  aU  over  Wttrttemberg, 
and  attracted  aU  classes  who  had  an  interest  in  re- 
ligion. As  a  preacher,  he  did  not  represent  any 
sharply  defined  theological  or  ecclesiastical  tend- 
ency. His  sermons  had  much  of  the  supernatural- 
ism  of  the  old  TObingen  school,  but  more  warmth 
and  sympathy  than  belonged  to  it.  He  had  an  eye 
to  the  domestic  and  social  wants  of  his  people,  and 
drew  laigely  upon  his  every-day  intercourse  with 
them  for  his  subjects.  He  also  took  a  warm  inter- 
est in  the  ecclesiastical  affairs  of  Wttrttemberg,  and 
in  foreign  missions  as  advanced  by  the  missionary 
institution  in  Basel.  For  more  than  a  quarter  of  a 
centiuy,  he  was  the  center  of  the  pious  circles  of  the 
land. 

The  best  known  of  his  publications  are :  OebetbiuJi 
(Stuttgart,  1835;  21st  ed.,  1905);  Cimmunumbuch 
(1840;  24th  ed.,  1901);  Das  kleine  Communionbuch 
(1841;  36th  ed.,  1905);  Wamung  einea  Jugend- 
freundes  (1841;  20th  ed.,  1902);  Achizig  Predig- 
ten  yber  die  alien  Epietdn  (1851;  6th  ed.,  1879); 
83  Predigtm  Ober  die  alien  Evangdien  (1862;  6th 
ed.,  1876);  and  Camalreden  (ed.  C.  Kapff,  1880). 
(Kabl  von  BuBxt.) 
Bxbuooeapht:   C.  Kapff,  LtbenAUd  von  8ixt  Karl  Kapff, 

2  vote..  Stuttgart,  1881  (by  his  aon). 

KAPPEL,    PBACB   OF.    See    Zwingu,    Huld- 

REICH. 

KARAITES,  k6'ra-aits. 

The  Sect  in  BabyloiiiA  (f  1).   Egypt  and  the  Crimea  (f  4). 
In  Palertine  (f  2).  Constantinople  (f  6). 

Religious  Philoaophy  (|  8).     Poland  (|  6). 
Doetrine  and  Law  (|  7). 

The  name  of  the  Karaites  (Hebr.  Xiara'tm,  sing. 
^ara),  a  very  important  Jewish  sect,  may  be  an 
intensive  noun  from  the  verb  kara,  "  to  read,"  sig- 
nifying "  readers,"  i.e.,  readers  of  the  Bible  par 
exceUence.  It  is  better,  however,  to  take  ^ara  as 
a  denominative  form  from  mCkra  (Aram,  hera)^ 
**  Scripture  "  and  to  interpret  it  as  an  "  adherent 
of  the  Scriptures,"  i.e.,  one  who  follows  strictly  the 
text  of  the  Bible  and  rejects  the  rabbinical  tradi- 
tion of  the  Talmud.  This  explanation  finds  sup- 
port in  the  fact  that  the  Karaites  are  also  called 
Bene  Mikra,  **  sons  (adherents)  of  the  Scripture," 
as  opposed  to  the  Bene  mishnah,  or  "sons  of  the 
mishnah  "  or  of  tradition. 

The  founder  of  the  Karaite  sect  was  Anan  ben 
David,  who,  according  to  tradition,  was  disap- 
pointed in  his  expectations  of  becoming  either  gaon 
(head  of  one  of  the  Babylonian  academies)  or  reek 


gahUa  (head  of  the  Babylonian  diaspora),  and  there- 
fore renounced  the  Talmud,  founding  at  Bagdad 
in  761-762  a  new  conmiunity  which 
z.  The  rejected  mishnaio  and  talmudic  tra- 
Sect  in  dition.  Like  all  prominent  Karaites, 
Babjionia.  he  wrote  a  Se/er  ha-Miewol  ("  Book 
of  Precepts")  and  two  other  works, 
of  which  only  a  few  fragments  are  extant;  the 
statement  that  he  wrote  a  commentary  on  the 
Pentateuch  is  without  proof.  Anan's  pupil  Mocha 
and  his  son  Moses  (780--8(X))  introduced  a  new 
system  of  vowels  and  accents  which  displaced  the 
former  system  and  promoted  the  Masorah,  while 
other  Karaites  applied  the  so-called  hermeneutical 
rules  (middot),  borrowed  from  Mohammedan  the- 
ology, to  the  interpretation  of  the  law.  At  a  veiy 
early  period  the  Karaites  followed  the  philosoph- 
ical tendency  of  Mohanmiedanism,  and  about  8(X) 
Judah  Yudghan  attacked  the  rabbinical  doctrine 
of  the  anthropomorphism  of  God.  His  system  was 
elaborated  by  Benjamin  ben  Moses  Nahawendi, 
who  flourished  about  830.  According  to  him,  God 
is  too  exalted  to  reveal  himself  to  man,  and  revelar 
tion  was  accordingly  made  by  the  medium  of  an 
angel,  who  not  only  created  the  world  but  also  per- 
formed all  the  acts  of  God  recorded  in  the  Torah. 
Benjamin's  writings,  with  the  exception  of  his 
Se/er  dintm  ("  Book  of  Laws  '0  ^^  known  only 
from  citations.  With  Benjamin  and  a  few  others 
the  Arabic  period  of  Karaism  came  to  a  close,  and 
the  Karaite  communities  of  Babylonia  and  Persia 
soon  lost  their  importance. 

Under  the  impulse  of  the  Messianic  expectations 
which  are  a  marked  characteristic  of  Karaism, 
Palestine  now  became  the  center  of  a  Karaite  prop- 
aganda, which,  in  the  tenth  and  eleventh  centuries, 
reached  even  to  Greece  and  Spain,  while  the  Ka- 
raites living  in  Jerusalem  took  the 
2.  In  name  of  Shoshanim  or  Maakilim,  with 
Palestine,  reference  to  Dan.  xii.  3.  Karaite  con- 
gregations already  existed  in  Egypt, 
and  Ck>nstantinople  was  selected  as  a  missionary 
field;  but  the  chief  object  of  attack  was  the  first 
and  last  great  teacher  of  Judaism  to  polemise 
against  them,  Saadia  Gaon  (b.  892;  d.  942),  who 
had  assailed  Hiwi  alrBalkhi  and  Ibn  Sakuyah  in 
his  Kilab  al-TamyuB  ("  Book  of  Distinction "), 
written  in  926,  and  in  his  Se/er  Emunot  we-De*oi 
(*'  Book  of  the  Articles  of  Faith  and  Doctrines  of 
Dogma "),  written  seven  years  later.  The  first 
Karaite  who  wrote  against  Saadia  was  Solomon  ben 
Jeroham  (b.  at  Fostat  c.  915-920;  d.  about  960), 
whose  MiXhamot  Adtmai  ("  Wars  of  the  Lord  ")  is 
still  extant  in  its  main  portions.  He  also  wrote 
commentaries  on  Ecclesiastes,  the  Song  of  Solo- 
mon, The  Psalms,  and  Lamentations,  as  well  as 
others  which  are  now  lost.  He  denounced  phi- 
losophy and  all  other  sciences,  and  acknowledged 
only  the  study  of  the  Torah,  although  he  respected 
the  Mishnah.  His  partisan,  the  Jerusalem  Ka- 
raite Sahl  ben  Mazliah  also  wrote  against  Saadia  and 
the  latter's  disciple,  Samuel  ben  Jacob.  Solomon 
ben  Jeroham's  successor,  Yafithibn  Ali  (Japheth 
ha-Levi)  of  Bassora,  the  greatest  and  most  fruitful 
Karaite  exegete,  was  also  an  opponent  of  Saadia, 
but  he  was  moderate  in  hia  polemics  and  in  his  com- 


KaraitM 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


298 


mentaries  quoted  many  paasages  from  his  oppo- 
nent. He  paid  special  attention  to  grammar,  and 
in  lexicographical  respects  his  commentaries,  which 
are  extant  on  the  entire  Old  Testament,  are  very 
instructive.  Like  Benjamin  Nahawendi,  he  referred 
Isa.  liii.  to  the  Messiah  and  his  sufferings,  in  oppo- 
sition to  the  Rabbinical  exegetes,  who,  on  accoimt 
of  their  hostility  to  Christianity,  referred  the  chap- 
ter to  the  people  of  Israel  Yafith  lived  about 
915-1008,  and  wrote  his  commentaries  in  the  last 
quarter  of  the  tenth  century,  apparently  compos- 
ing his  Sefer  horMitwoi  before  Ids  commentaries. 
In  the  first  half  of  the  eleventh  century  lived  Abu 
al-Faraj  Harun  of  Jerusalem,  the  author  of  a  gram- 
matical work  entitled  MushtamU  ("  The  Compre- 
hensive "))  in  which  he  compared  Hebrew  with 
Arabic.  He  also  wrote  an  Arabic  commentary  on 
the  Bible,  in  which  he  explained  aU  difficult  words 
and  sometimes  entire  sentences.  To  the  middle  of 
the  eleventh  century  belongs  Jacob  ben  Reuben, 
the  author  of  commentaries  on  the  Bible,  composed 
chiefly  of  compilations  from  older  authorities. 

With  the  first  half  of  the  tenth  century  began 
the  first  epoch  of  Karaite  religious  philosophy  which 
was  based  upon  the  Arabic  scholastic  theolpgy  of 
the  kaJam  (literally  "word";  cf. 
3.  ReUg-  logos),  a  system  developed  in  the  seo- 
k>U8PU-  ond  century  of  the  Hejira,  and  in- 
kMophy.  tended,  according  to  the  statements  of 
the  Arabs  themselves,  to  harmonize 
tradition  with  philosophy.  It  therefore  afforded  a 
means  of  defending  religious  doctrines  by  argu- 
ments based  on  reason,  and  was  primarily  directed 
against  the  tenets  of  the  heterodox  sects,  and  sec- 
ondarily against  the  teachings  of  the  philosophers. 
Thus  Aaron  ben  Elijah  (see  below,  {  5)  could  con- 
trast the  MutakaUamun  ("  teachers  of  the  word  ")» 
with  the  "  philosophers,"  or  the  Aristotelians, 
whereas  the  main  elements  of  the  kalam  were 
evolved  from  the  Peripatetic  philosophy.  The 
MutakaUamun  also  include  the  Mohammedan  sect 
of  the  Mutazilites  (''Separatists,  Dissenters";  see 
Mohammedanism),  who  were  founded  by  Wasil  ibn 
Ata  (b.  699/700;  d.  748,  749),  a  contemporary 
of  Azian  and  the  founder  of  an  Islamitic  religious 
philosophy  which  professed  a  rationalistic  formu- 
lation of  Mohammedan  dogmas  in  opposition  to 
the  liberal  belief  of  traditional  orthodoxy.  The 
Karaites  were  closely  allied  to  this  sect,  and  their 
teachers  even  called  themselves  MutakaUamun. 

The  first  religious  and  philosophical  work  of  Kara- 
ism  was  the  KUab  al- Anwar  ("  Book  of  Lights  "), 
written  by  Jacob  al-Kirkisani  in  937,  and  devoted 
to  a  simmiaiy  of  the  marriage  law  of  the  Kara- 
ites, so  far  as  it  deviated  from  the  rabbinical  sys- 
tem. He  also  wrote  a  commentary  on  the  Penta- 
teuch, and  was  followed  in  the  eleventh  century 
by  Joseph  ben  Abraham  ha-Roeh,  who  is  men- 
tioned by  Maimonides  in  his  Moreh  Ntbukim  as 
a  representative  of  the  kalam  and  an  opponent 
of  Hai  Gaon.  Joseph  was  the  author  of  Kilah  al- 
Muhtatvi,  a  philosophical  work  on  **  the  roots  of 
religion."  Hitherto  the  Karaites,  interpreting  Gen. 
ii.  24  to  mean  that  husband  and  wife  form  a  unit, 
had  made  it  almost  impossible  for  them  to  marry 
among  themselves.    Tlds  theory  was  abolished  by 


Joseph  and  his  pupil  Joshua  ben  Judah  (Abu  al- 
Faraj  Furkan),  although  an  exaggerated  applica- 
tion of  the  method  of  analogy  prohibited  marriage 
within  many  degrees  of  affinity  which  were  per- 
mitted by  the  rabbinical  Jews.  About  the  middle 
of  the  eleventh  century  Joshua  ben  Judah  wrote 
an  extensive  commentary  on  the  Pentateuch  and 
a  treatise  on  the  law  of  marriage.  According  to 
his  pupil  Ibn  al-Taras,  the  works  of  Joshua  pro- 
moted Karaism  in  Spain,  although  they  were  soon 
counteracted  by  rabbinical  Judaism. 

In  the  twelfth  centuiy  Egypt  took  the  place  of 
Jerusalem  as  the  center  of  Karaism,  and  this  cen- 
tury also  marks  decay  of  Arabo-Karaite  literature, 
for  its  last  representative  was  the 
4.  Egypt  physician  Daniel,  who  wrote  a  work 
and  the  in  1682  in  imitation  of  the  Hobot  hor 
Crimea.  Ubabol  ("  The  Duties  of  the  Hearts  "), 
composed  by  Bahya  of  Saragossa  in 
the  eleventh  century,  while  Egypt  was  also  the 
home  of  the  Hebrew  poet  Moses  Dari.  There  were 
also  many  congregations  of  Karaites  in  the  Crimea, 
where  a  community  is  said  to  have  existed  in  1279. 
Crimean  Karaite  literature  was  extremely  scanty, 
and  little  of  it  has  been  preserved,  although  it  is 
known  that  the  Karaites  of  the  Crimea  applied 
themselves  diligently  to  the  study  of  the  law. 
Since  they  laid  great  stress  on  a  sojourn  in  Jerusa- 
lem, which  could  easily  be  reached  by  way  of  Con- 
stantinople, several  books  of  travel  were  written 
by  Karaites,  including  Samuel  ha-Kadosh  ben 
David  (1641-42),  Moses  ben  Elijah  ha-Levi  (1654- 
1665),  and  Benjamin  ben  Elijah  of  Koslov  (1785-86). 
About  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century  there 
were  500  families  in  the  Crimea,  represented  by 
four  communities  at  Kala,  Koslov,  Kafa,  and  Man- 
guf.  In  the  Crimea  the  Karaites  enjoyed  special 
privileges,  as  when,  in  1796,  the  Empress  Catharine 
remitted  half  the  poU-tax  for  every  young  man  and 
also  exempted  them  from  military  service. 

The  Karaite  community  which  existed  at  Con- 
stantinople in  the  early  part  of  the  eleventh  cen- 
tury, and  nimibered  500  families  in  the  second  half 
of  the  following  century,  is  important  for  the  his- 
tory and  literature  of  the  sect.  There  is  no  doubt 
that  Karaites  lived  in  Constantinople 
5.  Constan-at  the  time  of  Judah  Hadassi  (b.  at 
tinople.  Jerusalem  1075;  d.  at  Constantinople 
1160),  who  began  his  Eshkol  ha-Ko/er 
(also  called  Sefer  horPeles)  in  1148.  He  classified 
all  religion  on  the  basb  of  the  ten  commandments 
and  sought  to  oppose  all  heresies  known  to  him. 
In  natural  history  he  had  no  superior  among  hk 
contemporaries  and  he  gave  an  extended  and  val- 
uable account  of  the  progress  of  philosophy,  a  sub- 
ject which  he  also  treated  in  his  Sefer  Teren  bi- 
Teren  on  Hebrew  homonyms.  Karaite  literature 
was  especially  promoted  by  two  scholars  named 
Aaron.  The  first  of  these  was  Aaron  ben  Joseph, 
whose  literary  activity  faUs  between  1270  and 
1300.  He  was  a  physician  and  wrote  commentaries 
on  the  Pentateuch,  the  earlier  and  later  prophets, 
and  the  Psalms.  His  most  important  work  was 
hiB  commentary  on  the  Pentateuch,  entitled  Mibhar 
("Choice")  and  completed  in  1294.  Aaron  was 
likewise  the  author  of  a  grammatical  and  exeget- 


299 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


XaraitM 


ical  hand-book  entitled  Kelil  Yofi  ("Diadem  of 
Beauty  ")  and  a  book  of  prayers  which  enjoyed 
great  popularity  among  the  European  Karaites. 
The  second  Aaron  was  Aaron  ben  Elijah  of  Nico- 
media  (b.  at  Cairo  1300;  d.  at  Constantinople 
1369),  who  wrote  Ez  ha-Hayyim  ("  Tree  of  Life  "), 
in  which  he  developed  the  doctrinal  system  of  the 
new  faith,  showing  how  the  Jew  should  practise 
his  religion  to  gain  eternal  life.  He  sought  to 
blend  the  system  of  the  MviakaUamun  with  the 
school  of  Maimonides,  and  thus  produced  an  eclectic 
system,  although  at  the  same  time  he  defended  the 
kalam,  which  he  followed  rather  than  the  Aristo- 
telian method.  In  his  Oan  *Eden  ("  Paradise  ") 
he  recapitulated  all  his  predecessors.  This  work, 
which  is  to  the  Karaites  what  the  Maimonidean 
Yad  ha-Hcusakah  is  to  the  rabbinical  Jews,  is  based 
upon  the  principle  that  the  belief  in  the  unity  and 
other  attributes  of  God  as  well  as  in  his  government 
of  the  world  forms  the  end  and  aim  of  the  law, 
while  his  Keter  Torah  ("  Crown  of  the  Law  ")i  a 
commentary  on  the  Pentateuch,  is  intended  as  an 
elucidation  of  his  philosophical  Ez  horHayyim. 
The  latest  bloom  of  Karaite  literature  in  Constan- 
tinople is  represented  by  the  writings  of  Elijah 
Bashyazi  (b.  at  Adrianople  c.  1420;  d.  there  1490), 
the  author  of  the  Aderet  Eliyahu  C*  Mantle  of 
Elijah  ''),  a  summary  of  the  works  of  his  predeces- 
sors. His  pupil  and  nephew,  Caleb  Afendopolo  (b. 
1465),  completed  the  work  of  his  master,  in  addi- 
tion to  writing  independent  works  on  theology,  as- 
tronomy, and  medicine,  while  his  two  kinot  ("  Lam- 
entations ")  on  the  expulsion  of  the  people  of  God 
from  Spain,  Russia,  and  Lithuania  (1493)  are  his- 
torically interesting.  A  contemporary  of  Caleb 
was  Judah  ben  Elijah  ha-Gibbor,  who  enriched  the 
liturgy  of  the  Karaites,  while  his  son  Elijah  Shusbi 
wrote  a  poem  on  the  calendar.  Moses  Bashyazi,  a 
great-grandson  of  Elijah  Bashyazi,  was  a  distin- 
guished figure  of  the  sixteenth  century. 

While  the  literature  of  the  Karaites  in  the  By- 
zantine countries  was  mainly  doctrinal,  their  Po- 
lish coreligionists,  who  were  the  last  to  produce 
Karaite  literature,  were  obliged  to  write  contro- 
versial books,  owing  to  the  inquiries  of 
6.  Poland.  Christians.  The  first  Karaites  en- 
tered Poland  at  the  end  of  the  four- 
teenth century  at  the  request  of  the  king,  coming 
from  the  Crimea  to  Lithuania,  where  Grand-duke 
Witold  took  them  under  his  protection  and  granted 
them  privileges  which  were  afterward  (1446)  con- 
firmed by  King  Casimir  Jagellon.  The  first  com- 
munities were  at  Lutsk  and  Troki,  the  two  prin- 
cipal cities  of  Lithuania,  and  in  1581  Stephen 
Bathori  allowed  the  Karaites  to  settle  also  in  Vol- 
hynia,  Podlasie,  and  Kiev.  The  first  Karaite  to 
make  an  open  attack  on  Christianity  was  Isaac  ben 
Abraham  Troki  (b.  1533),  who  opposed  the  Christian 
faith  in  the  first  part  of  his  Hizzuk  Emunah  (''  Con- 
firmation of  Faith  ")  on  the  ground  that  the  prophe- 
cies of  the  Old  Testament  can  not  refer  to  the  founder 
of  Christianity,  while  in  the  second  part  he  criticized 
the  contradictions  in  the  Gospels.  Mention  may 
also  be  made  of  Mordecai  ben  Nisan,  who  wrote  a 
treatise  in  answer  to  four  questions  propoimded 
by  Jacob  Trigland,  professor  at  Leyden,  in  Apr., 


1698,  the  first  being  whether  the  Karaites  were  the 
ancient  Sadduoees  or  originated  with  Anan.  Though 
full  of  anadironisms  this  treatise  (entitled  Dod  Mor- 
dechat)  possesses  a  certain  amount  of  importance, 
since  it  was  long  the  chief  source  for  the  history  of 
Karaism.  For  the  king  of  Sweden  Mordecai  wrote 
his  Lebuah  MaUciU  on  the  differences  between  the 
Karaites  and  the  Rabbanites,  and  was  also  the 
author,  of  a  book  of  grammatical  rules  (Kelalim), 
Equally  noteworthy  was  Solomon  ben  Aaron  Troki, 
the  author  of  Appiryon  (c.  1700),  containing  an 
account  of  the  distinctive  features  and'  the  origin 
of  Karaism,  together  with  an  outline  of  its  cers- 
monies,  written  for  the  information  of  the  minis- 
ter of  the  Swedish  government.  The  second  part 
of  another  work  of  the  same  name  contains  refu- 
tations of  Christianity.  In  1756  Simhah  Isaac 
Lutski,  one  of  the  most  revered  and  learned  of  the 
Karaites,  wrote  his  Orah  Zaddikim,  containing  a 
list  of  the  most  celebrated  Karaites  and  their  works. 

Karaite  literature  ends  with  Abraham  Firko- 
vich  of  Lutsk  (d.  at  Chufut-Kale,  1874),  whose  val- 
uable services  to  the  criticism  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment are  overshadowed  by  the  systematic  falsifi- 
cations of  manuscripts  and  epitaphs  by  which  he 
sought  to  prove  that  the  Karaites  were  the  de- 
scendants of  the  Israelites  who  had  been  led  into 
the  Assyrian  captivity  and  who  had  settled  in  the 
Crimea  during  the  reign  of  Cambyses.  Since  1830 
the  Crimean  Karaites  have  had  a  printing-estab- 
lishment at  Eupatoria,  where  editions  of  their 
most  important  manuscripts  have  been  published. 
Karaite  conmiimities  are  found  not  only  in  the 
Crimea  but  also  in  Jerusalem  and  Constantinople, 
as  well  as  throughout  Egypt,  Galicia,  Moldavia, 
Wallachia,  and  southern  Russia.  In  1871  the  Kar- 
aites numbered  about  6,000,  but  this  number  has 
decreased  to  some  5,500,  the  majority  of  whom  live 
in  Russia. 

The  Karaites  recognize  as  binding  precepts  for 
religious  and  moral  conduct  only  those  which  can 
be  deduced  from  the  Bible  by  means  of  an  accu- 
rate exposition  of  the  literal  sense  according  to 
usage  and  context.  From  this  main  doctrine, 
which  has  been  compared  with  that  of  Protestant- 
ism, other  principles  are  inferred  as  necessary 
corollaries.  They  acknowledge  no  tra- 
7.  Doctrine  ditional  exposition  of  passages  of  the 

and  Law.  Bible,  but  every  experienced  teacher 
is  permitted  to  correct  or  change  for- 
mer interpretations  according  to  the  best  of  his 
knowledge  and  belief,  provided  his  views  are  justi- 
-fied  by  the  text;  and  such  rabbinical  laws  as  are 
recognized  by  the  Karaites  are  regarded  as  valid 
solely  because  they  are  based  on  the  Bible,  this 
category  including  injunctions  concerning  slaugh- 
tering, fixing  of  the  new  moon,  circumcision,  and 
marriage.  The  introduction  of  new  laws  and  the 
recognition  of  those  which  are  non-Biblical  are  for- 
bidden, and  the  Karaites,  therefore,  do  not  cele- 
brate the  Feast  of  Lights  {Hanukkah).  This  strict 
adherence  to  the  letter  of  the  law,  as  based  upon 
textual  hermeneutics,  has  also  exerted  an  influence 
upon  individual  rules  and  regulations.  Important 
divei*gencies  exist  between  the  Karaites  and  the  rab* 
binical  Jews  with  regard  to  the  Sabbath,  phylae- 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


800 


teries,  (see  Tbfbilun)  and  the  ealendara,  while  less 
eaBential  diflferenoes  ooaoem  the  celebration  of  the 
feasU,  especially  Passover,  the  Feast  of  Trumpets, 
and  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  as  weU  as  the  fasts 
and  religious  ezerdses.  The  earliest  Karaite 
teachers  formed  the  liturgy  by  omitting  all  rab- 
binical additions,  so  that  religious  customs  have 
been  exempt  from  change  or  discussion.  The  rigor 
with  which  the  Karaites  observe  all  their  customs 
has  had  a  deep  influence  on  their  lives.  They  are 
not  content  with  religious  worship  on  festivals  and 
on  semi-festivals  like  Purim,  but  refrain  from  work 
even  on  the  intermediate  days,  while  on  fast^lays 
they  abstain  from  all  commercial  pursuits.  The 
laws  of  ritual  purity  are  also  extremely  exaggerated, 
and  their  strictness  in  the  observance  of  legal  obli- 
gations extends  to  the  moral  duties.  They  attend 
to  their  avocations  in  quiet  simplicity,  and  generally 
wear  dark  clothing  in  their  aversion  for  everything 
which  pleases  the  sight. 

The  main  principles  of  the  religious  system  were 
fixed  as  early  as  the  time  c^  Hadassi,  and  were 
formulated  in  ten  articles  by  Elijah  Bashyaxi  and 
his  pi^>il  Caleb  Afendopolo,  as  follows:  (1)  The 
universe  was  created  (made  out  of  nothing);  (2) 
there  is  a  Creator,  who  was  neither  created  by  any 
other  power  nor  self-created;  (3)  he  has  no  form, 
is  one  in  every  respect,  and  is  like  none  of  his  crea- 
tions; (4)  God  sent  Moses,  our  teacher;  (5)  through 
him  God  revealed  the  Torah,  which  contains  the 
absolute  truth;  (6)  every  Jew  is  bound  to  read  the 
Torah  in  the  original;  (7)  God  also  revealed  him- 
self to  the  other  prophets;  (8)  God  will  raise  the 
dead  on  the  Day  of  Judgment;  (9)  God  will  recom- 
pense eveiy  one  according  to  his  deeds;  (10)  God 
win  deliver  Israel  from  their  affliction  and  send  to 
them  the  son  of  David.  On  the  whole  it  may  be 
said  that  the  Karaites  agree  with  the  rabbinical 
Jews  in  fundamental  doctrines,  but  differ  from 
their  opponents  in  carrying  them  out. 

(Victor  RrBSBLt.) 
Bibuookapht:  A  minute,  critioal  and  extensive  guide  to 
Utetmture  conoerninc  the  KMraitea,  indudinc  the  pro- 
duetione  of  their  leeden,  ie  given  in  Hnuck-Herioc  RB, 
X.  64-60,  ef.  881--882.  Consult  abo:  8.  Pinaker.  lA^pt^U 
kadKmomot,  Vienna.  1860  (in  Hebrew,  on  Karaite  his- 
tory and  Utermture):  A.  Neubauer.  in  J  A,  1866.  i.  634- 
642;  idbm.  Au9  der  Petm-ttwrger  BibUoAsk;  B^UrHgt  uni 
Dotwm^nU  twr  Omekiehta  d§9  KarOmihum;  Leipeio,  1866; 
O.  Karpelea.  Oe^dtuhia  der  jQdiatktn  LiUeraiur,  pp.  404- 
412  et  paarim.  Berlin.  1886;  The  AnH-KaraUe  WriHn<f 
ii^aaadiak  Oaan,  inJQR,  x  (1898).  238-276;  A  Comment 
iary  on  ik$  Book  qf  DanM  by  JepUi  bon  AH  tKo  KaraiU, 
od.  in  Arabic  with  iranA,  by  D.  S.  MarffoUouih,  in  Anoe- 
dcia  Oxonienoa,  3d  Mr.,  L,  part  3,  Oxford,  1889. 

On  the  history  consult:  J.  M.  Jost,  OoaehichU  dm  Ju~ 
donhmu  und  miner  Sekien,  3  Tols.,  Leipaic,  1867-60;  J. 
Font.  Ge&d^iehle  dee  KarAertwne,  3  vols.,  lb.  1862-60 
(to  be  used  with  caution);  A.  Gottlober.  Bikkoret  letoledot 
Kartrim,  Vihia.  1866;  J.  Gurland,  Oime  Yierael,  St. 
Petersburg,  1866-66;  W.  H.  Rule,  Hiei.  cf  the  Karaile 
Jew,  London,  1870;  A.  Harkavy,  DenknUUtr  ous  der 
Krim,  St.  Petersburg.  1876;  M.  Steinschneider,  PoUmieche 
lAieraher,  Leipsic,  1877;  idem,  Arobieche  LOenOw  der 
Jtiden,  Frankfort,  1002;  H.  Grftts.  OeeehiehU  der  Juden, 
especially  v.  16^204.  Leipsic.  1806,  Eng.  transl.,  Lon- 
don, 1802;  SemiHe  Studie$  in  ihe  Memory  af  Rev.  Dr.  A. 
Kohut,  pp.  436-466.  Berlin.  1807;  David  ben  Sa'del,  Ibn 
airHiH'€  Arabic  Chronide  of  Karaiie  Doeior$,  Iranal.  by 
O.  MargoUoulh,  London,  1807;  Erach  and  Oruber,  En- 
eydopOdie,  section  XL,  vols,  xxvii,  xxxiii.;  JE,  vil  438-447. 

KARBN&    See  Bubma. 


KARG,   6E0R6   (GEORGIUS  PARSDCOHIUS): 

German  Lutheran  theologian;  b.  at  Heroldingen 
(near  Harbuig,  31  m.  n.e.  of  Augsburg)  1512;  d. 
at  Anabach  (25  m.  s.w.  of  Nuremberg)  Nov.  29, 
1576.  He  was  educated  at  Wittenbeig,  and  thsn 
began  to  preach,  though  unauthorized  by  the  uni- 
versity to  do  so.  He  promulgated  heretical  doc- 
trines, however,  and  in  1537  was  imprisoned  in  the 
castle  of  Wittenberg.  He  soon  reg^uned  the  con- 
fidence of  Luther  and  Jonas,  and  the  former,  at  the 
request  of  Count  Louis  of  Oettingen,  ordained  Karg 
minister  at  Oettingen,  where  he  worked  zealously 
for  the  Reformation  until  forced  to  flee  in  1547. 
He  found  a  welcome  in  the  district  of  Ansbach  and 
was  appointed  pastor  in  Schwabach.  In  1552  he 
received  a  call  to  Ansbach,  and  was  soon  made  su- 
perintendent for  the  entire  district.  There  he  grad- 
ually allowed  the  rites  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church  to  fall  into  abeyance,  and  against  the  wishes 
of  the  government  sought  to  abolish  all  usages  ci 
the  Auduarium,  a  sort  of  modified  interim  which 
had  been  introduced  in  an  attempt  to  comply  with 
the  imperial  demand.  At  the  request  of  the  prince, 
Karg  took  part  in  1551  in  the  conferences  of  tho 
Wittenbeig  theologians  on  the  Council  of  Trent, 
and  also  attended  the  sessions  of  the  conferences 
at  Frankfort  and  Worms.  His  heretical  tend- 
encies had  not  entirely  disapi)eared,  however,  and 
in  1557  he  was  involved  in  a  discussion  on  the 
Eucharist,  and  later  caused  a  conmiotion  by  his 
teaching  concerning  justification  by  faith,  declaring 
that  the  law  exacted  either  punishment  or  obedi- 
ence, but  not  both,  and  that  Christ  had  suffered 
passively  for  man,  but  had  rendered  obedience  for 
himself.  His  active  obedience,  accordingly,  was 
not  part  of  his  vicarious  task,  nor  was  his  right- 
eousness imputed  to  man  in  the  Scriptures,  Luther's 
interpretation  of  Phil.  iii.  9  being  incorrect.  The 
atonement  for  the  sins  of  mankind  was  due  to  the 
death  of  Christ,  not  to  his  righteousness,  and  he 
had  confirmed  the  Uw,  not  abrogated  it.  The 
enunciation  of  these  views  resulted  in  a  contro- 
versy, and  Kaig  was  suspended  from  office  and 
obliged  to  make  a  solenm  retraction  before  he  was 
reinstated  by  Jakob  Andre&  (q.v.)  on  Oct.  31, 1570. 
The  most  important  of  his  numerous  writings  was 
his  KaUdvUmus,  which  was  first  printed  in  1564 
and  was  still  used  in  Ansbach  in  the  early  part  of 
the  nineteenth  century.  (T.  Kolde.) 

Bxbuoobapbt:  P.  F.  Karrer.  in  ZeUedirift  far  btiheritdu 
Thcologie  und  Kirdie.  1853.  pp.  661  sqq.;  O.  Frank,  Ge- 
achiehle  der  proteetantiechen  Theoloffie,  i.  168  aqq.,  Leipoc, 
1802,  ef.  J.  J.  I.  D5Uinger.  Die  R^ormation,  m.  564  Bqq.. 
ReKenflbuis.  1846. 

KARTAHOS,  kOr'ta-nes,  JOANIIIEIOS:  Greek 
theologian  of  the  sixteenth  century;  b.  in  Corfu  at 
the  end  of  the  fifteenth  or  the  beginning  of  the  six- 
teenth century;  place  and  date  of  death  unknown. 
He  was  originally  a  monk  and  protosynceUus  at 
Corfu,  and  in  the  first  third  of  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury was  sent  to  Venice,  where  he  incurred  the  hos- 
tility of  Arsenios  Apostolis  and  was  imprisoned. 
He  was  later  released  and  returned  to  Greece,  but 
no  further  details  of  his  life  are  known.  Kartanos 
was  one  of  the  first  to  revive  a  knowledge  of  the 
Bible  and  the  teachings  of  the  Church  among  the 


301 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDU 


Santa 


common  people  by  writing  in  Romaic,  since  they 
were  no  longer  familiar  with  classic  Greek.  His 
chief  work  was  his  "  Flower/'  written  during  his 
imprisonment  and  first  published  at  Venice  in 
1536.  It  enjoyed  immense  popularity,  but  the  ad- 
mixture of  apocryphal  elements  roused  the  hostil- 
ity of  the  Orthodox  Greek  party.  His  heresies 
were  successfully  assailed  and  the  movement  which 
he  had  inaugurated  was  stopped.  The  ethical 
treatises  of  Kartanos  were  incorporated  in  the 
Thesaurus  of  Damascenus  the  Studite  and  thus 
gained  a  certain  degree  of  currency  in  the  Greek 
Church.  (Philipp  Meter.) 

Bibuoorapht:  E.  Legrand,  Bihlioipraphie  HeUirtique,  L  226, 
Paris,  1886;  P.  Meyer,  in  TSK,  1898.  pp.  315  sqq.;  idem, 
Di€  theohgiBdie  LiUeratur  der  grieehUcKen  Kirche  im  16. 
JahrhunderUt  pp.  120  aqq.,  Leipeio,  1899. 

KASSHTTES.    See  Babylonia,  VI.,  5. 

KASSIA  (KASIA):  Bysantine  poetess  of  the 
ninth  century.  Krumbacher  (ut  inf.)  suggests 
that  the  form  "  Icasia  "  (Gibbon,  Decline  and  FaU, 
V.  199)  is  possibly  a  corruption  of  4  Kaoia,  She 
lived  at  Constantinople  under  the  Emperors  The- 
ophilus  (829^842)  and  Michael  III.  (842-^867)  in 
a  cloister  of  her  own  founding.  Both  ecclesiastical 
and  secular  poems  are  extant  under  her  name;  but, 
excepting  such  as  were  adopted  in  liturgical  books, 
they  occur  rarely  in  manuscript.  Her  three  best 
known  sacred  hymns  are  the  "  Idiomela  "  on  the 
birth  of  Christ,  the  birth  of  John  the  Baptist,  and 
on  Ash  Wednesday.  The  last-named  is  identical 
with  the  song  Eis  Un  pomin.  W.  Christ  and  N. 
Paranikas  edited  the  three  songs  in  their  Anthologia 
GrcBca  (pp.  10-104,  Leipsic,  1871).  Four  short 
poems  were  published  by  Papadopulos-Kerameus 
{BtfzanHniache  Zeitschrift,  x.  60-61,  1901),  and  an 
acrostic  dirge  and  some  epigrams  were  issued  by 
Krumbacher  (ut  inf.).  G.  KRt^asR. 

Bibuoorapht:     K.    Kromb^oher,    KoMia,    Munich,    1897; 

idem,  Q^aehiekU,  pp.  715-716;    P.  Maas,  in  BytanHnMche 

Zeiladtrift,  x  (1901),   64-69;    8.   Petridea,   in  Bmme  <U 

VorimU  chritien,  vu  (1902),  218-244. 

KATERKAMP,  kQ'ter-kOmp,  JOHANN  THEO- 
DOR  HERMANN:  German  Roman  Catholic;  b. 
at  Ochtrup  (25  m.  n.w.  of  MQnster),  Westphalia, 
Jan.  17,  1764;  d.  at  Mttnster  June  9,  1834.  He 
studied  in  MQnster,  was  ordained  priest  in  1787, 
and  for  ten  years  was  tutor  to  the  sons  of  Baron 
Droste-Vischering,  spending  a  part  of  this  time 
traveling  with  his  wards  in  Switzerland  and  Italy. 
From  1797  till  1806  he  resided  in  the  home  of  Prin- 
cess Amalie  Galitzin.  In  1809  he  became  profes- 
sor of  church  history  at  Mttnster,  and  in  1831  was 
appointed  dean  of  the  cathedral  at  Mttnster.  His 
principal  work  is  his  church  history  to  the  year 
1153  (6  vols.,  Mttnster,  1819-^).  He  also  pub- 
lished DenkwHrdigkeUen  aus  dem  Lfben  der  FUrstin 
Amalia  von  GaUitzin  (1828). 
Bibuoorapht:    Trauerrede,  by  H.  Brookmann,  Mtmster, 

1834;    E.  RAasmann,  Naehrichien  von  dem  LAtn  tmd  den 

Schriften  ManeterUkfidiecher  Schriftateller,  ib.  1866;    KL, 

vii.  333-335. 

KATTBNBUSCH,  kflt'ten-bttsh,  FRIEDRICH 
WILHELM  FERDINAND:  German  Lutheran;  b. 
at  Kettwig  (7  m.  s.s.w.  of  Essen)  Oct.  3,  1851. 
He  studied  in  Boni^  Berlii^  Halle  (1869-73),  and 


Gottingen  (lie.  theol.,  1875);  became  privat-dooent 
in  GOttingen,  1876;  professor  of  systematic  theol- 
ogy at  Giessen  1878,  at  GOttingen  1904,  and  at 
Halle  1906.  He  was  created  a  privy  ecclesiastical 
councilor  in  1897  and  since  1903  has  been  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Norwegian  Videnskabsselskabet.  In  the- 
ology he  is  a  follower  of  Albrecht  Ritschl,  and  has 
written  among  other  works:  Lekrbuch  der  vergleiek- 
enden  Confeesionskunde,  t.  (Freiburg,  1892);  Das 
aposUdische  Symbol^  seine  Entstehung,  sein  ge- 
schichUicher  Sinn  und  aeine  ursprHngliche  SteOung 
im  KuUus  und  in  der  Theologie  der  Kirche  (2  vols., 
Leipsic,  1894-1900);  and  Das  sUaiche  Rechi  des 
Krieges  (Giessen,  1906). 

KAULEN,  kaulen,  FRANZ  PHILIPP:  German 
Roman  Catholic;  b.  at  Dttsseldorf  Mar.  20,  1827; 
d.  at  Bonn  July  11,  1907.  He  studied  in  Bonn 
(1846-49)  and  at  the  theological  seminary  in  Cologne 
(1849),  and  was  chaplain  at  Duisburg  (1850-52)  and 
Dottendorf  (1852-53),  rector  and  prison  chaplain 
at  Ptttzchen,  near  Bonn  (1853-59),  lecturer  in  the 
theological  seminary  at  Bonn  (1859-63),  and  privat- 
docent  in  the  University  of  Bonn  (1863-80).  In 
1880  he  became  associate  professor  of  Old-Testa- 
ment exegesis  in  Bonn,  and  full  professor  in  1882. 
After  1892  he  was  a  domestic  prelate  to  the  pope. 
He  edited  the  fifth  to  the  eighth  editions  of  C.  H. 
Vosen's  Rudimenta  linguae  hebraicae  (Freiburg,  1872- 
1899);  the  twelfth  to  the  eighteenth  editions  of  the 
same  author's  Kurte  EinleUung  sum  Erlemen  der 
hebrdischen  Sprache  (1874-1900);  the  second  edition 
of  the  KL  (12  vols.,  1882-1903);  and  the  second 
and  third  editions  of  K.  Martin's  translation  of  the 
"  Antiquities  "  of  Josephus  (Cologne,  1883-92).  As 
independent  works  he  wrote:  L€ber  Jonas  prophdae 
(Mainz,  1862);  Legende  von  dem  seligen  Hermann 
Joseph  (1862);  Oeachichte der  Vulgaia  (1869);  Handr 
buch  zur  Vulgata  (1870);  Einleiung  in  die  heUige 
Schrift  Alien  und  Neuen  Testaments  (2  parts,  1876- 
1881);  Aesyrien  und  Babylomen  naeh  den  neuesten 
Entdeckungen  (Cologne,  1877);  Kurte  Einleitung  in 
die  heUige  Schrift  des  AUen  und  des  Neuen  Testaments 
(Freiburg,  1897);  and  Der  bibUsche  Sch^fpfungsbe- 
richt  erklOH  (1902). 

KAUTZ,  kauts  (CUCIU8),  JAKOB:  Anabap- 
tist; b.  at  Grossbockenheim  (8  m.  s.w.  of  Worms), 
Bavaria,  c.  1500;  d.  after  1532.  In  1524  he  was 
preacher  in  Worms,  where  the  reformatory  move- 
ment took  on  a  radical  character,  and  Anabaptism 
found  a  favorable  soil.  The  resentment  of  the  dti- 
sens,  caused  by  their  long  and  violent  struggles 
with  the  bishop,  found  expression  at  the  beginning 
of  the  Reformation  in  violent  attacks  upon  the 
Church  and  the  clergy.  The  same  tendencies 
showed  themselves  in  the  participation  of  the  dty 
in  the  Peasants'  War.  By  the  intervention  ci 
Count  Palatine  Ludwig,  the  bishop  and  the  clergy 
were  reinstated  in  their  rights,  but  Evangelical 
preaching  was  continued.  Among  the  Evangel- 
icals  there  was  a  conservative  and  a  radical  party. 
Ulrich  Preu  and  Johann  Freiherr,  two  of  the  preach- 
ers, were  in  connection  with  Wittenberg  while 
Kautz  and  Hilarius  represented  a  more  radical 
tendency,  especially  after  the  appearance  of  the 
two  leading   Anabaptists,  Denk  and   Hfttier,  in 


Xants 
Xauie 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


802 


Wonns,  whose  teaching  Kauts  adopted  in  1527. 
The  number  of  Anabaptists  in  Worms  grew  rapidly. 
Kautz  with  Denk,  H&tzer,  and  Melchior  Ring  pub- 
lished seven  theses  against  their  Evangelical  op- 
ponents in  which  the  peculiar  teachings  of  Denk 
find  expression:  the  distinction  between  the  exter- 
nal and  internal  word  of  Scripture;  the  impossi- 
bility of  all  external  words  and  sacraments  to  as- 
sure the  inner  man  of  his  salvation;  rejection  of 
the  baptism  of  children  and  of  the  essential  pres- 
ence of  Christ  in  the  Lord's  Supper;  universal  sal- 
vation; denial  of  the  objective  value  of  Christ's 
satisfaction;  and  exhortation  to  follow  him.  The 
Lutheran  preachers  in  Worms  immediately  replied, 
also  Cochlaeus  as  representative  of  the  Roman  Cath- 
olics. The  excitement  in  the  town  increased  and 
the  clergy  of  Strasbuig  declared  themselves  against 
the  theses  and  warned  the  people  of  Worms.  At 
the  urgent  request  of  Count  Palatine  Ludwig,  the 
preachers  of  both  Evangelical  parties  were  dis- 
missed, and  severe  measures  were  adopted  against 
the  adherents  of  Anabaptism  among  the  citizens; 
but  the  power  of  Anabaptism  in  Worms  and  its 
neighborhood  was  not  broken.  The  movement  had 
found  a  sympathetic  response  among  the  people, 
and  it  was  possible  to  hold  it  down  only  by  force. 
As  the  Lutheran  preachers  had  been  banished  at 
the  same  time,  the  progress  of  the  Reformation  in 
Worms  was  considerably  retarded.  Kautz  wan- 
dered from  place  to  place,  leading  the  restless  life 
of  an  agitator.  In  the  summer  of  1527  he  appeared 
for  some  little  time  at  Augsburg,  then  at  Rothen- 
burg-on-the-Tauber  with  Wilhelm  Reublin.  In 
June,  1528,  they  were  both  at  Strasburg,  disputing 
with  the  preachers;  in  October  they  were  arrested 
for  their  inflammatory  speeches.  Capito  and 
Schwenckfeld  tried  in  vain  to  divert  Kautz  from  his 
revolutionary  ideas,  and  he  was  expelled  from  the 
city.  In  1532  he  reapi)eared  before  the  town,  beg- 
ging to  be  admitted;  disappointment,  despair,  and 
exhaustion  had  broken  his  courage;  but  the  coun- 
cil did  not  receive  him,  and  thenceforth  he  disap- 
pears from  history.  (A.  HEGLBRf.)  K.  Holl. 
Bibliooraphy:  Sources  are  in  the  work*  of  Zwingli,  vol. 
viii.  passim,  ed.  of  Zurich,  1828-61.  Consult:  T.  W. 
ROhrieh,  Oe9chiehte  der  Reformation  in  Elsaaa,  i.  338  aqq., 
ii.  7&-77.  1830-32-.  idem,  in  ZHT,  1860.  pp.  20  sqq..  43 
sqq..  60  sqq.;  L.  Keller,  Bin  ApoMUl  der  WisdertAiifer, 
Leipsio,  1882;  C.  Qerbert,  Oetehiehte  der  Straaetnarger  8ek- 
tenbewegung,  pp.  57  sqq..  83-84.  Strasburg.  1889;  A.  H. 
Newman,  in  American  Church  History  Seriee,  ii  25,  New 
York,  1804;  idem.  Hiet.  cf  Anti^PedobapHmt,  pp.  170. 
245  sqq.,  Philadelphia.  1897. 

KAUTZSCH,  kautsh,  EMIL  FRIEDRICH:  Ger- 
man Protestant;  b.  at  Plauen  (21  m.  s.w.  of  Zwick- 
au) Sept.  4,  1841.  He  studied  in  Leipsic  (Ph.D., 
1863),  taught  in  the  Nicolai  Gymnasium  of  Leipsic, 
1863-72;  became  privat-docent  in  Leipsic,  1869, 
associate  professor,  1871,  full  professor  of  Old-Tes- 
tament exegesis  at  Basel,  1872;  at  Tubingen,  1880; 
at  Halle,  1888.  In  1877  he  shared  in  founding  the 
Deutscher  Pal&stina-Verein.  He  has  written:  De 
Veteria  TeHamenti  locia  a  Paulo  apoatolo  aUegatis 
(Leipsic,  1869);  Die  Echtheii  der  moabitiachen  AU 
tertumer  (1876;  in  collaboration  with  A.  Sodn); 
Johann  Buxtorf  der  AeUere  (Basel,  1879);  Uebunga- 
buck  zu  GeseniuS'Kavizech  hebrdtscher  Grammaiik 
(Leipsic,   1881);     Grammaiik   des  Biblisch-Aramd- 


iachen  (1884);  Predigten  uber  den  zweHen  Jahrgang 
der  wUrttembergiechen  Evangelien  (TObingen,  1887; 
in  collaboration  with  H.  Weiss);  Die  Genesis  mU 
duseerer  Unterecheidung  der  Quellenschrifien  uber- 
seUt  (Freiburg,  1888;  in  collaboration  with  A. 
Socin);  Die  Pealmen  ubereeUl  (1893);  AbrUs  der 
Geechichte  dee  alUeetameniUchen  SchrifUume  (1897); 
BibeLwieeenechafi  und  ReligumeufUerrtcht  (Halle, 
1900);  Proverbe  in  the  Polychrome  Bible  (New  York, 
1901;  in  collaboration  with  A.  MOller);  Die  Poesie 
und  die  poetiachen  Bucher  dee  Alien  Testamenit 
(Tubingen,  1902);  and  Die  Aram&iamen  im  AtUn 
Testament  (Halle,  1902).  He  has  also  edited  the 
second  to  the  eighth  edition  of  H.  Scholz's  Abrm 
der  hebraiaehen  Laul-  und  Formenlehre  (Leipsic, 
1874-99);  the  twenty-second  to  the  twenty-seventh 
edition  of  W.  Gesenius'  Hebrdiscke  Grammaiik  (1878- 
1902);  and  the  tenth  and  eleventh  editions  of  K.  R. 
Hagenbach's  Encyklopddie  und  Methodologie  (18S(^ 
1884).  He  likewise  published,  in  collaboration  with 
other  scholars,  Die  heilige  Schrifi  dee  Alien  Testa- 
ments (Freiburg,  1894) ;  Die  Apokryphen  und  Pseud-  , 
epigraphen  dee  Alien  Teetamenis  (1899);  and  Teii-  \ 
bibel  dee  Alien  und  Neuen  Teetamenis  (Tubingen. 
1900). 

KAWERAU,  ka'v6-rau,  PETER  GUSTAV:  Ger 
man  Protestant;  b.  at  Bunzlau  (65  m.  n.w.  of 
Breslau),  Silesia,  Feb.  25,  1847.  He  studied  at  tb 
University  of  Berlin  (1863-66),  and  was  pastor 
at  Langheinersdorf,  Brandenburg  (1871-76),  and 
Klemzig  (1876-82).  He  became  professor  m 
spiritual  inspector  at  the  Kloster  Unserer  Liebe: 
Frau,  Biagdebuig,  1882;  professor  of  practical  the- 
ology at  Kiel,  1886;  at  Breslau,  1894.  He  was  ap- 
pointed university  preacher  at  Kiel  in  1888  and  at 
Breslau  in  1894,  was  created  a  consistorial  coundlo: 
in  the  latter  year;  became  provost  of  St.  Peters 
at  Berlin,  1907.  In  1883  he  was  one  of  the  found- 
ers of  the  Verein  fUr  Reformationageschichte,  and 
has  edited:  Der  Brief weched  dee  Justus  Jonas  (2 
vols.,  1885);  shared  in  the  Brunswick  edition  and 
edited  the  third,  fourth,  eighth,  and  part  of  the 
twelfth  volimies  of  the  Weimar  edition  of  Luther 
(Weimar,  1885-91);  Zwei  dlteeU  Caiechismen  df^ 
lutheriechen  Reformation  (Halle,  1891);  the  third 
volume  of  W.  MOller's  Lehrbuch  der  Kirchenge- 
schichU  (Tubingen,  1907);  Schleeiechee  Hauschonl- 
buck  (Breslau,  1898);  and  the  fifth  edition  of  J 
KOstlin's  MaHin  Luther  (2  vols.,  Berlin,  19(H- 
1905);  As  independent  works  he  has  written:  Jo- 
hann Agricola  von  Eisleben  (Berlin,  1881);  Caspar 
Gattelf  ein  LtbemMd  aus  Luthere  Freundeskrem 
(Halle,  1882);  Ueber  Berechtigung  und  Bedeutvng 
dee  landesherrlichen  Kirchenregiments  (Kiel,  1887': 
De  digamia  epiecoporum  (1889);  Luthere  Lebensendi 
in  neueeter  uUramontanietiecher  Bdeuchiung  (Bar- 
men, 1890);  C.  H.  Spurgeon,  ein  Prediger  tofl 
Gotiee  Gnaden  (Hamburg,  1892);  Hieronymus  Em- 
ser  (Halle,  1898);  Die  Versuche  Mdanchthon  sur 
kaiholiechen  Kirche  zuruckeufuhren  (1902);  and 
Luihers  RUckkehr  von  der  Wartburg  nach  TTiU^ 
berg  (1902). 

KAYS,  k6,  JOHN:  Bishop  of  Lincob;  b.  at 
Hammersmith,  London,  Dec.  27,  1783;  d.  at  Rise- 
holme  (2  m.  n.  of  Lincoln),  Lincolnshire,  Feb.  IS, 


803 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


XautB 


1853.     He  studied  at  Christ's  College,  Cambridge 
(B.A.,  1804;  M.A.,  1807;  B.D.,  1814;  D.D.,  1816), 
where  he  became  fellow  in  1804.    He  was  tutor  of 
Christ's  College,   1808-14,  master   1814-30,   vice- 
chanoellor  of  the  university  1815,  and  regius  pro- 
fessor of  divinity  after  1816.    In  this  capacity  it 
was  his  peculiar  service  to  recall  theological  stu- 
dents to  the  study  of  the  Fathers.     He  was  conse- 
crated bishop  of  Bristol  in  1820,  and  translated  to 
Lincoln    in    1827.    His    episcopal    administration 
was  marked  by  aggressiveness  and  efficiency.    He 
increased  the  number  of  resident  clergy  in  the  di- 
ocese of  Lincoln,  revived  the  office  of  rural  dean, 
and  was  the  first  bishop  to  require  candidates  for 
orders  to  pass  the  theological  examination  of  the 
University  of  Cambridge  which  up  to  that  time 
had  been  voluntary.     His  principal  works  are:  The 
Ecclesiastical  History  of  the  Second  and  Third  Ceniu- 
ries,  Illustrated  from  the  Writings  of  TertuUian  (Cam- 
bridge, 1825);   The  Writings  and  Opinions  of  Justin 
Martyr  ( 1829) ;  The  Writings  and  Opinions  of  Clement 
of  Alexandria  (London,  1835);   The  Council  of  Ni- 
coea,  in  Connexion  with  the  Life  of  Athanasius  (1853) ; 
The  External  OovemmerU  and  Discipline  of  the  Church 
of  Christ  during  the  First  Three  Centuries  (1855). 
All  of  these,  with  his  sermons,  charges,  and  mis- 
cellaneous writings,  were  collected  in  his  Works  (8 
vols.,  London,  1888). 

Bibliography:   A  Memoir  is  prefixed  to  the  Work9,  ut  sup. 
Consult  DNB,  xxix.  252-253. 

KAYSER,  koi'eer,  AUGUST:  German  Protes- 
tant theologian;  b.  at  Strasbui>g  Feb.  14,  1821;  d. 
there  June  17,  1885.  He  was  educated  at  the  uni- 
versity of  his  native  city,  and  was  appointed  assist- 
ant librarian  in  1840.  From  1843  to  1855  he  acted 
as  private  tutor  at  Havre  and  Gebweiler.  In  1858 
he  was  appointed  pastor  at  Stossweier,  Upper 
Alsace,  whence  he  went  to  Neuhof,  near  Strasburg, 
in  1868,  and  nine  years  later  became  associate  pro- 
fessor of  theology  at  the  University  of  Strasburg. 
Influenced  by  his  teacher,  Eduard  Reuss,  Kayser 
was  especially  attracted  to  the  study  of  the  Old 
Testament,  althougn  his  first  scientific  investiga- 
tions dealt  with  the  literature  and  theology  of  the 
first  centuries  of  the  Christian  era.  The  results  of 
these  investigations  were  embodied  in  La  phUoso- 
phie  de  Celse  et  ses  rapports  avec  le  Christianisme 
(Strasburg,  1843),  De  Justini  Mariyris  doctrina  dis- 
sertatio  historica  (1850),  and  Die  Testamente  der 
zwdlf  Patriarchen  (in  Reuss  and  Cimitz,  Beitrdge 
2U  den  theologischen  Wissenschaften,  iii.,  1851). 

By  comparing  the  commandments  with  the  his- 
torical traditions  of  the  Pentateuch  Kayser  had 
early  come  to  the  conviction  that  the  Elohistic  code 
could  not  possibly  antedate  the  restoration  of  the 
Jewish  commonwealth  under  Persian  rule.  He 
had  just  prepared  a  work  on  this  question  when 
C.  H.  Graf's  Die  geschichtlichen  Bucher  des  Alien 
Testaments  (Leipsic,  1866)  appeared,  voicing  the 
same  view.  Kayser  therefore  refrained  from  pub- 
lishing his  own  book,  and  devoted  himself  to  the 
problem  from  the  point  of  view  of  literary  history. 
The  results  of  his  studies  appeared  under  the  title 
Das  vorexUische  Buch  der  Urgeschichte  Israels  und 
seine  Erweiterungen  (Strasbui^,  1874).  He  wrote 
the  posthimious  Die  Theologie  des  Alien  Testaments 


in  xhrer  geschiehUichen  EntwickeHung  dargesteOt  (Stras- 
burg, 1886).  (A.  ERiCHflONf.) 

KEACH,  BENJAMIN:  Particular  or  Calvinistic 
Baptist;  b.  at  Stoke  Hammond  (11  m.  n.e.  of 
Aylesbury),  Buckinghamshire,  Feb.  29,  1640;  d. 
at  Southwark,  London,  July  18,  1704.  He  entered 
the  Baptist  ministry  as  a  self-taught  man  in  1659, 
and  sudffered  during  his  career  frequent  persecu- 
tions. On  Oct.  8,  1664,  he  was  tried  at  Aylesbury 
before  Sir  Robert  Hyde,  for  having  taken  "  certain 
damnable  positions  "  regarding  the  second  advent 
in  a  catechism  he  had  published.  He  was  sen- 
tenced to  a  fine  of  twenty  poimds  and  two  weeks' 
imprisonment,  with  the  pillory  on  separate  days  at 
Aylesbury  and  Winslow.  This  sentence  was  rig- 
orously executed,  and  Keach's  little  book  was 
burned  by  the  public  hangman.  In  1668  he  re- 
moved to  London  and  became  pastor  of  the  Bap- 
tist church  in  Tooley  Street,  Southwark.  On  the 
indulgence  of  1672  his  congregation  erected  a  large 
wooden  structure  at  Horsleydown.  Keach  was  an 
advocate  of  congregational  singing,  and  his  church 
is  said  to  have  been  the  first  Baptist  church  to  in- 
troduce that  practise  (1688).  He  attained  consid- 
erable fame  as  a  preacher  and  defender  of  Baptist 
doctrines.  His  most  important  works  are:  Tro- 
pologia:  a  Key  to  open  Scripture  Metaphors  (Lon- 
don, 1682;  new  ed.,  1855);  and  Gospel  Mysteries 
Unveiled  (4  parU,  1701;  new  ed.,  1856).  Other 
works  still  remembered  are,  Travels  of  True  Godli- 
ness (1683;  new  ed.,  1849);  The  Progress  qf  Sin: 
or  the  Travels  of  Ungodliness  (1684;  new  ed.,  1849); 
and  A  Golden  Mine  Opened  (1694). 
Bibuoorapbt:   DNB,  xxx.  254-255,  where  may  be  found 

refefenoes  to  scattered  notices;  a  Memoir,  by  H.  MaJcom, 

was  prefixed  to  his  Travels  cf  True  Oodlineea,  New  York, 

1831. 

KEAHE,  JOHN  JOSEPH:  Roman  Catholic  arch- 
bishop of  Dubuque,  la.;  b.  at  Ballyshannon  (22  m. 
n.e.  of  Sligo),  Coimty  Donegal,  Ireland,  Sept.  12, 
1839.  At  the  age  of  seven  he  was  taken  by  his 
parents  to  the  United  States,  and  after  engaging  in 
business  for  some  years,  studied  at  St.  Charles'  Col- 
lege, EUicott  City,  Md.  (1859-62),  and  St.  Mary's 
TheologicalSeminary,  Baltimore  (1862-^5).  He  was 
ordained  to  the  priesthood  in  1866,  and  from  that 
year  until  1878  was  curate  of  St.  Patrick's,  Wash- 
ington, D.C.  In  1878  he  was  consecrated  bishop 
of  Richmond,  Va.,  whence  he  was  translated,  in 
1888,  to  the  titular  see  of  Ajasso,  that  he  might  de- 
vote himself  to  the  upbuilding  of  the  Catholic  Uni- 
versity of  America,  Washington,  D.  C,  of  which  he 
had  been  appointed  rector  two  years  previously, 
when  he  had  resigned  his  diocese  at  the  request  of 
the  American  hierarchy  and  of  the  pope.  He  re- 
mained at  the  head  of  the  Catholic  University  until 
1897,  when  he  was  elevated  to  the  titular  arch- 
diocese of  Damascus.  On  his  return  from  a  visit 
to  Rome  he  was  translated  to  his  present  arch- 
diocese of  Dubuque.  During  his  curacy  at  Wash- 
ington he  helped  to  organize  the  Catholic  Total  Ab- 
stinence Union  of  America  and  the  Catholic  Yoimg 
Men's  National  Union,  while  during  his  episcopate 
at  Richmond  he  established  in  his  diocese  the  Con- 
fraternity of  the  Holy  Ghost,  besides  taking  part 
in  the  Third  Plenary  Council,  held  at  Baltimore  in 


Xaim 


ktor 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


804 


1884.  He  was  likewise  active  in  the  pramotion  of 
religious  and  educational  work  among  the  colored 
people  of  his  see.  He  was  Dudleian  lecturer  at 
ELarvard  in  1890,  and  has  written  Onward  and 
Upward  (Baltimore,  1902). 

KBATOR,  FRBDBRIC  WILLIAM:  Protestant 
Episcopal  missionary  bishop  of  Olympia,  Wash.; 
b.  at  Honesdale,  Pa.,  Oct.  22,  1855.  He  was  grad- 
uated at  Yale  College  in  1880,  the  Yale  Law  School 
in  1882,  and  the  Western  Theological  Seminary, 
Chicago,  in  1891.  He  practised  law  in  Chicago 
from  1882  to  1890,  and  after  completing  his  theo- 
logical training  was  ordained  to  the  priesthood  in 
1891.  He  was  then  rector  of  the  C3iurch  of  the 
Atonement,  Chicago,  1891--96,  Grace  Church,  Free- 
port,  111.,  1896-99,  and  St.  John's,  Dubuque,  la., 
1899-1902.  In  1902  he  was  consecrated  missionary 
bishop  of  Olympia. 

KEBLE,  JOHll:  A  leader  of  the  Oxford  move- 
ment in  the  Church  of  England  (see  Tractarian- 
ism);  b.  at  Fairford  (24  m.  s.e.  of  Gloucester), 
Gloucestershire,  Apr.  25,  1792;  d.  at  Bournemouth 
(25  m.  s.w.  of  Southampton),  Hampshire,  Mar.  29, 
1866.  He  was  educated  by  his  father  (a  clergy- 
man) and  at  Corpus  Christi  CoUege,  Oxford;  be- 
came fellow  of  Oriel  (at  the  time  the  foremost  col- 
lege in  Oxford)  in  1811  and  was  tutor  1818-23; 
was  ordained  priest  in  1816;  became  curate  of 
East  Leach  and  Burthorpe  (near  Fairford)  in  1818, 
curate  of  Hursley,  Hampshire,  in  1825,  vicar  of 
Hursley  in  1836.  From  1831  to  1841  he  held  the 
iectiuieship  on  poetry  at  Oxford. 

Keble's  reputation  rests  on  his  contributions  to 
devotional  poetry  and  his  share  in  spreading  sacr^- 
mentarian  views  in  the  Chureh  of  England  and  in 
the  development  of  the  Oxford  movement.  In 
1827  he  published,  anonymously,  The  ChrMan 
Year  (2  vols.,  Oxford),  a  collection  of  sacred  lyrics, 
which  had  been  issued  in  140  editions  when  the 
copyright  expired  in  1873.  Some  of  the  poems 
have  been  pronounced  faultless  of  their  kind.  In 
1839  appeared  The  Paalter,  or  Psalms  of  David  in 
English  Verse,  and  in  1846  Lyra  Innocentium,  a  col- 
lection of  sacred  poems  for  childhood.  Of  Keble's 
hymns  the  best  in  common  use  are  ''  O  God  of 
mercy,  God  oi  might,"  and  ''  Sun  of  my  soul,  thou 
Savior  dear,"  the  latter  taken  from  the  second  poem 
in  the  Christian  Year,  entitled  ''  Evening."  With 
the  help  of  his  brother  Thomas,  and  Charles  Dy- 
son, an  intimate  friend,  he  edited  the  works  of 
Richard  Hooker  (3  vols.,  Oxford,  1836),  spending 
five  years  on  the  task  and  producing  what  is  still 
the  standard  edition  (revised  by  R.  W.  Church 
and  F.  Paget,  3  vols.,  Oxford,  1888).  In  1838  with 
F.  W.  Newman  and  E.  B.  Pusey  he  began  to  work 
on  the  Library  of  the  Fathers,  for  which  he  trans- 
lated Irenieus.  At  Oxford  he  was  intimate  with 
Newman,  Pusey,  and  Richard  Hurrell  Froude,  and 
his  views  concerning  the  sacraments — he  regretted 
that  cireumstances  did  not  admit  of  his  introducing 
the  confessional — and  the  episcopal  constitution 
of  the  Church  inevitably  brought  him  to  the  front  in 
the  Oxford  movement.  Newman  in  his  Apologia 
pronounces  Keble  its  *'  true  and  primary  author." 
He  wrote  nine  of  the  Tracts  for  the  Times  (nos.  4, 


13,  40,  52,  54,  57,  67,  60,  89),  the  first  being  on 
apostolic  succession  and  the  last  on  the  mysticiBm 
attributed  to  the  early  Fathers.  He  approved  (rf 
Newman's  Trad  90,  but  did  not  leave  the  com- 
munion of  the  EkigUsh  Church  and  regarded  the 
doctrine  of  the  immaculate  conception  as  an  Id- 
superable  barrier  to  ecclesiastical  union.  Other 
works  are  Praelectianes  Academioae  (2  vols.,  Ox- 
ford, 1844),  his  lectures  on  poetry;  Sermons  (1847); 
and  a  Life  </  Bishop  Wilson  (2  vols.,  1863).  After 
his  death  appeared  Occasional  Papers  and  Reviews 
(Oxford,  1877)  and  eleven  volumes  of  sennoDs 
(1876-80).  Keble  was  not  eloquent  as  a  preacher, 
but  scriptural  and  impressive.  He  had  a  remark- 
able power  of  attracting  both  old  and  young. 
Shortly  after  his  death  his  friends  and  admirers 
raised  a  fund  and  erected  to  his  memoiy  Keble 
College  at  Oxford,  which  was  opened  in  1869. 

D.  S.  SCHAVF. 
Bibuoomapht:  Biocraphies  are  by  J.  T.  Coleridge,  2  vols.. 
Oxford.  1860;  W.  Loek,  Boeton.  1803.  Goneult  also: 
J.  C.  Shairp.  John  KtbU:  Bssay  on  the  AuOutr  cftho**  Chru- 
Han  Yoar."  Edinburch.  1866;  Tho  Birthplaee,  Home, 
ChurdtM  and  other  Placas  eonnoeted  tciih  A«  AtOhm-  <^  . 
"  The  ChriaHan  Year,"  with  Notee  by  J.  F.  Moor,  (Mord, 
1867;  J.  H.  Newman.  Seeaye  Critieia  and  Hielorieal,  iL 
421  sqq.,  London,  1873,  and  ef.  the  Apotogia;  8.  W.  Duf- 
field,  Englith  Hymne,  PP.  600-602.  New  York,  1866; 
Julian,  HymnaHooy,  pp.  610-613;  DNB,  xxx.  291-205. 

KECKBRMAim,  BARTHOLOMAEUS:  German 
Reformed  theologian;  b.  at  Dansig  1571  (1573?); 
d.  there  Aug.  25,  1609.  He  studied  at  Witten-  ' 
beig,  Leipsic,  and  Heidelbeiig,  where  he  became 
professor  of  Hebrew.  From  1601  till  his  death 
he  was  rector  and  professor  of  philosophy  at  the 
Reformed  Gymnasium  of  his  native  dty.  All 
lus  literary  works  grew  out  <A  courses  of  lectures. 
His  Opera  omifia  (2  vols.,  Geneva,  1614)  comprise 
the  whole  sphere  of  philosophy,  which  he  treated 
in  the  spirit  of  a  strict  Aristotelianism,  while  many 
other  Reformed  theologians  adopted  the  method 
and  ideas  of  Petrus  Ramus.  HIb  theological  works, 
Rhetorica  ecdesiastica  (3d.  ed.,  Hanau,  1606),  and 
Systema  theologicum  (1602,  and  often;  Eng.  transl., 
A  Manuduction  to  Theology  [Ixmdon,  16207])  form 
only  an  appendix;  and  his  dogmatic  system  is  inter- 
esting chiefly  on  account  of  its  method.  Kecker- 
mann  starts  from  a  subjective  point  of  view,  from 
the  enjoyment  of  God  by  man.  The  first  book  of 
the  Systema  treats  of  God  as  the  highest  aim  of 
man.  From  the  highest  aim  Keokermann  proceeds 
analytically  to  the  means  for  its  attainment,  which 
are  knowledge  of  our  misery  and  deliverance  from 
it.  Hence  he  distingubhed  two  parts  of  theology, 
a  thedogia  pathologiki  (book  ii.,  doctrines  of  the  orig- 
inal state,  fall,  and  sin),  and  a  theologia  therapeutike 
(book  iii.,  election,  redemption,  justification,  and 
perfection) .  But  he  did  not  follow  the  consequences 
of  his  subjective  starting-point  beyond  the  structure 
of  the  external  frame.  Keckermann's  attempt  to 
transfer  ethics  from  theology  to  philosophy  is  still 
worthy  of  note.  (£.  F.  Karl  MtyixER.) 

Bibuoorapby:  M.  Adam,  Viiae  Oermanorum  phUoeophormm, 
pp.  232  sqq.,  Frankfort.  1706;  P.  Bayie,  DUOonary  Bie- 
torieal  and  CriHeal,  iii.  666.  London.  1786;  A.  Sdnraier. 
Olaubenelehre  der  eoanoeUeeh^ormierten  Kirthe,  i.  96. 
it  151  aqq..  Zurich.  1844;  F.  W.  J.  H.  Ga«.  GeeehidOt 
der  proteetantitehen  Doffmaiik,  I  406  Kiq..  Berlin,  1854. 


806 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Kaator 


KEDNBY,  JOHN  STBINFORT:  Protestant  Epis- 
copal; b.  at  Bioomfield,  N.  J.,  Feb.  12,  1819.  He 
was  educated  at  Union  College  (A.B.,  1838)  and 
General  Theological  Seminary  (1841).  He  was  or- 
dered deacon  in  1841  and  priested  in  1843.  After 
being  a  missionary  in  North  Carolina  from  1842  to 
1845,  he  was  rector  of  St.  John's,  Salem,  N.  J. 
(1847-52),  Bethesda,  Saratoga  Springs,  N.  Y. 
(1852-^9),  Trinity,  Society  Hills,  S.  C.  (1859-65), 
Trinity,  Potsdam,  N.  Y.  (1865-70),  and  Trinity, 
Camden,  S.  C.  (1870-71).  Since  1871  he  has  been 
professor  of  divinity  in  Seabuiy  Divinity  School, 
Faribault,  Minn.,  although  advancing  years  have 
compelled  him  to  retire  from  active  work.  He  has 
written:  Catawba  River,  and  Other  Poems  (New  York, 
1846);  The  BeautifuL  and  the  SvbLime  (1884); 
Hegd'B  Esthetics  (Chicago,  1886);  Chrietian  Doo- 
trine  Harmonized  (2  vols..  New  York,  1888);  Mene 
Chrieti  (1890);  and  PrMeme  in  Ethics  (1900). 

KEDRON.    See  Kidbon. 

KEENEy  JAMES  BENNETT:  Church  of  Ire- 
land, bishop  of  Meath;  b.  at  Dublin  Oct.  25,  1849. 
He  studied  at  Trinity  College,  Dublin  (B.A.,  1871), 
and  was  ordered  deacon  in  1872  and  ordained  priest 
in  the  following  year.  He  was  curate  of  St.  Mat- 
thias, Dublin  (1872-74),  diocesan  curate  of  Meath 
(1874-77),  Y.  M.  C.  A.  chaplain  at  Dublin  (1877- 
1879),  incumbent  of  Ballyboy  (1879),  and  rector  of 
Navan  (1879-97).  In  1897  he  was  consecrated 
bishop  of  Meath.  He  has  been  examining  chap- 
lain to  the  bishop  of  Meath  (1885-94),  prebendary 
of  Tipper  and  canon  of  St.  Patrick's  Cathedral, 
Dublin  (1892-97),  and  rural  dean  of  Skr3me  (1896- 
1897). 

KEENER,  JOHN  CHRISTIAN:  Methodist  Epis- 
copal (South)  bishop;  b.  at  Baltimore,  Md.,  Feb. 
7,  1819.  He  was  graduated  at  Wesleyan  Univer- 
sity, Middletown,  Conn.,  in  1835,  and,  after  being 
engaged  in  business  for  six  years,  entered  the  minis- 
try of  his  denomination  in  1841.  For  the  next 
seven  years  he  was  pastor  of  churches  in  Alabama, 
and  from  1848  to  1861  was  pastor  at  New  Orleans, 
being  also  presiding  elder  in  1858  and  1860.  He 
was  then  superintendent  of  the  chaplains  attached 
to  the  Confederate  Army  west  of  the  Mississippi 
until  1864,  when  he  returned  to  New  Orleans  as 
presiding  elder  and  editor  of  the  New  Orleans  Chris- 
tian Advocate,  In  1870  he  was  elected  bishop.  In 
1873  he  established  a  Methodist  Episcopal  mission 
in  Mexico.  He  has  written:  The  Post  Oak  Circuit 
(Nashville,  Tenn.,  1857);  Studies  of  Bible  Truths 
(1899);  and  The  Oarden  of  Eden  and  the  Flood 
(1900). 

KEIL,  kail,  KARL  AUGUST  GOTTLIEB:  Ger- 
man theologian;  b.  at  Grossenhain  (19  m.  n.n.w. 
of  Dresden),  Saxony,  Apr.  23,  1754;  d.  at  Leipsic 
Apr.  22,  1818.  Left  an  orphan  at  an  early  age,  he 
was  adopted  by  an  unde  in  Leipsic  in  1763,  and 
studied  at  the  university  of  that  dty.  In  1785  he 
was  appointed  assistant  professor  of  philosophy; 
became  assistant  professor  of  theology  two  years 
later,  and  in  1792,  upon  the  death  of  his  former 
teacher.  Professor  Moms,  he  succeeded  to  the  chair 
of  theology.  Keil  may  be  regarded  as  a  worthy 
VI.-20 


representative  of  the  Leipsic  school  of  theolpgy, 
which  exercised  a  considerable  influence  during  the 
latter  part  of  the  eighteenth  and  the  beginning  of 
the  nineteenth  century.  He  published  a  Lehriuch 
der  Hermeneutik  des  Neuen  Testaments  (Leipsic, 
1810)  and  wrote  a  number  of  essays,  which  were 
collected  by  J.  D.  Goldhom  and  published  under 
the  title  KeUii  opuscula  academica  ad  Novi  Testa- 
menti  interpretationem  grammatico-historicam  et 
theoloffiae  christianae  origines  pertinentia  (1820). 
From  1812  to  1817  Keil  collaborated  with  Tsschir- 
ner  in  editing  the  Analekten  fitr  das  Studium  der 
exegetischen  und  systematischen  Theologie, 

(WOLDBMAB  SCHMinrt.) 
BiBUoaBAPHT:   His  autobiography  ia  included  in  Kraiuler, 
Betdireibuno  der  FeierlichkeUen  am  Jvbtlfute  der  CAni- 
vermiiU  LeipgUf,  Dee.  4,  1809,  pp.  10-16,  Leipne,  1810. 

KEIL,  JOHANN  FRIEDRICH  KARL:  German 
Protestant  exegete;  b.  at  Lauterbach  near  Olsnita 
(25  m.  S.W.  of  Zwickau),  Saxony,  Feb.  26,  1807;  d. 
at  lUkilitz  (8  m.  s.e.  of  Glauchau),  Saxony,  May  6, 
1888.  He  studied  theolpgy  in  Dorpat  and  Berlin, 
and  in  1833  accepted  a  oall  to  the  theological  fac- 
ulty of  Dorpat,  where  he  labored  for  twenty-five 
years  as  docent  and  professor  of  Old-  and  New-Tes- 
tament exegesis  and  Oriental  languages.  With  Sar- 
torius,  Busch,  later  Philippi,  Theodosius,  Hamack 
and  Kurts,  he  educated  for  the  Baltic  provinces  a 
generation  of  preachers  who  faithfully  adhered  to 
the  confession  of  the  Church.  In  1859  he  settled  at 
Leipsic,  where  he  devoted  himself  to  literary  work 
and  to  the  practical  affairs  of  the  Lutheran  Church. 
In  1887  he  removed  to  ROdlits,  continuing  there  his 
literary  activity  until  his  death.  He  belonged  to  the 
strictly  orthodox  and  conservative  school  of  Heng- 
stenbeig.  Ignoring  almost  entirely  modem  criti- 
cism, aU  his  writings  represent  the  view  that  the 
books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  are  to  be  re- 
tained as  the  revealed  word  of  Gk>d.  TiU  the  veiy 
last  he  regarded  the  modem  development  of  (German 
theologicad  science  as  a  passing  phase  of  error. 
His  chief  work  is  the  commentaiy  on  the  Old  Testa- 
ment (4  vols,  in  14,  Leipsic,  1861-75;  Eng.  transl., 
25  vols.,  Edinburgh,  1864-78),  which  he  undertook 
with  Franz  Delitzsch.  To  this  work  he  contrib- 
uted commentaries  on  all  the  books  from  Genesis 
to  Esther  inclusive,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  Daniel,  and 
the  minor  prophets.  He  also  published  commen- 
taries on  MaccsJi)ee8  (Leipsic,  1875),  Matthew  (1877), 
Mark  and  Luke  (1879),  John  (1881),  Peter  and  Jude 
(1883),  and  Hebrews  (1885).  Other  works  are:  Der 
Tempei  Salomos  (Dorpat,  1839);  Einleitung  in  die 
kanomschen  Schriften  des  AUen  Testaments  (Frank- 
fort, 1853;  3d  ed.,  1873;  Eng.  transl.,  2  vols.. 
Manual  of  HistoruxhCritiixd  Introduction  to  ,  .  , 
The  O.  7.,  Edinburgh,  1870);  and  Handbuch  der 
hiblischen  Archdologie  (1858-59;  2d.  ed.,  1875;  Eng. 
transl..  Manual  of  Biblical  ArchoBology,  2  vols., 
Edinburgh,  1887-«8).  0^.  J.  A.  Keil.) 

KEIM,  koim,  KARL  THEODOR:  German  his- 
torical thedogian;  b.  at  Stuttgart  Dec.  17,  1825; 
d.  at  Giessen  Nov.  17,  1878.  He  studied  theology 
from  1843  to  1847  at  Tabingen,  devoting  himself 
with  special  seal  to  Oriental  languages,  and  being 
influenced  by  F.  C.  Baur.  He  was  tutor  in  the 
family  of  Count  Sontheim,  1848-50;  in  1850  con- 


Kaim 
KeUer 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


806 


tinued  hia  studies  at  Bonn;  was  lecturer  at  Tu- 
bingen, 1851-55;  pastor  in  Esslingen,  Warttemberg, 
185&-^9.  From  1860  to  1873  he  was  professor  of 
historical  theology  at  the  University  of  ZUrich,  and 
from  1873  until  shortly  before  his  death,  when  ill 
health  compelled  his  resignation,  held  a  correspond- 
ing position  at  Giessen.  The  three  years  of  preach- 
ing and  pastoral  labor  at  Esslingen,  of  which  a 
memorial  exists  in  Freundeaworte  zur  Gemeinde,  a 
collection  of  sermons  (Stuttgart,  1861),  show  him  to 
have  been  an  eloquent  and  ediJPying  preacher;  but 
he  was  essentially  a  scholar.  His  chief  importance 
for  Evangelical  theology  lies  in  the  sphere  of  his- 
tory, especially  in  the  investigation  and  scientific 
establishment  of  the  historical  foimdations  of 
Christian  faith.  After  his  first  theological  ezaminar 
tk>n  he  published  a  prize  essay,  VerhdUnia  der  ChrU^ 
ten  in  den  ersten  drei  Jahrhunderten  bia  KonstanHn 
turn  romischen  Reiche  (1848).  The  Revolution  of 
1848  caused  him  to  leave  Tilbingen  and  return  to 
his  native  city  where  he  occupied  himself  first  with 
the  study  of  primitive  Christianity,  but  soon  turned 
to  the  history  of  the  Reformation,  especially  in 
Swabia.  In  the  latter  field  he  published:  Die  Refar- 
motion  der  Reichestadt  Ulm  (Stuttgart,  1851); 
Schwdbische  Reformationegeechichte  bia  mm  Auga- 
burger  Reichstag  (TQbingen,  1855);  Awbroaiua 
Blarer  (Stuttgart,  1860);  Refarmationabl&tter  der 
Reichaatadt  Eaalingen  (Esslingen,  1860).  His  his- 
torical investigations  show  scientific  earnestness  and 
f^rcat  freedom  from  prejudice  combined  with  a  deep 
insight  into  the  character  of  the  Reformers  as 
Thinkers  upon  the  great  religious  and  political 
questions  of  the  time.  At  Ztlrich  Keim  devoted 
himself  exclusively  to  the  study  of  primitive  Chris- 
tianity. His  special  effort  was  to  explain  the 
development  of  the  Christian  Church  from  its  apos- 
tolic origin  up  to  its  conquest  over  the  old  faith 
and  the  military  power  of  the  Roman  Empire, 
and  to  give  a  scientific  representation  of  the 
historic  origin  of  our  faith,  the  history  of  Jesus. 
The  results  along  the  first  of  these  two  lines  are  set 
forth  especially  in:  Die  romiachen  Toleramedikte  far 
daa  Chriatentum  und  ikr  geachichUicher  Wert  and 
Bedenken  gegen  die  Echtheit  dea  hadrianiachen 
Ckriatenreakripta  (in  Theologiache  Jdhrbucher^  1852, 
1856);  Der  Uebertritt  Konatantina  dea  Oroaaen  zum 
Chriatentum  (ZQrich,  1862);  Cetaua*  Wahrea  WoH 
(ib.  1873);  Aua  dem  Urchriatentum.  GeachichUiche 
Unlerauchungen  in  zwangloaer  Fclge  (ib.  1878);  and 
Rom  und  daa  Chriatentum  (Berlin,  1881).  In  re- 
gard to  the  origin  of  our  faith  he  wrote:  Die  menach- 
liche  Entwickdung  Jeau  Chriaii  (ZOrich,  1861),  Die 
geachichtliche  Wiirde  Jeau  (ib.  1864);  he  then  re- 
published the  two  just  named,  with  a  new  lecture, 
under  the  caption,  Der  geachichtliche  Chriatua  (ib. 
1865);  then  followed  his  greatest  works,  Die  Ge- 
achichte  Jeau  von  Nazara  in  ihrer  Verkettung  mit 
dem  GeaammUeben  aeinea  Volkeafrei  unteraucht  und 
auafuhrlich  erkldH  (3  vols.,  ib.  1867-72;  Eng.  transl.. 
The  History  of  Jeaua  of  Nazareth,  6  vols.,  London, 
1873-82).  In  order  to  give  his  views  a  wider  cur- 
rency, Keim  published  Die  Geachichte  Jeau  nach  den 
Ergebnissen  heidiger  Wiasenachaft  fiir  weitere  Kreise 
iibersichtlich  erzdhU  (1874.  1875).  Although  he  em- 
phasized chiefly  the  human  side  in  Christ,  he  can 


not  be  called  a  "  Unitarian. "  While  minimizing  the 
miraculous  element  in  Christianity,  and  in  spite  of 
the  most  concrete  conception  of  the  human  limita- 
tions and  development  of  its  founder,  he  considered 
Jesus  not  only  the  greatest  upon  earth,  but  the  Son 
**  in  whom  the  Father  reveals  himself."  In  his  criti- 
cism of  the  historical  sources  he  starts  from  Paul, 
whose  epistles  he  r^ards  as  the  firm  basis  for 
Evangelical  history  and  the  dedsive  test  for  judg- 
ing aU  other  events;  and  in  this  criticism  he  pro- 
ceeds entirely  according  to  objective  points  of  view, 
unhampered  by  any  dogmatic  theory  of  inspiration. 
He  rejected  the  fourth  Gospel;  among  the  synoptic 
Gospels  he  gave  the  preference  to  Matthew,  which, 
according  to  him,  originated  as  early  as  68  and  is 
distinguished  by  primitive  simplicity  and  absence 
of  preconceived  notions,  showing  only  slight  traces 
of  revision.  Luke,  according  to  Keim,  obscured 
the  simple  representation  of  Matthew  by  his  medi- 
ating Pauline  standpoint.  Mark  wrote  in  the  in- 
terest of  a  world-embracing  universalism,  chang- 
ing the  picture  of  Jesus  in  Matthew  by  omitting 
the  most  important  speeches  wherever  they  clash 
with  his  theory.  Keim's  work  shows  rare  scientific 
solidity  and  deep  penetration,  and  holds  a 
position  in  the  literature  of  the  life  of  Jesus 
which  can  not  be  neglected  even  by  those  who 
do  not  share  his  rationahstic  standpoint. 

(H.  ZlSGLER.) 

KEIMANN,  koi'mOn  (KEYMANN),  CHRISTIAN: 
Saxon  educator  and  hynm-writer;  b.  at  Pankraz, 
near  Gabel  (50  m.  n.n.e.  of  Prague),  Bohemia,  Feb. 
27,  1607;  d.  at  Zittau  (50  m.  e.s.e.  of  Dresden), 
Saxony,  Jan.  13,  1662.  He  attended  the  gymna- 
sium at  Zittau  and  the  University  of  Wittenberg 
(M.A.,  1634),  became  associate  rector  of  the  gym- 
nasium at  Zittau  in  1634  and  was  rector  from  1639 
till  his  death.  His  Easter  hymn,  Meinen  Jeaum 
laaa  ich  nicht  ("  My  Savior  will  I  not  forsake  ")  has 
been  extremely  popular.  Also  the  Christmas  hymn, 
FreudCf  Freude  iiber  Freude  ("  O  joy  all  joys  ex- 
celling "),  the  Advent  hymn,  Hoaianna,  Davids 
Sohn  ("  Hosannah  to  the  Son  of  David  "),  and  the 
Passion  hymn,  Sei  gegrOtaaet,  Jeau  gOtig  ("  Hail  to 
the  Savior  benign  "),  a  paraphrase  of  S^ve,  Jeau, 
aumme  bonua  by  Bernard  of  Clairvaux,  found  much 
acceptance.  On  July  31,  1651,  he  was  crowned 
imperial  poet-laureate.  He  was  also  active  as  a 
pedagogical  author.  Religious  education  was  fos- 
tered by  his  Mnemosgne  sacra  (GOrlitz,  1646),  and 
Micae  evangeticae  (Zittau,  1655);  also  by  the  col- 
lection of  proverbs  originally  issued  by  Gerladi, 
SerUentiarum  aacrarum  cerUuriae  duae  (Dresden, 
1635).  Of  wide  use  in  linguistic  instruction  were 
his  Tabulae  declinationum  (Leipsic,  1649),  and  the 
Enchiridion  grammaticum  Latinum  (Jena,  1649), 
and  his  books  on  his  logic,  rhetoric,  and  arith- 
metic were  issued  repeatedly.  He  also  wrote  a 
number  of  school  dramas.  Georg  Mueller. 

Biblxoorapht:  An  early  life  is  by  G.  Weia,  Memcria  C. 
Keimanni,  Zittau,  1689;  the  modem  one  by  H.  J.  Kdm- 
mel,  Chriatian  Keimann,  ib.  1866;  idem,  in  ADB,  xr. 
535-536.  Consult  further:  O.  E.  Koch,  Oe$ehichte  da 
KirchenliedM,  Stuttgart.  1867;  A.  F.  W.  Fisdker.  Kirdten- 
liederUxikon,  I  195.  312.  ii.  62,  248,  282,  449,  Gotha. 
1878-79;  Julian.  Hvmnologv,  pp.  613-614.  A  laiff 
literatura  is  indicated  in  Hauck-Heriog,  BE,  x.  202. 


307 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


KaUer 


KEITH,  kith,  ALEXANDER:  aergyman  of  the 
Free  Church  of  Scotland;  b.  at  Keith  Hall  (11  zn. 
n.w.  of  Aberdeen),  Aberdeenshire,  Nov.  30,  1791; 
d.  at  Buxton  (160  m.  n.w.  of  London),  Derbyshire, 
Feb.  8,  1880.  He  studied  at  the  Marischal  College 
and  University  of  Aberdeen  (B.A.,  1809;  D.D., 
1833),  was  licensed  to  preach  in  1813,  and  was  pre- 
sented the  same  year  to  St.  Cyrus,  Kincardineshire, 
which  he  resigned  in  1840  on  account  of  ill  health. 
In  1839  he  visited  Palestine  as  a  member  of  a  com- 
mission sent  out  by  the  Church  of  Scotland  to  in- 
quire into  the  condition  of  the  Jews,  preparatory 
to  the  establishment  of  a  mission  among  them. 
At  the  disruption  of  1843  he  joined  the  Free  Church. 
He  was  the  author  of  several  works  on  prophecy, 
the  best  known  being  Evidence  of  the  Tiidh  of  the 
Christian  Religion,  Derived  from  the  Literal  Ful- 
filment of  Prophecy  (Edinburgh,  1828;  40th  ed., 
London,  1873).  Other  works  are:  The  Signs  of  the 
Times  (2  vols.,  Edinburgh,  1832);  Demonstration 
of  the  TnUh  of  Christianity  (1838);  The  Harmony 
of  Prophecy  (1861);  and  The  Hilary  and  Destiny 
,ofthe  World  (London,  1861). 

Bibuoobapht:  A.  Black,  Jewish  Mitnanary  TraveU  to  the 
Jewe,  pp.  3  aqq..  Newcastle,  1841;  Hew  Soott,  FaeH 
eeeUaiae  SeUieanae,  iii.,  2,  pp.  866.  881,  London,  1871; 
DNB,  XXX.  316-316. 

KEITH,  GEORGE:  Scotch  Quaker,  afterward 
Anglican  clergyman  and  missionary  to  America; 
b.,  probably  in  Aberdeenshire,  1639;  d.  at  Edbuiv 
ton  (20  m.  e.  of  Chichester),  Sussex,  Mar.  27,  1716. 
After  receiving  the  degree  of  M.  A.  from  Marischal 
Collie,  Aberdeen,  he  became  tutor  and  chaplain 
in  a  noble  family.  He  was  designed  for  the  Pres- 
byterian ministry,  but  about  1664  adopted  the 
tenets  of  the  Quakers,  and  soon  won  a  prominent 
position  in  the  councils  of  the  sect.  He  was  inti- 
mately associated  with  Robert  Barclay,  George 
Fox,  and  William  Penn.  After  having  been  fre- 
quently imprisoned  for  preaching  in  England, 
Keith  emigrated  to  America  about  1685,  served  for 
a  time  as  surveyor-general  in  New  Jersey,  and  set- 
tled in  Philadelphia  in  1689  as  principal  of  a  Friends' 
school.  Subsequently  he  traveled  in  New  England 
and  defended  the  principles  of  the  Quakers  in  con- 
troversy with  Increase  Mather  and  others.  Hav- 
ing become  involved  in  bitter  disputes  with  other 
leaders  of  the  sect,  in  1692  Keith  headed  a  faction 
called  "Keithites,"  or  '' CSuistian  Quakers."  In 
1694  he  returned  to  England,  where  he  was  de- 
nounced by  Penn  as  an  apostate  and  dismissed 
from  the  society  at  the  Annual  Meeting  of  1695. 
After  preaching  to  his  followers  for  five  years  at 
Turners'  Hall,  London,  he  united  with  the  Estab- 
lished Church  in  1700,  and  subsequently  led  several 
hundred  Quakers  to  conform.  From  1702  till  1704 
he  traveled  in  America  as  a  missionary  of  the  So- 
ciety for  the  Propagation  of  the  Gospel  in  Foreign 
Parts.  From  1706  till  his  death  he  was  rector  of 
Edburton,  Sussex.  He  is  said  to  have  been  one 
of  the  most  scholarly  and  versatile  men  ever  en- 
rolled by  the  Quakers.  The  more  important  of 
his  numerous  writings  are:  The  Deism  of  William 
Penn  and  his  Brethren  (London,  1699);  The  Stand- 
ard of  the  Quakers  Examined  (1702);  and  A  Journal 
of  Travels  (1706). 


Bibuoorapht:    DNB,  txx.  318-321,  where  references  to 
scattered  notices  are  given. 

KEITH-FALCONER,  HONORABLE  ION  GRANT 
NEVn^LE :  Church  of  Scotland  layman;  the  third  son 
of  the  ninth  earl  of  Kintore ;  b.  in  Edinburgh  July 
5,  1856;  d.  at  Aden,  Arabia,  May  11,  1887.  He 
was  educated  at  Harrow  Public  School,  and  at 
Cambridge  University,  at  both  of  which  he  distin- 
guished him8e.lf  not  only  by  scholarship  but  by  his 
bicycle-riding.  He  was  appointed  Lord  Almoner's 
professor  of  Arabic  at  Cambridge,  1886.  He  also 
taught  himself  Pitman's  system  of  shorthand  and 
attained  unconunon  speed  for  a  non-professional. 
He  became  deeply  interested  in  evangelistic  work 
in  Cambridge  and  in  London,  and  so  his  thoughts 
turned  to  making  his  remarkable  Oriental  learning 
available  on  the  foreign  field.  With  this  in  view  he 
paid  a  visit  to  Aden  to  see  for  himself  the  pros- 
pects of  a  mission  to  the  Mohanmiedans  and  being 
convinced  that  his  lifework  lay  in  that  direction 
he  laid  aside  his  ambition  as  an  Oriental  scholar 
in  England,  and  in  1886  went  to  Aden  as  a  lay 
missionary  of  the  Church  of  Scotland.  There,  how- 
ever, he  quickly  succimibed  to  an  attack  of  fever. 
He  was  destined  to  be  of  much  more  consequence 
in  inciting  others  to  labor  for  the  conversion  of 
Mohammedans  and  other  non-Christians  than  as 
a  worker  himself.  It  was  one  of  the  sources  of  this 
influence  that  he  was  a  nobleman  of  wealth  and 
therefore  one  who  could  not  be  accused  of  sordid 
motives.  He  died  too  soon  to  do  much  in  litera- 
ture. Still  his  article  on  shorthand  in  the  ninth 
edition  of  the  Encydopcedia  Britannica,  his  edition 
(1885)  of  Kalilah  and  Dimnahj  otherwise  known  as 
the  Fables  of  Bidpai,  and  some  of  his  papers  at- 
tracted wide  attention. 
Bibliography:     R.   Sinker,   MemoriaU  of  .  ,  .  Keith-Fal^ 

eoner,  Cambridge,  1888. 

KELLER  (CELLARIUS),  ANDREAS:  Early  Ger- 
man EvangeUcal;  b.  at  Rottenburg  (25  m.  s.w. 
of  Stuttgart),  Warttemberg,  1503;  d.  Sept.  18, 
1562.  He  probably  studied  at  Vienna.  In  the 
spring  of  1524  he  preached  the  Gospel  with  youth- 
ful fire  in  his  native  town  and  combated  the  pa- 
pacy, and  accepted  in  the  same  year  a  callto  Stras- 
burg  as  assistant  at  St.  Peter's.  In  Dec,  1524,  he 
became  pastor  at  Wasselnheim,  near  Strasburg.  . 
By  means  of  brief  tracts  he  sought  to  promote  the 
cause  of  the  Gospel,  and  abo  wrote  his  now  van- 
ished catechism,  Bericht  der  Kinder  zu  Wasdheim 
in  Frag  und  Antwort  gesteUt  (Strasburg,  1530).  In 
Sept.,  1536,  he  became  pastor  at  Wildberg,  Wttrt- 
temberg,  and  later  superintendent.  In  1542  Stras- 
bui>g  wifJied  to  recall  him,  but  he  remained  at  Wild- 
berg, reformed  the  neighboring  cloister  of  Reuthin, 
and  participated  in  the  weightiest  affairs  of  the 
State  Church,  e.g.,  in  the  memorial  with  reference 
to  the  attitude  of  the  Evangelicals  toward  the  coun- 
cil, 1543-44;  and  in  the  matter  of  advisement  con- 
cerning the  Confessio  Wirtembergica,  June,  1551. 
As  a  writer  he  now  confined  himself  to  German  ver- 
sions of  foreign  works.  G.  Bossbrt. 
Bibuoorapht:  Souroee  are:  L.  M.  Fiechlin,  Memoria  the- 
ologorum  Wirtemberffeneium,  supplement,  pp.  46,  376, 
Ulm,  170(^1710;  C.  F.  Schnurrer.  ErlAuterungen  der 
wviembergiadien  Kirehen-  lUformaUone-  und  Oelehrten'O^ 
•dbtdUc  pp.  89,  X9,  TQbincen,  1708;    T.  W.  Roehrieh, 


K«U«r 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOO 


808 


OMcMAte  dm  n^mwaHiim  im  Blmm,  L  277,  875.  iL  19. 
StrMboii.  1880-32.  Goiuult  atoo:  C.  T.  Kttm,  AAwO- 
M«eA«  Jt^armaliofMVMoftidkte,  pp.  24  aqq.,  TObincan, 
1855;  1FilHlMi6«rvuefc«  iCtrehMOMdUdkfi,  pp.  272  ■qq., 
StunfWt.  1802. 

KELLBR,  LUDWIG  KARL:  German  Refonned 
layman;  b.  at  Fritilar  (16  m.  8.w.  of  Caasel),  Prus- 
sia, Mar.  28,  1849.  He  was  educated  at  the  uni- 
versities of  Leipsio  and  Marbui|;  (Ph.D.,  1873), 
and  from  1874  to  1896  was  connected  with  the 
state  archives  of  Westphalia  at  Milnster,  where  he 
was  successively  second  assistant  (1874-81),  and 
director  (1874-95).  Since  1895  he  has  been  privy 
state  archivist  at  Berlin.  Besides  being  editor  of 
the  MonaUschrift  der  ComemiM-GtadUefurft,  he  has 
written  the  following  works  of  theological  interest: 
Oetehiehte  der  Wiedertairfer  und  ihrea  Reidu  ta 
MUntier  (Mtlnster,  1880);  Die  Oegenrefcrmaiion  in 
Weeifalen  und  am  Niedarhein,  AdenetiUke  und  Er- 
Iduterungen  (3  parts,  Leipsic,  1886-95);  Ein  Apoetel 
der  Wiederidufer  (biography  of  Hans  Denk;  1882); 
Die  ReformaHon  und  die  aUeren  Reformparieien  in 
ihrem  Zueammenhange  dargeeteiU  (1885);  Die  Wald- 
eneer  und  die  deuischen  Bibdabmeteungen  (1886); 
and  Johann  wn  Staupite  und  die  Arrfdnge  der  Re- 
farmaitum  (1888). 

KELUfSR,  KARL  ADAM  HSIHRICH:  Ger- 
man Roman  Catholic;  b.  at  Heihgenstadt  (15  m. 
n.w.  of  MOhlhausen),  Prussia,  Aug.  26,  1837.  He 
studied  at  the  academy  of  MOnster,  the  University 
of  TQbingen,  and  the  seminary  of  Treves,  and  was 
ordained  to  the  priesthood  in  1861.  He  was  then 
vicar  at  Treves  1862-65,  parish  priest  at  Bitbuig 
1866-67,  and  professor  of  canon  law  in  the  theo- 
logical seminary  at  Hildesheim  from  1867  to  1874, 
when  the  institution  was  closed  as  a  result  of  the 
Kulturkampf .  In  1874  he  was  ^pointed  professor 
of  church  histoiy  in  the  University  of  Bonn,  and 
held  this  position  until  his  retirement  from  active 
life  in  1902.  He  has  written  Bvee-  und  Siraffver- 
fahrungen  gegen  KUnker  in  den  eeehe  ertten  Jiriet- 
lichen  Jahrhunderien  (Treves,  1863);  Helleniemua 
und  Chrieientum  (Cologne,  1866):  AuegewOhUe 
Schriften  TertuUiane  iJiber$eUt  (2  vols.,  Kempten, 
1870-72);  Veifaaeung,  LehranU  und  Ur^ehlbarkeit 
der  Kirche  (1872);  TertuUiane  9&mmaiche  Schriften 
Hberuixi  (2  vols.,  Cologne,  1882);  and  Heortohgie 
Oder  doe  Kirchenjahr  und  die  HeQigertfeete  in  xhrer 
geechichtlichen  Entwicklung  von  den  dUeeten  Zeiten 
hie  swr  Gegenwart  (Freiburg,  1901).  He  also  re- 
vised the  eleventh  volume  of  Rohrbacher's  Uni- 
veraalgeeehichte  der  kaiholUechen  Kirche  (MQnster, 
1880). 

BXLLS,  STIIOD  OF:  A  synod  convened  in  1152 
at  Kells  (38  m.  n.w.  of  Dublin),  by  Eugenius  III., 
for  the  purpose  of  reorganising  the  Church  of  Ire- 
land. It  divided  the  coimtry  into  four  archbish- 
oprics, established  a  hierarchy,  introduced  tithes 
and  the  Peter's-pence,  acknowledged  the  papal  su- 
premacy, etc.  See  Cmi/nc  Chubch  in  Britain  and 
Irbland,  III.,  2,  §  5. 

KELLY,  THOMAS:  Irish  dissenting  preacher 
and  hymn-writer;  b.  at  Kellyville  (4  m.  w.  of  Athy), 
County  Queen's,  July  13,  1769;  d.  there  May  14, 
1855.    He  was  graduated  at  the  University  of 


Dublin  and  studied  law  in  London,  but  took  orden 
in  the  Established  Church  in  1792  and  be^m  to 
preach  in  Dublin.  For  his  fervent  Evangelical  ser- 
mons he  was  soon  inhibited  by  the  archbishop  from 
preaching  in  the  diocese  of  Dublin.  After  preach- 
ing for  a  time  in  two  unconsecrated  buildings  m  the 
city,  he  became  a  dissenter  and,  from  his  ample 
means,  erected  chapels  at  Athy,  Portarliogton, 
Waterford,  Wexford,  and  other  places,  where  he 
continued  to  preach.  His  reputation  rests  upon  his 
Hymne  on  Various  Paeeagee  of  Scripture  (Dublin, 
1804).  The  ninety-six  hymns  of  the  first  edition 
grew  to  765  in  the  seventh  (1853),  the  last  that  ap- 
peared before  his  death.  His  best-known  hymns 
are,  "  Come,  see  the  place  where  Jesus  lay,"  and 
"  On  the  mountain's  top  appearing." 
Bibuoosapht:    8.  W.  DufBeld,  Bnoli9k  Hymtu,  pp.  206- 

a07  et  pMiim,  New  York,  1886;   Julian,  Hymnwhon,  pp. 

614-615. 

KELLY,  WILLIAM:  Plymouth  Brother;  b.  of 
Episcq^Mdian  parentage  in  the  north  of  Ireland 
1821;  d.  at  Exeter,  England,  B(ar.  27,  1906.  He 
was  early  left  fatherle»,  supported  himself  by  I 
teaching  in  the  island  of  Sark,  and  joined  the  Plym- 
outh Brethren  (q.v.)  in  1840.  He  retained  a  close  ! 
connection  with  the  Channel  Islands  for  thirty 
years,  residing  in  Guernsey,  but  for  the  latter  half  , 
of  his  career  his  home  was  at  Blackheath,  London,  ' 
S.  £.  He  graduated  with  classical  honors  at  Trin- 
ity College,  Dublin,  and  by  his  writings  established 
a  reputation  for  sound  scholarship  and  acquired 
distinction  as  an  able  controversialist.  Besides 
aiding  Tregelles  in  that  eminent  scholar's  investi- 
gatioQs  as  a  Biblical  textual  critic,  he  himself  pub- 
lished, in  1860,  a  critical  edition  of  the  Revelation 
of  John,  which  earned  a  commendatory  notice  from 
Ewald  in  the  Qdttingen  JahrbOdier,  Such  studies 
were  carried  on  concurrently  with  the  editing  of  a 
periodical  entitled  The  Proepect,  which  gave  way  to 
The  Bible  Treaeury,  carried  on  by  Kelly  to  the  time 
of  his  death.  This  brought  the  editor  into  corre- 
spondence with  such  men  as  Dean  Alford,  Dr.  Rob- 
ert Scott  the  lexicographer.  Principal  Edwards, 
Professor  Sanday,  and  other  theologians.  In  his 
last  days  Archdeacon  Denison  was  wont  to  speak 
of  The  Bible  Treaeury  as  the  only  religious  magazine 
worth  reading,  so  steadfast  was  the  editor  in  rejec- 
tion of  what  he  believed  to  be  Christ-dishonoring 
views  of  the  Bible  put  forth  by  higher  critics. 

Kelly  identified  himself  whole-h«irtedly  with  the 
body  of  doctrine  developed  by  the  late  John  Nel- 
son Darby  (q.v.),  whose  CoUeeled  Writings  were 
edited  by  him.  According  to  Neatby,  he  "  was 
essentially  the  interpreter  of  Darby  to  the  uniniti- 
ated." Kelly's  own  merits  were,  however,  mani- 
fest alike  in  living  as  in  written  ministry.  Spur- 
geon,  judging  by  the  latter,  has  applied  to  him,  in 
the  duide  to  CommentarieSy  words  of  Goldsmith, 
"  bom  for  the  universe,  who  narrowed  his  mind  " 
by  Darbyism.  Although  friction  at  last  arose  be- 
tween them,  the  younger  retained  his  veneration  for 
the  older  man. 

In  the  list  of  Kelly's  writings  will  be  found  le<s 
tures  on  or  formal  expositions  of  aU  the  books  of 
the  Bible.  Kelly  exerdsed  considerable  influence 
upon  outside  readers  by  his  Lectures  on  the  Neic 


809 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Kampia 


Testament  Doctrine  of  the  Holy  Spirit  (London, 
(1867);  On  the  Church  of  God  (lOth  ed.,  1906);  On 
the  Pentateuch  (1877);  On  the  Goepd  of  Matthew 
(1868);  and  On  ^  Book  <^ Revetation  (1861).  "  In 
the  Beginning "  (Mosaic  Cosmogony),  Expositions 
^  the  Prophecies  of  Isaiah  and  the  Gospel  of  John 
(enlarged  ed.  by  £.  £.  Whitfield,  1907);  The  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews  and  the  Epistles  of  Jckn;  a  work  on 
God's  Inspiration  qf  the,  Scriptures,  and  his  last  words 
on  Christ's  Coming  again  (in  which  he  vindicated 
the  originality  of  Darby  in  regard  to  the  "  Secret 
Rapture  "  after  its  impugnment  by  an  American 
writer)  are  other  works  which  warrant  notice. 

£.  E.  Whittibld. 
BimjooBiFHT;    W.  B.  Naatby.  WiOiam  KMy  a»  a  Theo-. 
Vooiant  in  Bxpo&Uor,  7  aer.,  no.  17. 

KELSO,  JAMES  AHDERSON:  Presbyterian;  b. 
at  Rawal  Pindi  (90  m.  s.e.  of  Peshawur),  India, 
June  6,  1873.  He  was  graduated  at  Washington 
and  Jefferson  College  in  1892,  Western  Theological 
Seminary  in  1896,  and  studied  in  Berlin  and  Leip- 
sic  (Ph.D.,  1902).  He  was  tutor  of  Greek  and 
Latin  at  Washington  and  Jefferson  College  1892- 
1893,  instructor  in  Hebrew  in  Western  Theological 
Seminary  1897-1901,  professor  of  Hebrew  and  Old- 
Testament  literature  in  the  same  institution  1901- 
1909,  and  president  since  1909.  He  is  ''an  adher- 
ent of  the  confessional  Theology  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church,  U.S.A."  He  has  written  Die  Klagdieder, 
der  masoretisehe  Text  und  die  Versionen  ^ipsic, 
1901). 

KBMPIS,  THOMAS  A. 


I.  life.  Mhwr  Writhigs. 
II.  The  Inutetion  of  Christ. 
IIL  Disputed    Authorship   of 
the  "Inutfttion  of  Christ." 


Genersl  Surrey  (I  1). 
Gersen's  Claims  (|  2). 
Gerson's  Oaims  (|  3). 
Thomes  h  Kempis  (|  4). 


L  Life,  Minor  Writings:  Thomas  k  Kempis, 
German  mystic  and  author  of  the  ''  Imitation  of 
Christ,"  was  bom  at  Kempen  (40  m.  n.w.  of  Co- 
logne) in  1380  and  died  near  ZwoUe  (52  m.  e.n.e. 
of  Amsterdam)  in  1471.  His  paternal  name  was 
Hemerken  or  H&nunerlein,  "  little  hammer."  In 
1395  he  was  sent  to  the  school  at  De venter  con- 
ducted by  the  Brethren  of  the  Common  Life  (q.v.). 
He  became  skilful  as  a  copyist  and  was  thus  en- 
abled to  support  himself.  Later  he  was  admitted 
to  the  Augustinian  convent  of  Mount  Saint  Agnes 
near  Zwolle,  where  his  brother  John  had  been  before 
him  and  had  risen  to  the  dignity  of  prior.  Thomas 
received  priest's  orders  in  1413  and  was  made  sub- 
prior  1429.  The  house  was  disturbed  for  a  time 
in  consequence  of  the  pope's  rejection  of  the  bishop- 
elect  of  Utrecht,  Rudolph  of  Diepholt;  otherwise, 
Thomas'  life  was  a  quiet  one,  his  time  being  spent 
between  devotional  exercises,  composition,  and 
copying.  He  copied  the  Bible  no  less  than  four 
times,  one  of  the  copies  being  preserved  at  Darm- 
stadt in  five  volumes.  In  its  teachings  he  was 
widely  read,  and  his  works  abound  in  Biblical  quo- 
tations, especially  from  the  New  Testament.  His 
life  is  no  doubt  fitly  characterized  by  the  words 
under  an  old  picture,  first  referred  to  by  Francescus 
Tolenais:  **  In  all  things  I  sought  quiet  and  found 
it  not  save  in  retirement  and  in  books."  A  monu- 
ment was  dedicated  to  his  memory  in  the  presence 


of  the  archbishop  of  Utrecht  in  St.  Michael's  Church, 
ZwoUe,  Nov.  11,  1897. 

Thomas  k  Kempis  belonged  to  the  school  of 
mystics  who  were  scattered  along  the  Rhine  from 
Switzerland  to  Strasburg  and  Cologne  and  in  the 
Netherlands.  He  was  a  follower  of  Geert  Groote 
and  Florentius  Radewijns,  the  founders  of  the 
Brethren  of  the  Conunon  Life.  His  writings  are 
all  of  a  devotional  character  and  include  tracts  and 
meditations,  letters,  sermons,  a  life  of  St.  Lydewigis, 
a  Christian  woman  who  remained  steadfast  imder 
a  great  stress  of  afflictions,  and  biographies  of 
Groote,  Radewijns,  and  nine  of  their  companions. 
Works  similar  in  contents  to  the  "Imitation  of 
Christ "  and  pervaded  by  the  same  spirit  are  his  pro- 
longed meditation  on  the  life  and  blessings  of  the 
Savior  and  another  on  the  Incarnation.  Both  of 
these  works  overflow  with  adoration  for  Christ. 

n.  The  Imitatk>n  of  Christ:  The  work  which 
has  given  Thomas  k  Kempis  imiversal  fame  in  the 
Western  churches  is  the  De  imitations  Christi.  It 
is  the  pearl  of  all  the  writings  of  the  mystical  Gei^ 
man-Dutch  school  of  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth 
centuries,  and  with  the  "  Confessions  "  of  Augus- 
tine and  Bunyan's  Pilgrim's  Progress  it  occupies  a 
front  rank,  if  not  the  foremost  place,  among  useful 
manuals  of  devotion,  after  the  Bible.  Protestants 
and  Roman  Catholics  alike  join  in  giving  it  praise. 
The  Jesuits  give  it  an  official  place  among  their 
"  exercises."  John  Wesley  and  John  Newton  put 
it  among  the  works  that  influenced  them  at  their 
conversion.  General  Gordon  carried  it  with  him 
to  the  battlefield.  Few  books  have  had  so  exten- 
sive a  circulation.  The  number  of  counted  edi- 
tions exceeds  2,000;  and  1,000  difl^erent  editions 
are  preserved  in  the  British  Museum.  The  Bul- 
lingen  collection,  donated  to  the  city  of  Cologne  in 
1838,  contained  at  the  time  400  different  editions. 
De  Backer  (Essai,  ut  inf.)  enumerates  545  Latin 
and  about  900  French  editions.  Originally  writ- 
ten in  Latin,  a  French  translation  was  made  as 
early  as  1447,  which  still  remains  in  manuscript. 
The  first  printed  French  copies  appeared  at  Tou- 
louse 1488.  The  earliest  German  translation  was 
made  in  1434  by  J.  de  Bellorivo  and  is  preserved 
in  Cologne.  The  editions  in  German  began  at 
Augsburg  in  1486.  The  first  English  translation 
(1502)  was  by  William  Atkinson  and  Maigaret, 
mother  of  Henry  VII.,  who  did  the  fourth  book. 
Translations  appeared  in  Italian  (Venice,  1488, 
Milan  1489),  Spanish  (Seville,  1536),  Arabic  (Rome, 
1663),  Armenian  (Rome,  1674),  Hebrew  (Frank- 
fort, 1837),  and  other  languages.  Comeille  pro- 
duced a  poetical  paraphrase  in  French  in  1651. 

The  "  Imitation  of  Christ "  derives  its  title  from 
the  heading  of  the  first  book,  De  imitatione  Christi 
et  oontemptu  omnium  vanitatum  mundi.  It  consists 
of  four  books  and  seems  to  have  been  written  in 
meter  and  rime,  a  fact  first  annoimced  by  K. 
Hirsdie  in  1874.  The  four  books  are  not  foimd  in 
all  the  manuscripts,  nor  are  they  arranged  invaria- 
bly in  the  same  oider.  The  work  is  a  manual  of 
devotion  intended  to  help  the  soul  in  its  conmiunion 
with  God  and  the  pursuit  of  holiness.  Its  sentences 
are  statements,  not  arguments,  and  are  pitched  in 
the  highest  key  of  Christian  experience.    It  was 


Kempis 


THE  NEW  SCHAFP-HERZOG 


810 


meant  for  monastioB  and  reduaes.  Behind  and 
within  all  its  reflections  runs  the  council  of  self- 
renunciation.  The  life  of  Christ  is  presented  as  the 
highest  study  possible  to  a  mortal.  His  teachings 
far  excel  all  the  teachings  of  the  saints.  The  book 
gives  counsels  to  read  the  Scriptures,  statements 
about  the  uses  of  adversity,  advice  for  submission 
to  authority,  warnings  against  temptation  and  how 
to  resist  it,  reflectipns  about  death  and  the  judg- 
ment, meditations  upon  the  oblation  of  Christ,  and 
admonitions  to  flee  the  vanities  of  the  worid. 
Christ  himself  is  more  than  all  the  wisdom  of  the 
schools  and  lifts  the  mind  to  perceive  more  of  eter- 
nal truth  in  a  moment  of  time  than  a  student  might 
learn  in  the  schools  in  ten  years,  fbcoellent  as 
these  counsels  are,  they  are  set  in  the  minor  key 
and  are  especially  adapted  for  souls  burdened  with 
care  and  sorrow  and  sitting  in  darkness.  They 
present  only  one  side  of  the  Christian  life,  and  in 
order  to  compass  the  whole  of  it  they  must  be  sup- 
plemented by  counsels  for  integrity,  bravery  and 
constancy  in  the  struggle  of  daily  existence  to  which 
the  vast  mass  of  mankind,  who  can  not  be  recluses, 
are  called.  The  charge  has  even  been  made  that 
the  piety  commended  by  the  "Imitation"  is  of  a 
selfish  monkish  type.  It  was  written  by  a  monk  and 
intended  for  the  convent;  it  lays  stress  on  the  pas- 
sive qualities  and  does  not  touch  with  firmness  the 
string  of  active  service  in  the  world.  That  which 
makes  it  acceptable  to  all  Christians  is  the  supreme 
stress  it  lays  upon  Christ  and  the  possibility  of  im- 
mediate conmiunion  with  him  and  God.  The  ref- 
erences to  medieval  mistakes  or  superetitions  are 
confined  to  several  passages,  viz.,  the  merit  of  good 
works  and  transubstantiation  (iv.  2),  purgatory 
(iv.  9),  and  the  worship  of  saints  (i.  13,  ii.  9,  iii.  6, 
59).  In  other  works,  however,  Thomas  k  Kempis 
exalts  Mary  as  the  queen  of  heaven,  the  efficient 
mediatress  of  sinners,  and  to  her  all  should  flee  as 
to  a  mother.  She  should  be  invoked.  He  also 
gives  prayers  to  Mary  (cf.  the  De  iabemaculiSf  and 
Horius  raaarumf  Pofal's  ed.,  ut  inf.,  i.  also  iii.  357, 
vi.  219,  235  sqq.). 

m.  Disputed  AutfaozBhip  of  the  ^*Imitatk>n  of 
Christ":  To  some  extent  national  sentiments  have 
entered  into  the  controversy  which  for  300  years 

has  been  waged  over  the  authorship 

I.  General   of  the  "  Imitation,"  France  and  Italy 

Survey.      contending  for  the  honor  of  furnishing 

the  author  as  against  the  Netherlands. 
The  weight  of  opinion  is  in  favor  of  Thomas  k 
Kempis.  Among  the  recent  treatments  of  the  sub- 
ject are:  K.  Hirsche,  Prolegomena  tu  einer  neuen 
Ausgabe  der  ImUatio  Christi  (Berlin,  1873,  1884, 
1894),  containing  a  copy  of  the  Latin  text  of  the 
manuscript  dated  1441;  C.  Wolfsgruber,  Giovanni 
Qeraen^  eein  Leben  und  aein  Werk  De  Imilatione  Chrieti 
(Augsburg,  1880);  L.  Santini,  /  diriUi  di  Tommaeo 
da  Kempis  (2  vols.,  Rome,  1879-^1);  S.  Kettlewell, 
Authorship  of  the  "  De  Imitations  ChrisH  "  (London, 
1877;  2d  ed.,  1884);  V.  Becker,  VAiUeur  de  V Imi- 
tation ei  Us  documents  Ne^landais  (The  Hague,  1882) ; 
also  Les  demiers  traveaux  sur  VatUeur  de  Vlnntation 
(Brussels,  1889);  H.  S.  Denifle,  Kritische  Bemerk- 
ungen  gur  GersenrKempis  Frage^  in  ZKT  (1882- 
1883);  O.  A.  Spitxen,  Thomas  a  Kempis  als  adirijver 


der  navolffing  (Utrecht,  1880),  also  NouveOs  de- 
fense en  riponse  du  Demfle  (1884);  F.  X.  Funk, 
Gerson  und  Gersen,  also  Der  Verfasser  der  Nachfolge 
Christi,  both  in  his  Ahhandlungen  (ii.  373-444, 
Paderbom,  1899);  P.  E.  Puyol,  Descriptions  bOh 
liographiques  des  manuscrits  et  des  principales  Edi- 
tions du  livre  De  Imitations  Christi  (Paris,  1898); 
PaUographie,  dassement,  g^nMogie  du  livre  de  Imi- 
tatione  Christi  (1898),  and  L'Autewr  du  livre  De 
Imilatione  Christi  (2  vols.,  1899-1900);  G.  Ken- 
tenich,  Die  Handschriften  der  Imitatio  und  die  AiUcr- 
schc^t  des  Thomas,  in  ZKG,  xxiii.  18  sqq.,  xxiv.  504 
sqq.;  J.  E.  G.  De  Montmorency,  Thomas  ii  Kempis, 
his  Age  and  his  Book,  New  York,  1906;  and  L. 
Schubse,  in  Hauck-Herzog,  RE,  xix.  719-733.  For 
other  works,  see  the  bibliography  below.  Pohl  gives 
a  list  of  thirty-five  persons  to  ^hom  the  authorship 
has  at  one  time  or  another  been  ascribed,  among 
them  Thomas  k  Kempis,  Jean  CharUer  de  Gerson, 
chancellor  of  the  University  of  Paris,  Giovanni 
Gersen,  the  reputed  abbot  of  Vercelli,  Italy,  St. 
Bernard,  Bonaventura,  David  of  Augsbui^,  Johann 
Tauler,  Heinrich  Suso,  and  even  Innocent  III.,  the 
last  chiefly  on  account  of  the  second  part  of  the  title 
of  the  "  Imitation,"  recalling  Innocent's  work  on  the 
contempt  of  the  world.  The  only  claimants  worthy 
of  attention  are  Thomas  k  Kempis,  the  Chanoellor 
Gerson  (d.  1429),  and  the  Abbot  Giovanni  Gersen, 
who  is  said  to  have  lived  about  1230.  The  uncer- 
tainty arises  from  several  facts:  (1)  a  niunber  of 
manuscripts  and  printed  editions  of  the  fifteenth  cen- 
tury have  no  note  of  authorship;  (2)  the  rest  are  di- 
vided between  these  three  men  and  St.  Bernard; 
and  (3)  the  manuscript  copies  show  important  di- 
veigences.  The  matter  has  been  made  more  per- 
plexing by  the  forgery  of  names  and  dates  in  man- 
uscripts of  the  ''  Imitation  "  since  the  controversy 
began,  these  forgeries,  however,  being  largely  in  the 
interest  of  Gerson  and  Gersen.  A  reason  for  the 
absence  of  an  author's  name  in  so  many  of  the 
manuscripts  is  to  be  found,  if  Thomas  k  Kempis 
was  indeed  the  author,  in  his  wishing  to  remain 
unknown  according  to  his  maxim  Ama  nesciri, 
Love  to  be  imknown.  Of  the  Latin  editions  be- 
longing to  the  fifteenth  century,  Pohl  gives  twenty- 
eight  as  accredited  to  Gerson,  twelve  to  Thomas, 
two  to  St.  Bernard,  and  six  anonymous.  Or,  to 
follow  Funk  (p.  426),  forty  editions  of  that  century 
ascribed  the  work  to  Gerson,  eleven  to  Thomas, 
two  to  St.  Bernard,  one  to  Gersen,  and  two  are 
anonymous.  Spitien  gives  fifteen  as  ascribed  to 
Thomas  k  Kempis.  Most  of  the  editions  contain- 
ing Gerson's  name  were  printed  in  France;  a  few 
were  issued  in  Italy  and  Spain.  The  editions  of 
the  sixteenth  century  show  a  change.  There, 
thirty-seven  Latin  editions  ascribe  the  authorship 
to  Thomas  k  Kempis,  twenty-five  to  Gerson.  As 
for  the  manuscripts,  idl  of  them  dated  before  1450, 
the  dates  of  which  are  probably  genuine,  were  writ- 
ten in  Germany  or  the  Netherlands.  The  oldest  is 
included  in  a  codex  preserved  since  1826  in  the  royal 
library  of  Brussels.  The  codex  contains  nine  other 
writings  of  Thomas  besides  the  ''Imitation."  It  is 
dated  1441,  containing  the  note,  in  Latin,  Jinitus  el 
computus  MCCCCXLI  per  manus  fratris  Th.  Kern- 
pensis  in  Monte  S,  Agnetis  props  ZwoUis,  "  Finished 


311 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDU 


Kempitf 


and  completed  in  1441  by  the  hands  of  brother 
Thomas  k  Kempis,  at  Mount  Saint  Agnes  near 
Zwolle  "  (cf.  Pohl,  ii.  461).  If  this  be  a  genuine 
writing  the  manuscript  is  an  autographic  copy. 
The  text  of  the  Imitation  is  written  on  older  paper 
than  the  other  documents  comprised  in  the  codex. 
It  also  contains  corrections  which  are  found  in  the 
first  Dutch  translation  of  1420.  For  these  reasons 
Spitzen,  Funk  and  others  place  this  text  of  the 
Imitation  between  1416  and  1420. 

The  literary  controversy  over  the  composition 
began  in  1604  when  Dom  Pedro  Manriquez,  in  a 
work  on  the  Lord's  Supper  issued  at  Milan,  declared 
the   "Imitation"  to  be  older  than  Bonaventura, 
basing  his  statement  upon  an  alleged 
2.  Gersen'B  quotation  from  it  by  that  schoolman. 
Claims.     In  1606  Bellarmine  in  his  De  scriptaribua 
ecdenasUds  stated  it  was  already  in  ex- 
istence in  1260.    About  the  same  time  the  Jesuit 
Rossignoli  found  in  a  convent  at  Arona  near  Milan 
a  manuscript  without  date  bearing  the  name  of  the 
Abbot  Giovanni  Gersen  as  its  author.  The  house  had 
at  one  time  belonged  to  the  Benedictines,  and  the 
Benedictine  Cajetan,  secretary  of  Paul  V.,  defended 
the  abbot's  claim  in  his  Oeraen  restitutua  (Rome, 
1614)  and  later  in  his  Apparatta  ad  Oeraenem  reati- 
tututn,    Cajetan  also  announced  the  discovery  of 
a  manuscript  in  Venice  containing  the  statement, 
"  Not  Johannes  Gerson  but  Johannes  abbot  of  Ver- 
oelli  wrote  this  book."    Gersen's  claims  were  at- 
tacked by  the  Augustinian  Heribert  Rosweyde  in 
his  Vindiciae  Kempenaea  (Antwerp,  1617),  and  so 
cogently  that  Bellarmine  withdrew  his  statement. 
The  Congregation  of  Propaganda,  urged  by  the 
Benedictines,  gave  permission  for  the  book  to  be 
printed  in  Rome  and  elsewhere  under  the  name  of 
Gerson.    A  revival  of  the  assertion  of  the  Italian's 
authorship  was  started  by  the  Piedmontese  noble- 
man, Gregory,  in  his  latoria  deUa  Vercelleae  letteror 
tura  (Turin,  1819).    He  was  confirmed  in  his  view 
by  a  manuscript  of  the  **  Imitation  "  purchased  in 
Paris  in  1830,  containing  the  statement  that  in 
1550  it  was  the  property  of  an  Italian  Girolamo 
d'Avpgadri.    The  family  AvQgadri  had  its  ances- 
tral seat  near  Vercelli,  and  an  old  dtdrium,  which 
Gregory  found,  contained  under  the  date  of  Feb. 
5,  1347,  the  record  of  the  transmission  of  a  book 
called  the  "  Imitation  of  Christ."    Gregory  issued 
his  manuscript  (Paris,  1833),  and  in  his  Hiataire  du 
livre  de  VlmiiabUme  (Paris,  1842)  he  defended  the 
alleged  authorship  of  the  abbot  of  Vercelli.    He 
was  thoroughly  answered  by  J.  B.  Malou,  bishop  of 
Bruges,  in  his  Recherchea  kiatoriquea  et  crUxquea  aur 
le   viriiable  atUeur  du  livre  de  VlmUation  Ckriati 
(Toumay.  1848;  3d  ed.,  Paris,  1858).    The  Italian 
origin  again  found  a  vigorous  advocate  in  Ck)ele8tin 
Wolfsgruber  (ut  sup.).    The  abbot's  claim  has  at 
present  little  or  no  standing;  and  it  has  been  shown 
that  the  details  of  his  life  are  simple  conjectures. 
Funk  pronounces  him  a  fiction.    A  moniunent  was 
dedicated  to  the  Italian's  memory  at  Vercelli  in 
1884. 

After  the  decision  of  the  Congregation  of  Propa- 
ganda the  matter  of  the  authorship  was  taken  up 
with  spirit  in  France.  A  careful  examination  of 
the  manuscript  copies  of  the  Imitation  was  made. 


but  with  uncertain  result.  Richelieu  in  his  splendid 
edition  of  1640  issued  the  work  without  name  of 

author,  but  in  1652  the  French  Parlia- 

3.  Oerson's  ment  ordered  the  work  issued  under  the 

Claims,     name  of  Thomas  k  Kempis.    Mabillon 

made  a  fresh  examination  of  manu- 
scripts at  three  gatherings  (1671,  1674,  1687),  the 
case  being  decided  against  Thomas  k  Kempis. 
Dupin,  in  his  edition  of  Gerson's  works  (cf.  2d  ed., 
1728,  vol.  i.,  pp.  lix.-lxxxiv.),  made  a  comparison  of 
Gerson 's  writings  with  the  "  Imitation  "  and  showed 
that  it  was  possible  that  Gerson  was  the  author  of  the 
latter,  but  closed  his  discussion  with  the  statement 
that  it  is  not  possible  to  come  to  a  final  decision 
between  the  claims  of  Gersen,  Gerson,  and  Thomas 
k  Kempis.  The  controversy  again  broke  out  with 
the  edition  of  1724  made  by  the  Benedictines  Ei^ 
hard  and  Mezler,  who  ascribed  the  authorship  to 
Gerson  as  also  did  Vollardt  in  his  edition  (Paris, 
1758).  A  strong  reply  was  made  by  the  Augus- 
tinian E.  Amort  of  Polling,  Bavaria,  who  defended 
with  much  learning  the  claims  ^i  Phomas  k  Kempis 
in  his  Infarmatio  de  atatu  controveraiae  (Augsburg, 
1728),  and  especially  in  his  Scutum  Kempenae  aeu 
vindiciae  IV  Ubrcrum  de  Imitatione  Chriati  (Cologne, 
1728).  The  editions  of  De  Sacy  (Paris,  1853)  and 
Caro  (ib.,  1875)  leave  the  authorship  imdedded. 
After  the  claims  of  Thomas  k  Kempis  seemed  to  be 
very  generally  acknowledged,  still  another  stage  in 
the  controversy  was  opened  by  P.  E.  Puyol  (1898, 
ut  sup.),  who  gave  a  description  of  348  manuscripts 
and  annotated  the  variations  between  fifty-seven  of 
them.  His  conclusion  was  that  the  text  of  the 
Italian  manuscript  is  the  more  simple  and  conse- 
quently the  older.  He  has  been  followed  by  Ken- 
tenich;  Puyol's  work  may  lead  to  a  more  careful 
comparison  of  the  texts  of  the  Imitation.  The 
claim  that  Gerson  is  the  author  of  the  "  Imitation 
of  Christ "  is  based  upon  editions  and  manuscripts 
made  before  1500  bearing  his  name  and  upon  prob- 
abilities drawn  from  Gerson's  style  and  mystical 
temper  of  thought.  The  manuscript  upon  which 
chief  stress  used  to  be  laid  is  at  Valenciennes  and 
is  dated  1462.  It  contains  Gerson's  sermons  on 
the  Passion  of  Christ  and  a  book  called  IntemeUe 
ConaolaHon.  On^sime  Leroy  in  his  jStudea  aur  lea 
myaUrea  et  aur  le  divera  marmacrUa  de  Geraon  (Paris, 
1837),  and  in  his  CometUe  et  Geraon  dana  l* Imita- 
tion de  Jeau  Chriati  (Paris,  1841),  drew  the  con- 
clusion that  all  these  works  must  be  by  the  same 
author.  It  was  later  shown  from  a  manuscript  in 
Amiens  dated  1447  that  the  work  IrUemeUe  Conao- 
lation  was  a  translation  of  the  Imitation  made  by 
Hesden  from  the  Latin.  The  similarity  between 
Gerson 's  writings  and  the  *'  Imitation  "  was  amply 
refuted  by  J.  B.  Schwab  in  his  life  of  Gerson 
(Wtirzbuig,  1858,  pp.  782-786).  Gerson  in  his 
judgment  would  have  required  the  endowment  of 
a  wholly  new  tongue  to  write  the  work.  The  first 
edition  of  Gerson's  works  (1483)  does  not  contain 
it.  Again,  the  lists  of  the  chanceUor's  writings  given 
by  his  brother  John  (1423)  and  by  Canesius  (1429) 
do  not  mention  it.  The  author  was  by  his  own 
statement  a  monk  (iv.  5,  11,  iii.  56),  and  Gerson 
was  not  a  monk.  The  attachment  of  Gerson's  name 
to  the  book  can  be  explained  only  by  the  considenir 


Kampia 
Kanorlok 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0Q 


813 


tion  that  the  "  Imitation  **  first  went  forth  anony- 
mously, and  Gerson's  mystical  treatises  gave  to 
French  editors  and  copyists  the  supposed  cue  to 
its  authorship. 

The  daim  of  k  Kempis  has  many  arguments  in 
its  favor.  Jan  Busch  in  his  Chronieon  WindeB- 
hemefue,  written  in  1464,  seven  years  before  the 
death  of  Thomas  k  Kempis,  expressly  states  that 

Thomas  wrote  the  **  Imitation."  This 
4.  Thomas  statement  might  be  considered  suffi- 
i  Kempis.  cient  of  itself  were  it  not  for  the  fact 

that  the  so-called  Gaesdoncker  Codex 
of  the  Chronicon  does  not  contain  this  statement. 
Caspar  of  Pf onheim,  who  made  his  German  trans- 
lation in  1448,  says  the  work  was  written  by  "  a 
devoted  father.  Master  Thomas,  a  canon  regidar." 
Hennann  Rheyd,  who  met  Thomas  at  the  chapter  of 
^^ndesheim  in  1454,  speaks  of  him  as  the  author. 
John  Wessel,  who  spent  some  time  with  Thomas, 
was  according  to  his  early  biographer  attracted  by 
the  book  at  Windesheim.  Fimk  gives  thirteen 
dated  manuscripts  written  before  1500  ascribing 
the  "  Imitation  "  to  Thomas  k  Kempis.  The  original 
Brussels  Codex  of  1441  has  already  been  referred 
to  above.  Its  date  is  accepted  by  Hirsche,  Pohl, 
Funk,  Schulae,  and  others;  and  the  conclusion 
drawn  is  that  the  manuscript  of  the  "  Imitation  "  it 
contains  was  written  before  1420.  The  date  1441 
has  recently  been  disputed  as  ungenuine  by  Puyol 
and  Kentenioh  on  the  basis  of  its  divergences  from 
other  texts  by  the  way  of  additions  and  also  the 
conclusion.  A  second  manuscript  in  Louvain  is 
also  subscribed  as  autographic  and  seems  to  be 
nearly  as  old  (cf.  Pohl,  vi.  456).  Another  manu- 
script preserved  in  Brussels  has  the  date  1425  and 
states  that  Thomas  was  the  author.  The  Codex 
Magdalenua  in  Oxford,  dated  1438,  strangely  gives 
the  work  imder  the  title  De  munea  eccUkcatica, 
the  title  of  a  work  by  Walter  Hylton,  an  Eng- 
lish mystic.  Of  printed  editions  of  the  fifteenth 
century,  at  least  twelve  present  Thomas  as  the 
author,  beginning  with  the  Augsburg  edition  of 
1472.  Finally,  in  style  and  contents  the  "  Imita- 
tion "  agrees  closely  with  other  writings  of  Thomas 
k  Kempis;  and  the  flow  of  thought  is  altogether 
similar  to  that  of  the  MedHatio  de  incarnaJtUme, 
Spitaen  has  made  it  seem  probable  that  the  author 
was  acquainted  with  the  writings  of  Jan  van  Ruys- 
broeck  and  other  mystics  of  the  Netherlands.  Funk 
has  brought  out  the  references  to  ecclesiastical  cus- 
toms which  fit  the  book  into  the  early  part  of  the 
fifteenth  century  better  than  into  an  earlier  time. 
Scholars  like  Schwab,  Hirsche,  Pohl,  Schulze,  and 
Funk  (and  also  the  Italian  Santini)  agree  that  the 
claims  of  Thomas  k  Kempis  are  almost  beyond  dis- 
pute. On  the  other  hand,  Denifie  cleared  the  deck 
of  all  suggested  names  and  ascribed  the  work  to 
some  unknown  canon  regular  of  the  Netherlands. 
Karl  MUUer  in  a  brief  note  {Kirchengeschichte,  ii. 
122)  pronounces  the  theory  of  the  Thomas  author- 
ship to  be  "  more  than  uncertain  "\  and  Loofs 
(DogmengeschichUf  4th  ed.,  p.  633)  expresses  sub- 
stantially the  same  judgment.  In  addition  to  the 
historic  considerations  for  the  Thomas  authorship 
the  philosophical  consideration  certainly  has  weight, 
that  no  sufficient  reason  can  be  given  why  the  name 


of  Thomas  k  Kempis  should  have  been  attached  to 
the  book  if  he  did  not  write  it.  D.  S.  Sghatp. 
BmuooBAPirr:  The  first  ed.  of  the  Opera  by  N.  Ketdaer 
and  Q.  de  Leampt  appeared  at  Utrecht.  1473  (oontaiBed 
fifteen  writmga,  not  inchiding  the  *'  Imitation'*).  Othfen 
are  by  P.  Danhaaor.  Nuremberg,  1494  (inohide§  tirenty 
eompoMtione);  J.  Badiua.  Antwerp,  1S20,  1521.  1523; 
Q.  Dupuyherbault,  with  Viia  by  J.  B.  AMetomia,  Pftrii. 
1649;  G.  Putherbeue,  Antwerp,  1574;  H.  Bomnudha. 
3  Tola.,  ib.  1599.  5th  ed..  Douai.  1635  (regarded  an  the 
beet  until  the  next  to  be  mentioned):  M.  J.  Pohl,  to 
be  in  8  Tola.,  Tole.  i.-T.,  Freiburs.  1903  aqq.  On  the 
Imitation  there  ia  a  diacoaaion  of  the  literature  by  R.  P. 
A.  de  Backer,  Bami  bMioffrapki^iu  tur  la  Uvn  De  taiito- 
Uom  ChrieU,  U6wt,  1864.  The  editiona  of  the  work  an 
paat  oounting.  Amonc  them  may  be  singled  out:  the 
first  Latin  ed..  Ausaburg,  1472  (bound  up  with  a  oojiy  of 
Jerome'a  De  vir.  iU.,  and  writinga  of  Augustine  and  Thomas 
Aquinaa).  cf.  FaetimiU  ReprodueHan  of  Ae  Pint  Edi- 
turn  ci  lA7t  wiA  Hietorieal  Initoduetum  by  C.  Kwax-IMt, 
London,  1894.  Of  the  many  Engliah  tranalatiooB  may 
be  noted:  the  firat,  by  W.  Atkinaon  and  the  Prinoen 
Margaret,  mother  of  King  Henry  VIL,  London,  1502; 
reprinted  ib.  1828,  new  ed.  by  J.  K.  Ingram,  ib.  1893: 
The  ImUaiion  cf  Ckriet,  Being  the  AtOognph  M8.  <4 
Thtmtae  a  Kempie,  De  imUaiione  ChrieH,  Bepndveei  in 
Faeeimile  from  the  Orioinal  Preeerved  in  the  Royal  lAbmy 
ai  BrueeeU,  with  IntrodueHon  by  C.  Rudene,  Londoo, 
1879;  The  Imitation  of  Chriel,  now  far  Aa  FiraA  Time  Set 
forth  in  Rythm  and  Senieneee,  wih  Prefaee  by  Canon  l/A- 
don,  ib.  1889;  Mediiaiiona  on  Oa  Life  <^  Chrut .  .  . 
Traneiated  and  Bdited  .  .  .  by  Archdeacon  Wright .  . . 
and  .  .  .  3.  Kottlewell.  wUh  a  Prefaee  by  Ute  Latter,  Ox- 
ford. 1892;  The  imiiaiion  of  Ckriet;  Traneiation  by  Caim 
W.  Benham,  vith  19  Photoyravuree  after  Celebrated  Potat- 
inge,  ib.  1905;  J.  H.  Srawley.  The  Imitaiion  ef  Ckrid  or 
the  BeeUeiaeHcal  Mueic,  Oambridge.  1908. 

On  the  life  of  Thomaa  the  fundamental  aouree  is  J. 
Buach,  Chronieon  Windeehemenee,  ed.  H.  Roeweyde.  Ant- 
werp, 1621.  and  K.  Grube.  Halle,  1880;  with  wfaidi 
ahould  be  uaed  H.  Roeweyde,  Chronieon  ML  S.  Agne^ 
Antwerp,  1615,  ed.  cum  Roeweydii  vindieiie  KempeneQna, 
ib.  1622.  (}onault  further:  Vol.  i.  of  the  Opero  by  Pohl  (at 
aup.)  oontaina  a  diacuaaion  of  the  life  and  writings;  B. 
Bihring.  TKomae  h  Kempie  der  Prediger  dor  Nad^cigt 
ChriMti,  Lnpaie,  1872;  8.  Kettlewell.  Thomae  h  Kempie  and 
the  Brethren  of  the  Comtnon  Life,  2  Tola..  London,  18S2. 
abridged  ed..  1885;  F.  R.  Oruiae.  Thomae  h  Kompie,  triA 
Notee  of  a  Vtai<  to  the  Seenee  in  vfhieh  hie  Life  «mis  Spent, 
with  Some  Account  of  the  BxaemnaHont^hie  AaKoc.  ib.  1887; 
L.  A.  Wheatley.  Story  qf  the  ImOation  <4  Chritt,  ib.  1801: 
ROring.  Thomae  h  Kempie,  Zijne  voorgangere  en  zijne  tOdge^ 
nooton,  Utrecht.  1902;  C.  Bigg.  Wayeide  Sketchee  in  Bode- 
eiaetieal  Hietory,  ib.  1906;  KL,  viiL  1555-^50. 

KEN  (KBNN),  THOMAS:  Biahop  of  Bath  and 
Wells;  b.  at  Great  (or  Little)  Berkhamsted,  Hert- 
fordshire, July,  1037;  d.  at  Longleat  (22  m.  w.n.w. 
of  Salisbury),  WUtshire,  Mar.  19,  1711.  He  stud- 
ied at  Winchester  College,  and  at  New  College,  Ox« 
ford  (B.A.,  1661;  M.  A.,  1664;  D.D.,  1679),  wa» 
fellow  of  New  College  1657-66,  and  tutor  in  1661. 
In  1665  he  went  bade  to  Winchester,  became  diap- 
lain  to  Bishop  George  Morley,  and  took  gratuitous 
charge  of  the  parish  of  St.  John  in  the  Soke.  He 
was  elected  feUow  of  Winchester  in  1666,  and  col- 
lated to  a  prebend  at  Winchester  in  1669.  He  was 
rector  of  Brightstone,  Isle  of  Wight,  1667-69,  and 
of  East  Woodhay,  Hampshire,  1669-72.  With  the 
exception  of  a  visit  to  Rome  in  1675,  he  again  re- 
sided at  Winchester,  1672-79,  resuming  charge  of 
the  parish  of  St.  John  in  the  Soke.  In  1679  be 
went  to  The  Hague  as  chaplain  to  Mary,  the  king's 
sister,  wife  of  William  II.  of  Orange,  but  returned 
to  England  in  the  autumn  of  1680  and  became  chap- 
lain to  Charles  II.  In  the  summer  of  1683,  when 
the  court  was  about  to  visit  Winchester,  be  refused 


SIS 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Kempifl 
Kendrlok 


to  allow  his  prebendal  house  to  be  appropriated  for 
the  use  of  Nell  Gwyn.  Charles  respected  his  atti- 
tude in  the  matter,  admired  his  courage,  and  in 
Nov.,  1684,  gave  him  the  bishopric  of  Bath  and 
Wells.  He  was  consecrated  Jan.  25,  1685.  In  the 
mean  time  he  had  sailed  for  Tangier  in  Aug.,  1683, 
as  chaplain  to  Lord  Dartmouth,  conmiander  of  the 
English  fleet,  returning  to  England  in  Apr.,  1684. 
In  Feb.,  1685,  he  attended  the  king  on  his  death- 
bed, gave  him  absolution,  and  vainly  uiged  him  to 
receive  the  sacrament.  He  was  loyal  to  James  II., 
but  in  May,  1688,  refused  to  publish  the  second 
Declaration  of  Lidulgence.  He  was  one  of  the 
seven  bishops  thrown  into  the  Tower  June  8,  1688. 
With  his  six  brethren  he  was  tried  on  June  29,  and 
acquitted  and  liberated  June  30.  For  refusing  to 
take  the  oath  of  allegiance  to  William  and  Mary  he 
was  deprived  of  his  see  in  Apr.,  1691.  He  then 
retired  to  the  home  of  his  friend,  Lord  Weymouth, 
LoDgleat,  Wiltshire,  where  he  resided  chiefly  dur- 
ing the  remainder  of  his  life.  He  was  not  in  sym- 
pathy with  the  more  violent  non-jurors,  and  op- 
posed the  clandestine  consecrations  of  1694.  For 
joining  the  other  deprived  bishops  in  a  "  charitable 
reconmiendation  "  on  behalf  of  the  deprived  cleigy, 
he  was  summoned  before  the  council  in  Apr.,  1696, 
but  was  quickly  set  at  liberty.  In  June,  1704, 
Queen  Anne  granted  him  a  treasury  pension  of 
£200,  he  having  declined,  in  1702,  her  offer  to  re- 
instate him  in  his  see. 

In  early  English  hymnology  Ken  occupies  an 
important  place.  The  morning  hymn,  "  Awake, 
my  soul,  and  with  the  sun,"  and  the  evening  hymn, 
''  Glory  to  thee,  my  God,  this  night "  (or,  as  it  is 
usually  written,  **  All  praise  to  Thee,  my  God,  this 
night "),  are  among  the  best  hynms  in  tl^  language, 
ai^  are  known  wherever  Elnglish  is  spoken.  Each 
of  these,  as  also  the  midnight  hymn,  "  My  God,  now 
I  from  sleep  awake,"  ends  with  the  familiar  dox- 
ology,  "  Praise  God  from  whom  all  blessings  flow." 
He  wrote  these  hymns  for  the  boys  of  Winchester 
College,  and  first  printed  them  in  the  1695  edition 
of  his  Manual  for  the  Use  of  Winchester  Scholars 
(London,  1674;  printed  by  S.  P.  C.  K.,  1880),  as 
Hymns  for  MominQf  Evening,  and  Midnight  (ed. 
R.  Palmer,  1898).  Owing  to  their  length  these 
three  hynms  have  been  rearranged  in  modem 
hymnals,  and  divided  into  about  a  doien  separate 
hymns.  Other  works  by  Ken  are:  An  Exposition 
qf  the  Church  Catechism,  or  the  Practice  cf  Divine 
Love  (London,  1685;  new  ed.,  1849);  Prayers  for 
the  Use  qf  all  Persons  who  come  to  the  Baths/or  Cure 
(1692;  S.  P.  C.  K.,  1898);  and  the  posthumous 
Hymns  for  AU  the  Festivals  of  the  Year  (1721;  new 
eds.,  1868,  etc.).  Selections  from  his  devotional 
writings  have  been  frequently  published  under 
various  titles.  W.  Hawkins  published  his  Works 
(4  vols.,  1721),  including  only  poetical  compositions. 
J.  T.  Round  collected  his  Prose  Works  (1838), 
which  have  been  reedited  and  augmented  by  W. 
Benham  (1889;  new  ed.,  1899). 

Ken  was  one  of  the  beet  and  most  fearless  preach- 
ers of  his  time,  and  a  man  of  rare  piety  and  sweet- 
ness of  spirit.  He  was  anxious  to  do  good;  and 
during  his  incumbency  of  the  see  of  Bath  and  Wells 
he  devoted  lus  revenues  to  charitable  purposes. 


On  coming  into  the  possession  of  £4,000  in  1686 
he  gave  the  greater  part  of  it  to  the  fund  for  Hu- 
guenot refugees.  He  was  an  accomplished  lin- 
guist, and  a  musician,  as  well  as  a  poet.  He  was 
accustomed  to  sing  his  hymns  to  his  own  accom- 
paniment on  the  lute.  The  reverence  felt  for  Ken 
was  revived  by  the  Oxford  Movement.  In  Tract 
85  (London,  1836)  Newman  gives  a  form  of  service 
for  Mar.  21,  the  day  of  Ken's  burial. 

Bibuoobapht:  The  (Poetical)  Works  appeared  ed.,  with 
a  Life,  W.  HawkinB  (Ken's  great-nephew),  4  vole.,  Lon- 
don. 1721,  and  his  Proae  Work*  and  Letten,  ed.  J.  T. 
Round,  ib.  1838,  also  oontaining  the  Life  by  Hawkms 
(which  is  the  original  authority).  Besides  this,  consult 
the  lAfe  by  a  layman  (J.  L.  Anderdon).  2  vols.,  London, 
1861-54  (admirable);  E.  H.  Plumptxe.  ib.  1890;  and 
F.  A.  (Clarke,  ib.  1886.  Valuable  material  b  also  foimd 
in  T.  Lathbury.  HiM.  of  tke  Nonjuror*,  ib.  1862;  J.  Evelyn, 
Diary,  ed.  W.  Bray,  vols,  ii-iii,  passim,  ib.  1879;  S.  W. 
Duffield,  EnoLx9h  Hymru,  pp.  49-n50,  New  York,  1886;  J.  H. 
Overton,  The  Church  in  England,  vol.  ii.  passim,  ib.  1897; 
W.  H.  Hutton,  The  Enolieh  Chvrdi  Uet6-1714),  pasdm, 
ib.  1903;  Julian,  Hymnology,  pp. 616-622  (valuable);  DNB, 
zxx.  399-404. 

KBNDRICK,  ASAHEL  CLARK:  Baptist;  b.  at 
Poultney,  Vt.,  Dec.  7,  1809;  d.  at  Rochester,  N.  Y., 
Oct.  21,  1895.  He  was  educated  at  Hamilton  Col- 
lege, Clinton,  N.  Y.  (B.A.,  1831),  and  after  being 
professor  of  Greek  in  Madison  University,  Hamil- 
ton, N.  Y.,  from  1832  to  1850,  occupied  a  similar 
chair  at  the  University  of  Rochester  until  his  death. 
He  was  also  professor  of  Hebrew  and  New-Testa- 
ment interpretation  in  Rochester  Theological  Sem- 
inary from  1865  to  1868,  and  from  1852  to  1854 
studied  and  traveled  in  Europe,  especially  in  Greece. 
Although  ordained  to  the  Baptist  ministry,  he 
never  held  a  pastorate.  From  1871  to  1881  he  was 
a  member  of  the  New  Testament  Company  of  the 
Anglo-American  Bible  Revision  Committee.  He 
was  the  author  of:  Life  and  Letters  of  Mrs,  Emily  C 
Judson  (New  York,  1860);  Commentary  on  the  Epis- 
tletotheH^ews  (Philadelphia,  1889);  and  The  Moral 
Conflict  of  Humanity,  and  other  Papers  (1894).  He 
likewise  collaborated  on  several  biographies,  and  re- 
vised the  translation  of  H.  Olshausen's  Biblical 
Commentary  on  the  New  Testament  (6  vols.,  New 
York,  1836-58),  besides  translating  C.  B.  Moll's 
commentary  on  Hebrews  for  the  American  Lange 
commentary  (1868)  and  H.  A.  W.  Meyer's  commen- 
tary on  John  (1884). 

KENDRICK,  JOHN  MILLS:  Protestant  Epis- 
copal missionary  bishop  of  Arizona  and  New  Mex- 
ico; b.  at  Gambier,  O.,  May  14,  1836.  He  was 
graduated  at  Marietta  College,  Marietta,  O.,  in 
1856,  studied  law,  and  was  admitted  to  the  New 
York  bar,  but  feeling  himself  drawn  toward  the 
Church,  entered  the  theological  seminary  connected 
with  Kenyon  College,  Gambier,  O.  He  interrupted 
his  studies  to  serve  in  the  Union  Army  during  the 
Civil  War,  and  rose  to  be  assistant  adjutant-gen- 
eral. Graduating  from  the  theological  seminary 
in  1864,  he  was  ordered  deacon  in  the  same  year, 
and  advanced  to  the  priesthood  in  1865.  He  served 
as  a  missionary  for  two  years  at  Put-in-Bay,  O.,  and 
was  then  rector  of  St.  Andrew's,  Fort  Scott,  Kan. 
(1867-69),  St.  Paul's,  Leavenworth,  Kan.  (1869- 
1875),  and  the  Church  of  the  Good  Shepherd,  Co- 
lumbus, O  (1875-78).    In  1878-89  he  was  a  ijen- 


Xmiii 
Mmao 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


814 


era!  diooeean  misnonary,  and  for  five  ywn  of  this 
period  was  superintendent  of  city  missions  in  Co- 
Imnbus.  In  1889  he  was  consecrated  missionary 
bishop  of  Ariaona  and  New  Mezioo. 
Bibuogbapht:  W.  S.  Fttiy,  Tk§  BpiteopoU  im  Ammiea, 
p.  71.  New  York,  1806. 

KENITES.    See  Cain. 
KENIZZITES.    See  Caleb. 

KENNEDY,  ARCHIBALD  ROBERT  STIRLING: 

Church  of  Scotland;  b.  at  WhitehiUs  (2  m.  w.  of 
Banfif).  Banffshire,  Scotland,  Dec.  21,  1859.  He 
studied  at  the  universities  of  Aberdeen  (M.A., 
1879),  Glasgow  (B.D.,  1883),  Gdttingen  (1883), 
and  Berlin  (1883-85),  and  in  1885-87  was  fellow  of 
Glasgow  University.  He  was  professor  of  Hebrew 
and  cognate  languages  in  the  University  of  Aber- 
deen 1887-94,  and  since  1894  has  been  professor  of 
Hebrew  and  Semitic  languages  in  the  University  of 
Edinburgh.  He  prepared  the  Elnglish  editions  of 
the  Hebrew,  Syriac,  Assyrian,  and  Arabic  gram- 
mars in  the  Porta  Linguarum  (hienUdium  (London, 
1885-95),  and  has  ^ited  Exodus,  Joshua,  and 
Judges  in  The  Temple  Bible,  besides  writing  the 
commentary  on  Samuel  for  The  Century  Bible  (1905) . 

KENNETT  (KENNBT),  WHITE:  Bishop  of 
Peterborough;  b.  at  Dover  Aug.  10,  1660;  d.  at 
Westminster  Dec.  19,  1728.  He  studied  at  the 
Westminster  School  and  at  St.  Edtnund's  Hall, 
Oxford  (B.A.,  1682;  M.A.,  1684;  B.D.,  1694; 
D.D.,  1700),  and  was  vicar  of  Ambrosden,  Oxford- 
shire, 1685-1700.  As  a  student  he  had  been  an 
admirer  of  James  II.,  but  afterward  he  became  an 
open  supporter  of  the  Revolution  and  a  zealous 
Whig  partisan.  In  1691  he  returned  to  Oxford  as 
tutor  and  vice-principal  at  St.  Edmund's  Hall,  and 
gave  a  considerable  impetus  to  the  study  of  Brit- 
ish antiquities.  He  was  rector  of  St.  Botolph, 
Aldgate,  London,  1700-07,  and  then  rector  at  St. 
Mary,  Aldermary,  London.  In  1701  he  became 
prebendary  of  Salisbury  Cathedral,  archdeacon  of 
Huntingdon,  and  one  of  the  original  members  of 
the  Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the  Gospel  in 
Foreign  Parts.  In  the  same  year  he  entered  into 
a  famous  controversy  with  Francis  Atterbury  (q.v.) 
regarding  the  rights  of  convocation.  In  1708  he 
was  collated  to  a  prebend  in  Lincoln  and  installed 
dean  of  Peterborough.  Through  the  influence  of  his 
friend  Charles  Trimnell,  bishop  of  Norwich,  he  was 
made  bishop  of  Peterborough  in  1718,  despite  the 
fact  that  he  was  a  Low-churchman  and  hsd  taken 
the  side  of  Benjamin  Hoadly  (q.v.)  in  the  Bango- 
rian  controversy.  Kennett's  most  important  works 
are:  Parochial  AnUquiHes  ,  ,  ,  of  Oxford  and 
Bucks  (Oxford,  1695;  greatly  enlarged  from  the 
author's  manuscript  notes,  2  vols.,  1818);  the  third 
voltmie  of  A  Complete  Hietory  of  England  (3  vols., 
London,  1706),  covering  the  period  from  Charles  I. 
to  Queen  Anne;  and  the  unfinished  Register  and 
Chronicle,  Ecdeeiaetical  and  CivU  .  .  .  from  the 
Restoration  of  King  Charles  II.  (vol.  i.,  1728). 
Bibuooraprt:  An  anonymous  Life  of  .  .  ,  W,  Ktinet 
appeared,  London,  1730;  also  RemarkM  on  Some  PauaoM 
in  (Kb  Life  of  Dr.  KenneU  (by  J.  Sharp),  lb.  1730.  Con- 
sult: A.  it  Wood,  Athenae  Oxonienaee,  ed.  P.  Bliss,  it. 
702,  1003,  London,  1820;   DNB,  xxzi  2-e;   J.  H.  Orer- 


ton,  Chureh  in  England,  London,  1807;    W.  H.  Button. 
The  Bnolith  Church  OetS-irU),  ib.  1003. 

KEimiCOTT,  BENJAMIN:  BibUcal  scholar;  b. 
at  Totnes  (22  m.  s.s.w.  of  Exeter),  Devonshire, 
Apr.  4,  1718;  d.  at  Oxford  Aug.  18,  1783.  He 
spent  seven  years  in  the  grammar-school  and  be- 
came master  of  the  charity  school  at  Totnee,  and 
subsequently  studied  at  Wadham  and  Exeter  col- 
leges, Oxford  (B.A.,  1747;  M.A.,  1750;  B.D.  and 
D.D.,  1761).  He  was  feUow  of  Exeter  CoUege 
1747-71,  Whitehall  preacher  1753,  vicar  of  Culham, 
Oxfordshire,  1753-^83,  chaplain  to  the  bishop  of 
Oxford  1766,  Raddiffe  librarian  at  Oxford  1767- 
1783,  canon  of  Westminster  Abbey  1770,  canon  of 
Christ  Church,  Oxford,  1770-83,  and  held  the  vicar- 
age of  Menheniot,  Cornwall,  1771-81.  His  life  was 
spent  chiefly  in  the  study  of  the  Hebrew  texts  of 
the  Old  Testament.  After  the  publication  of  The 
Stale  of  the  Printed  Text  of  the  Old  Testament  (2 
vols.,  Oxford,  1753-59;  Latin  transl.,  Leipsic, 
1756-65),  he  was  induced  by  Thomas  Seeker  to 
undertake  a  collation  of  the  text.  For  this  work 
the  sum  of  about  ten  thousand  pounds  was  raised 
by  subscription,  and  many  scholars  were  employed, 
both  at  home  and  abroad.  During  the  progress 
of  the  undertaking  (1760-69)  ten  annual  reports 
were  published,  which  were  afterward  collected  in 
one  volume  (Oxford,  1770).  The  result  of  these 
labors  was  Kennicott's  Hebrew  Bible,  Vetus  Testor 
mentum  Hebraicum  cum  variis  lectionHms  (2  vols., 
1776-80).  To  the  second  volume  he  appended  a 
Dissertatio  generalis  (also  separately,  Oxford,  1780; 
Brunswick,  1783),  giving  an  account  of  the  manu- 
scripts of  the  Old  Testament.  The  text  is  that  of 
Van  der  HoQght,  but  without  points,  and  the  va- 
rious readings  are  placed  at  the  bottom  of  the  page. 
The  number  of  manuscripts  collated  was  615. 
Kennicott  has  been  criticised  for  his  preference  for 
the  Samaritan  Pentateuch,  for  his  neglect  of  the 
Massorah,  for  his  disregard  of  the  vowel  points,  and 
for  occasional  inaccuracy.  A  considerable  literature 
was  issued  embodying  these  and  other  objections, 
to  which  Kennicott  and  his  friends  made  answer. 
His  Letter  to  a  Friend  Occasioned  by  a  French  Pam- 
phlet (issued  anonymously,  1772)  answers  a  French 
attack,  and  his  Contra  ephemeridum  Ooettigensium 
criminationes  (1782)  replies  to  German  criticisms. 
Bibuogbapht:  The  Oenileman'e  Maganne,  1747.  176S. 
1771.  1783.  1780.  1830;  8.  DAyidaon.  Leetune  on  Biblieal 
Crittdem,  Edinburgh.  1839;   DNB,  xxxi.  10-12. 

KENNION,  GEORGE  WTNDHAM:  Church  of 
England,  bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells;  b.  at  Harro- 
gate (27  m.  w.  of  York),  Yorkshire,  Sept.  5,  1845. 
He  studied  at  Oriel  College,  Oxford  (BJV..,  1867). 
and  was  ordered  deacon  in  1869  and  ordained  priest 
in  1870.  After  being  domestic  chaplain  to  the 
bishop  of  Tuam  in  1869-70,  he  was  diocesan  in- 
spector of  Yorkshire  1871-73  and  vicar  of  St. 
Paul's,  Sculcoates,  Yorkshire,  1873-76  and  of  All 
Saints',  Bradford,  1876-^2.  In  1882  he  was  con- 
secrated bishop  of  Adelaide,  and  in  1894  was  trans- 
lated to  the  see  of  Bath  and  Wells.  He  was  also 
visitor  of  Wadham  Ck>llege,  Oxford,  in  1882,  lec- 
turer in  pastoral  theology  in  the  University  of 
Cambridge  in  1900,  and  Ramsden  Preacher  in  the 
same  university  in  the  following  year. 


315 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


KeniteA 
Kenoais 


KENOSIS. 

Scriptural  Basis  of  Kenons  (|  1). 

Modem  Rise  of  the  Doctrine  (S  2). 

Early  Orthodox  Exegesis  not  Kenotic  (|  3). 

Coneretenese  of  Early  Christology  (|  4). 

Foreshadowings  of  Kenotidsm  ((  6). 

The  Antiochian  School  and  Tertullian  (S  6). 

Kenotic  Undercurrent  (S  7). 

The  Problem  Ignored  by  Scholasticism  (S  8). 

Calvinism  not  Really  Kenotic  ((  9). 

Luther's  Christology  (S  10). 

Early  Post-Lutheran  Doctrine  (S  11). 

Summary  (S  12). 

l<!tiglt«h  and  American  Treatment  (S  13). 

Ever  sinoe  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century, 
it  has  been  usual  among  Protestant,  and  especially 
Lutheran,  theologians  to  find  the  basis  for  a  special 
doctrine  of  what  is  called  the  kendsia  or  self-empty- 
ing of  Christ  in  the  passage  (Phil.  ii. 

z.  Scrip-  6-S)  where  Paul  says  that  Christ 
tuial        "  being  in  the  form  of  God,  thought  it 

Basis  of     not  robbery  to  be  equal  with  God,  but 

Kenosis.  made  himself  of  no  reputation  (Gk. 
heatUon  ekenOaen)  and  took  upon  him 
the  form  of  a  servant.''  Although  this  doctrine  is 
now  of  little  influence  among  dogmatic  theologi- 
ans, the  popularity  which  it  enjoyed  and  its  rela- 
tion to  the  older  dogmatic  development  makes  a 
detailed  treatment  of  it  useful  for  the  knowledge  of 
the  present  condition  of  the  Christolpgical  prob- 
lem (see  Christology,  IX.,  X.). 

The  regular  Lutheran  orthodoxy  had  seen  in  the 

phrase  quoted  an  aphorism  relating  to  the  historic 

Christ,   partly  because  the  subject  of  the  verb, 

"  Christ  Jesus,"  is  a  term  usually  so  applied,  and 

partly  because  '*  a  kenosis  properly  so  called  can 

not  be  predicated  of  the  Logos  apart 

2.  Modem  from  the  flesh,  of  the  abstract  Deity, 

Rise  of  the  who   is   immutable   and    invariable '' 

Doctrine.  (J.  Gerhard,  Loci,  IV.,  xiv.  294).  The 
application  of  the  expression  to  the 
preexistent  Christ  was  made  first,  among  modem 
Lutheran  theologians,  by  Ernst  Sartorius,  tenta- 
tively in  1832  and  then  more  fully  in  his  Lehre  von 
(ier  heiligen  Liebe  (ii.  21  sqq.,  Hambuig,  1844).  In 
the  same  year  Johann  Ludwig  KOnig  expressed 
similar  ideas  in  Hegelian  phraseology;  and  in  1845 
began  to  appear  Thomasius'  Beitrdge  zur  kirchlichen 
Chrisiologief  which  inaugurated  the  triumph  of  the 
modem  conception  of  the  kenosis.  Here,  appar- 
ently, the  perfect  oneness  of  the  person  of  Christ 
was  assured,  since  it  was  the  divine  Logos  himself 
who  laid  aside  the  fulness  of  his  divine  Nature  in 
all  the  relations  in  which  it  manifests  itself  exter- 
nally, bringing  himself  down  to  the  level  of  a  hu- 
man individual;  the  possibility  of  a  real  human  de- 
velopment of  Jesus  was  assured,  since  the  Logos 
determined  to  subject  his  divine  being  to  the  forms 
of  human  existence,  under  the  laws  of  human  de- 
velopment, retaining  the  use  of  his  absolute  power 
only  so  far  as  it  was  required  for  his  redeeming 
work;  the  Calvinistic  theory  of  the  union  of  God- 
head and  manhood  so  that  the  whole  of  the  former 
still  existed  outside  the  latter  was  avoided;  and 
the  doctrine  of  the  Communicatio  Idiomatum  (q.v.) 
was  preserved.  Substantial  assent  was  given  to  the 
teaching  of  Thomasius  by  Lutherans  like  Kahnis, 
Luthardt  and  Delitzsch,  by  United  theologians  like 


Gaupp  and  J.  P.  Lange,  and  by  some  Reformed 
writers,  especially  Ebraid  and  later  Godet  in  his 
commentary  on  John.  Thomasius  took  heed  of 
criticism  so  far  as  to  attempt,  in  his  most  important 
work,  Christi  Person  und  Werk  (part  ii.,  Erlangen, 
1855),  to  avoid  the  alleged  ApoUinarianism  of  his 
Beitrdge  by  a  distinction  between  the  essential  at- 
tributes of  God  (absolute  power,  truth,  holiness, 
love)  and  the  merely  relative  attributes  affected  by 
the  kenosis  (omnipotence,  omniscienoe,  omnipres- 
ence), thus  meeting  the  charge  that  he  had  taught  ' 
a  mutability  of  the  divine  nature.  He  maintained, 
however,  that  his  doctrine  of  the  kenosis  was  the 
necessary  outcome  of  the  whole  previous  dogmatic 
development.  He  did  not  deny  that  the  view  of 
the  early  Church  had  in  general  been  a  different 
one,  but  he  was  convinced  that  Lutheran  Christol- 
ogy, in  which  the  Incarnation  was  more  deeply 
realized,  required  his  conclusion. 

The  passage  in  Philippians  was  used  as  early  as 
Marcion;  but  the  important  phrase  for  him  was 
"  the  likenese  of  man  ":  for  his  Docetic  position 
the  ekendaen  phrase  could  be  nothing  more  than  a 
general  indication  of  the  apparition  of  the  Logos 
in  the  lower  world.  The  work  ekendsen  is  quoted 
first  by  the  Gnostic  Theodotus,  Clem- 
3.  Early  ent  of  Alexandria,  and  Tertullian,  to  all 
Orthodox  of  whom  it  seems  to  be  nothing  more 
Exegesis  than  an  expression  designating  the 
not  Incarnation.  As  long  as  the  estimate 
Kenotic  of  the  person  of  Christ  took  its  depar- 
ture from  the  historic  Christ  (wMch, 
apart  from  Gnosticism,  was  the  case  down  to  the 
apologists),  no  reflection  was  likely  to  be  made  upon 
the  kenosis  of  the  preexistent  Logos.  It  is  only 
after  the  beginning  of  Catholic  theology  with  Clem- 
ent, Irenaeus,  and  Tertullian  that  the  text  in  Phi- 
lippians belongs  to  the  passages  regularly  used  to 
describe  the  Incarnation;  Origen,  in  fact,  under- 
stands the  official  doctrine  to  assert  that  the  Son 
of  God  "  emptying  himself  (se  ipeum  exinaniens) 
and  becoming  man  was  incarnate."  With  scarcely 
an  exception  the  early  writers  saw  the  subject  of 
ekendsen  in  the  logos  asarhos,  the  Word  apart  from 
the  flesh.  Only  Novatian,  Ambrosiaster,  Pelagius, 
and  the  commentary  based  on  him  which  goes  under 
the  name  of  Primasius  of  Hadrumetum  imderstand 
the  subject  to  be  the  Word  made  flesh.  An  exe- 
getical  predisposition  was  therefore  extant  in  the 
early  Church  for  a  theory  similar  to  the  modern 
kenosis-theory.  But  that  is  the  most  that  can  be 
said.  For  the  usual  exposition  of  the  text  sees  m 
the  "  self-emptying  "  of  the  Logos  merely  an  equiv- 
alent for  the  **  taking  the  form  of  a  servant,''  and 
that  again  is  merely  an  equivaleAt  for  "  becoming 
incarnate. "  Origen  asserts  that  the  rule  of  faith  lays 
down  that  the  Logos  "  being  made  man  remained 
that  which  he  was  before  ";  and  Augustine,  echo- 
ing the  voice  of  the  older  tradition,  says:  "  Thus 
he  emptied  himself,  taking  the  form  of  a  servant, 
not  losing  the  form  of  God;  the  form  of  a  servant 
was  added,  the  form  of  God  not  subtracted.'' 
Athanasius  and  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  while  admitting 
that  the  Word  so  far  emptied  himself  as  to  appear 
not  in  his  native  majesty  but  in  the  humility  of 
himian  nature,  yet  insist  on  his  imaltered  substan- 


KcnoaU 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


816 


tial  greatness;  and  this  remained  the  established 
view.  Athanasius,  in  opposition  to  the  Arians, 
who  made  the  Son  of  God  mutable  in  nature  and 
immediately  subject  to  human  development,  ne- 
oeasities,  troubles,  and  sufferings,  fights  for  the  un- 
changeableness  oJf  the  Logos  as  the  palladium  of 
orthodoxy;  the  Logos  does  not  increase  in  wisdom 
(Luke  ii.  52),  is  not  hungry  or  troubled  even  imto 
death  (John  xii.  27),  is  not  in  ignorance  of  the  day 
of  judgment,  does  not  suffer  or  die — all  these  things 
happen  only  to  his  '*  flesh,"  to  his  human  nature. 
And  after  Athanasius  not  only  the  Antiochian 
school  but  even  Apollinaris  and  Cyril  make  simi- 
larly strong  assertions  of  the  imchangeableness  of 
the  Godhead  of  the  Logos,  such  things  as  ignorance, 
sleeping,  being  troubled,  and  still  more  suffering 
and  death  being  referred  only  in  a  derived  or  loose 
sense  to  the  Logos  proper.  By  a  corresponding 
train  of  thought,  the  '*  exaltation  "  of  Phil.  ii.  9 
is  always  in  patristic  theology  referred  exclusively 
to  the  human  nature  of  Christ.  In  all  this  there 
is  no  room  for  such  a  theory  as  that  of  Thomasius; 
in  fact,  it  is  more  than  once  expressly  opposed. 
Hilary  menti<ms  something  not  dissimilar  as  one 
of  the  views  on  the  Incarnation  to  be  avoided,  and 
Cyril  of  Alexandria  controverts  two  different  ke- 
notio  theories,  the  exact  meaning  of  the  more  im- 
portant of  which  is  disputable  and  obscure — ^but 
Cjrril's  attitude  is  unmistakable;  he  rejects  both 
with  equal  firmness,  and  insists  again  on  the  way 
in  whicli  the  Godhead  fills  all  in  all;  a  limitation  of 
the  Godhead  in  Christ  is  essentially  tmthinkable 
on  account  of  his  tmity  with  the  Father.  But  the 
very  energy  with  which  the  Fathers  reject  any 
mutability  of  the  Godhead,  as  much  in  relation  to 
the  Incarnation  as  anywhere  else,  would,  taken  by 
itself,  make  the  whole  conception  of  the  Incamar 
tion  practically  unsustainable.  Its  inunense  im- 
portance to  early  Christian  thought  would  be  un- 
intelligible if  this  were  all  we  knew  about  primitive 
Christolqgical  development. 

But  this  is  not  all.    It  must  be  borne  in  mind 

that  the  idea  of  the  Incarnation  is  older  than  any 

realiiation  of  the  diflSculties  which  beset  it.    It 

springs   not   only   from    the   passage    in    Philip- 

pians,  but  also  from  such  thoughts  as  those  of  II 

Cor.   iv.  4;  John  i.  14;   I  John  i.  1.    It  appears 

definitely  in  Ignatius,  in  a  form  as  far 

4.  Coiif-     as    possible    removed    from    Docetic 

cretensM    imaginings.    With    almost    paradox- 

of  Baxly    ical  sharpness  he  contrasts  the  God- 

Chri8tok>gy.  head  and  the  passible  manhood   of 

Christ,  in  a  way  that  by  no  means 

suggests  what  would  now  be  called  kenosis;  he  is 

rather  filled  with  the  conception  that  the  invisible, 

incomprehensible,  impassible  God  became  visible, 

tangible,  passible  in  the  historical  person  of  Jesus. 

How  the  revelation  of  the  invisible  God  in  the  hi»- 

toric  Christ  came  to  pass,  he  does  not  undertake  to 

say;  he  merely  asserts  the  fact  with  firm  conviction, 

dealing  with  a  condescension  of  the  revelation  of  God 

to  our  level,  in  a  "  simple  modalistic  "  manner.  Ideas 

of  this  kind  did  not  die  out  with   Ignatius,  but 

through  the  theology  of  Asia  Minor  leavened  the 

later  development.    Irenaeus,  although  he  does  not 

quote  the  ekendaen,  obviously  connects  them  with 


the  thought  of  the  passage.  With  him,  however,  it 
is  clear  that  the  basis  is  not  a  metaphysical  kenosis- 
theory  of  the  self-transformation  crff  the  Logos,  but 
the  "  simple  modalistic "  conviction  that  '*  the 
man  without  beauty  and  subject  to  suffering,"  the 
historic  Christ,  was,  **  in  a  different  way  fnnn  all 
men  who  then  lived,  God  and  Lord  and  King  eter> 
nal,  the  only-begotten,  the  incarnate  Word  pro- 
claimed by  all  the  prophets  and  apostles  "  (Haer. 
IV.,  XX.  2).  The  faith  in  "  God  manifest  in  the 
flesh,"  centering  around  the  indivisible  historic 
personality  of  Jesus,  is  what  carries  the  belief  in 
the  Incarnation  through  all  the  difficulties  which 
arose  as  soon  as  men  began  to  attempt  to  define  the 
manner  of  the  Incarnation.  It  is  this  unquestion- 
ing belief  in  **  God  in  man  "  (Ignatius,  Epkestaru, 
vii.  2),  not  any  formal  theory  of  a  kenosis  or  any- 
thing else,  which  forms  the  real  basis  of  the  primi- 
tive doctrine  on  the  subject. 

Nor,  when  theories  begin  to  appear,  are  they  ke- 
notic,  at  least  not  in  the  sense  of  Thomasius.  The 
oldest  occurs  in  Irenaeus — ^the  same  Irenaeus  who 
speaks  of  "  the  impassible  becoming  piassible  "  and 
of  "  the  very  Word  of  God  incarnate 
5.  Fore-  suspended  on  the  tree,"  and  who  ve- 
shadow-  hemently  opposes  the  Gnostic  dis- 
ings  of  tinction  between  "  Jesus  who  suffered  " 
Kenoticism.  and  "  Christ  who  departed  before  the 
Passion."  In  so  far,  however,  as  he 
had  a  theory,  he  distinguished  in  the  historic  Christ 
the  Logos  and  the  homo  eju8,  and,  quite  in  accord 
with  the  later  development,  regarded  the  man  as 
the  object  of  temptation,  suffering,  death,  in  which 
the  Logos  had  no  part,  being,  on  the  other  hand, 
"  with  "  "  the  man  "  in  victory,  resurrection,  and 
ascension.  Here  is  the  source  of  the  appearance 
of  kenotic  ideas,  in  this  doctrine  of  the  Logos  taking 
into  himself  a  part  of  his  creation.  He  who  "  ac- 
cording to  his  invisible  nature  contains  all  things  " 
came  **  to  us  not  as  he  was  able  to  come,  but  as  we 
were  able  to  receive  him."  Here  is  indeed  a  self- 
limitation  of  the  Logos;  but  it  is  a  progressively 
less  and  less  self-limited  oonmiimication  of  him- 
self on  the  part  of  a  Logos  remaining  all  the  while 
in  undiminished  majesty,  to  man  who  progressively 
responds  more  and  more  to  the  approach;  it  is  the 
sort  of  self-limitation  asserted,  not  of  the  Logos 
but  of  the  '^  One  God,"  by  dynamic  Monarchian- 
ism.  This  conception  of  the  dynamic  indwelling 
of  the  Logos  in  the  man  Jesus  is  not  peculiar  to 
Irenaeus,  but  is  to  be  perceived  down  to  the  final 
disappearance  of  the  Antiochian  tradition  in  the 
reign  of  Justinian.  Origen  is  the  special  represen- 
tative of  this  view.  In  his  controversy  with  Cel- 
sus,  who  had  objected  that  if  God  came  down  in 
person  to  men  he  must  have  left  his  throne  and  suf- 
fered change,  Origen  replies  that  Celsus  knows  not 
the  power  of  God  nor  that  "  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord 
fiUeth  the  earth  "  (Wisd.  i.  7);  that  even  if  the 
God  of  all,  according  to  his  power,  came  down  to 
take  part  with  Jesus  in  earthly  life,  if  the  Logos 
who  in  the  beginning  was  with  God  and  was  God 
came  to  us,  it  did  not  mean  that  he  lost  or  left  his 
throne,  or  that  he  quitted  one  place  to  fill  another 
which  before  had  not  contained  him.  That  in 
some  of  Origen's  expressions  there  is  room  for  •«» 


817 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mmaotdm 


earthly  and  human  development  of  Jesus  is  dear 
enough;  but  these  views  have  nothing  in  common 
with  a  kenosis  theory  like  that  of  Thomasius. 

Through  Paul  of  Samosata  and  Lucian,  with 
some  direct  influence  from  Irenaeus,  these  views 
came  down  to  the  Antiochian  school;  and  it  is 
neither  unfair  nor  surprising  that  Cyril 
6.  The  and  Apollinaris  object  to  their  the- 
Antiochian  ology  that  it  goes  only  as  far  as 
School  and  uniting  man  with  God,  not  as  far  as 
Tertullian.  God  in  man  (enanthropesia).  But 
this  weakness  of  the  early  teaching  on 
the  Incarnation  shows  itself  not  only  in  Origen  and 
the  Antiochian  school.  Similar  thoughts  are  met 
with  in  Athanasius,  though  already  with  the  com- 
plementary ideas  which  alone  remain  in  Cyril;  and 
from  the  Council  of  Nicsa  a  direct  road  leads 
through  Marcellus  to  the  dynamic  Monarchianism 
of  Photinus.  In  the  West  also,  which  followed 
Antiochian  lines  down  to  553,  in  spite  of  the  in- 
sistence on  the  single  personality,  there  are  clear 
enough  traces  of  the  idea  of  a  dynamic  indwelling 
of  the  Logos  in  the  man  Jesus.  It  is  evidently  not 
worth  wlUle  to  seek  echoes  of  kenotic  ideas  in  Ter- 
tullian; if  it  could  be  done  at  all,  it  could  only  be 
after  all  danger  was  past  of  getting  lost  in  the  maze 
created  by  a  mixture  of  "  simple-modalistio " 
thoughts,  of  apologetic  conceptions  of  a  theophany, 
and  of  traditions  of  a  dynamic  indwelling  of  the 
verbum  ( «  sapierUia  =  apirUiu)  in  Christ.  The  mat- 
ter is  still  more  complicated  in  the  case  of  Hilary, 
even  after  the  painstaking  labors  of  Baur,  Domer, 
Thomasius,  and  Wirthmiiller.  But  a  minute  ex- 
amination of  the  works  of  that  eloquent  and  deep- 
thinking  theologian  should  convince  the  unpreju- 
diced student  that  his  doctrine  is  as  little  kenotic, 
in  the  sense  of  Thomasius,  as  that  of  Irenaeus,  on 
whom  he  shows  a  certain  dependence. 

That  in  theoretical  expositions  of  the  Incarna- 
tion which  held  strongly  to  the  immutability  of  the 
Godhead  expressions  should  now  and  then  be  used 
which  give  color  to  kenotic  ideas  is  not  to  be  won- 
dered at;  and  the  phenomenon  occurs  not  only  in 
Hilary,  not  only  in  Irenaeus  and  Ori- 
7.  Kenotic  gen,  but  also  in  the  two  Gregories, 
Under-  of  Nazianzus  and  of  Nyssa.  Tl:ds  was 
current  natural  enough,  both  because  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Incarnation  rested  on  the 
thought  of  **  God  manifest  in  the  flesh,"  and  be- 
cause simple  souls  understood  *'  the  Word  was 
noade  flesh  "  for  themselves,  regardless  of  the  re- 
strictions of  theologians;  and  when  **  simple-do- 
cetic  "  views  were  ruled  out,  there  was  scarcely  any- 
thing left  for  them  but  the  kenotic.  The  spread  of 
Arianism  may  possibly  be  explained  by  the  fact 
that  without  hair-splitting  it  recognizes  its  Logos 
as  the  passible  subject  of  the  historic  person  Jesus. 
The  kenotic  undercurrent  is  partly  responsible  for 
the  title  **  Mother  of  God  "  and  for  the  phrase  (very 
old  in  a  simple-modalistic  sense)  ''  God  crucified." 
In  proportion  as  the  Antiochian  school,  which  dis- 
approved of  these  expressions,  was  suppressed,  the 
undercurrent  came  to  the  surface;  and  Apollinaris, 
the  antithesis  of  the  Antiochian  theologians,  sought 
to  give  a  theological  dress  to  the  ideas  which  it  bore 
with  it.    After  the  condemnation  of  Apollinarian- 


ism,  such  kenosis  theories  as  he  had  framed  were 
of  course  impossible — ^though  it  is  strange  that  the 
Alexandrian  theology  won  its  victory  over  Nesto- 
rianism  and  its  final  triumph  at  the  Council  of 
Chalcedon  without  showing  traces  of  them.  For 
if  (as  was  de  fide  after  553)  the  hyposUuia  Urn  logon 
took  to  itself  an  impersoxial  human  nature,  a  real 
human  life  of  the  Ustoric  Jesus  is  unthinkable  if 
the  real  subject  of  this  historic  person,  the  Logos, 
retained  his  omniscience  and  his  impassibility. 
But  so  far  as  it  was  possible  without  endangering 
the  conceptual  integrity  of  the  two  natures, 
theologians  combated  the  undercurrent;  and  they 
were  content  to  guard  the  formulas  which  set 
the  "  mystery  of  the  Incarnation  "  beyond  under- 
standing. 

In  the  medieval  West,  the  scholastic  theology 
spent  much  formal  labor  on  the  doctrine  of  the  In- 
carnation, without  paying  any  attention  to  the 
passage  in  Philippians.    That  "  the  Word  of  God 
was  not  changed  "  in  the  Incarnation 
8.  The     was  an  accepted  axiom;   but  whether 
Problem    the  finally  prevalent  formula,  that  not 
Ignored     the  nature  common  to  the  divine  Per- 
by  Scho-    sons,  but  the  person  of  the  Word,  be- 
lasticisoL    came  incarnate,  was  ever  brought  into 
connection  with  the   Philippian  pas- 
sage, it  is  impossible  to  say.    In  any  case,  its  dis- 
tinction between  the  nature  and  the  person  of  the 
Word  would  have  no  significance  for  the  question 
under  discussion;  and  in  regard  to  the  kenosis  the 
medieval  Church  did  not  get  beyond  the  early  con- 
sensus   indicated    above.    The    present    Roman 
Catholic  theology  is  in  the  same  position,  and  pays 
no  heed  to  the  question  of  kenosis. 

Nor  did  Calvinistio  theology  go  be3rond  the  early 
consensus,  although  the  use  inade  of  the  text  in 
Philippians  has  given  the  impression  that  there  was 
a  special  Calvinistio  doctrine  on  the  subject.  Cal- 
vin B&ys  (InstUtdea  II.,  xiii.  2):  "Paid  shows  in 
Phil.  ii.  7,  that  Christ,  since  he  was 
9.  Calvin-  God,  might  have  at  once  manifested 
ism  not  his  glory  openly  to  the  world,  but 
ReaOf  waived  his  right  and  of  his  own  will 
Kenotic.  emptied  himself,  putting  on  the  form 
of  a  servant  and,  content  with  that 
humble  station,  suffering  his  Divinity  to  be  hidden 
by  a  veil  of  fl^."  This  kenosis  is  sometimes  de- 
scribed in  language  which  seems  to  imply  a  real 
alteration  of  the  condition  of  the  Logos;  but  too 
much  weight  must  not  be  laid  on  these  expressions, 
the  limitations  of  which  may  easily  be  shown  by 
other  more  authoritative  words,  especially  the  so- 
called  Extra  Calvinigticum:  "Since  the  Godhead 
can  not  be  comprehended  and  is  everywhere  pres- 
ent, it  follows  of  necessity  that  it  exists  outside  of 
(extra)  the  hiunan  nature  which  it  assumed,  but 
none  the  less  abides  within  it  and  personally  united 
with  it  "  (Cateckism,  ques.  48);  "  the  Logos  united 
human  nature  with  himself  in  such  a  manner  that 
he  totally  inhabited  it,  and  yet  totally  remained 
outside  of  (extra)  it,  since  he  is  inmieasurable  and 
infinite "  (Maresius  in  Schneckenbuiger,  p.  9). 
There  is  really  here  no  self-emptying;  the  Oalvin- 
ist  theologians  said  with  Augustine  that  the  Logos 
"  hid  what  he  was,"  and  the  veil  was  humanity 


KenosU 

Kent 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


818 


which  was  capable  of  containing  the  Godhead  only 
in  a  limited  measure. 

The  question  now  arises  whether  the  Luther- 
an theology  supplied  the  defects  of  the  earlier 
teaching  on  the  Incarnation.  Luther's  own  teach- 
ing has  so  many  sides  that  great  care  is  needed  to 
avoid  misrepresenting  him.  Certain  points  may  be 
brought  out  safely,  however.    (1)  Lu- 

10.  Lu-  ther  adhered  with  equal  firmness,  dur- 
ther's      ing  his  whole  public  career,  to  the  true 

Christol-  divinity  and  the  true  hmnauity  of  the 
ogy.  one  historic  person  of  Christ.  (2)  He 
was  never  inclined  to  bring  the  two 
into  relation  by  anything  like  the  theory  of  Thoma- 
sius,  and  as  early  as  1518  gave  an  exegesis  of  Phil, 
ii.  7,  which  would  cut  all  Scriptural  ground  from 
under  such  a  theory.  (3)  Phrases  reminding  us 
of  Domer's  view  are  indeed  present  in  Luther's 
earlier  work;  but  it  is  impossible  to  explain  his 
Christology  by  insistence  on  these.  (4)  He  rather 
shaped  his  Christology  from  the  first,  and  especially 
after  the  Lord's  Supper  controversy,  along  the  lines 
of  a  doctrine  of  the  two  natures  understood  in  an 
anti-Nestorian  sense;  and  it  is  indisputable  that 
his  view  of  the  suffering  of  the  Son  of  God  and  of 
the  communication  of  the  divine  attributes  (in- 
cluding omnipresence)  to  Christ  according  to  his 
humanity  was  a  scholastic  development  of  the  com- 
municatio  idiomatufn  as  taught  in  the  early  Church 
(see  Ubiquity).  (5)  But  in  spite  of  all  Luther's 
polemics  against  the  alloins  of  Zwingli,  it  may 
fairly  be  asked  whether  he  alwajrs  regarded  the 
communication  of  the  divine  attributes  as  real  and 
actual.  A  number  of  logical  difficulties  in  the  way 
of  this  might  be  collected  from  his  works,  and  sober 
thought  must  be  convinced  that  the  root  of  his 
doctrine  was  not  in  the  teaching  as  to  the  two  na^ 
tures  into  which  his  historical  position  forced  it  to 
grow.  (6)  It  is  rather  the  ultimate  datum  of  his 
Christology,  that  the  historic  person  of  Jesus  was 
and  is  the  God  of  revelation.  The  essential  feature 
of  his  Christology  is  really  this  understanding  of  the 
revealing  condescension  of  God,  this  harking  back 
to  "  simple-modalistic  "  ideas.  In  connection  with 
the  notion  of  the  dynamic  indwelling  of  God  in  the 
man  Jesus,  this  understanding  of  the  historic  per- 
sonality of  Jesus  might  have  led  to  a  new  construc- 
tion of  Christology — if  theologians  had  not  been 
bound  to  the  old  tradition  which  constructed  from 
above  downward  and  to  the  scheme  of  the  natures. 

But  since  they  were,  the  Lutheran  development 
could  lead  to  nothing  but  a  scholastic  working  out 
of  the  idea  of  the  communicatio  idiomatum  as  ex- 
tended by  Luther  beyond  the  traditional  content 
of  the  term.  Schools  differed  in  the  manner  of  this 
working  out;  but  they  agreed  in  denying  any  real 
kenosis  of  the  Logos.  Chemnitz  and  Brens  are  at 
one  not  only  in  saying  that  in  the  Incarnation  the 
Word  retained  the  fulness  of  his  God- 

iz.  Early  head,  but  that  this  fulness  was  im- 
post-     parted  to  the  humanity  of  Christ  at 

Lutheran    the  Incarnation.    The  only  place  where 

Doctrine,    real  kenotic  ideas  are  found   in  the 

Lutheran  theology  of  this   period   is 

among  the  PhilippLsts;  but  even  here  they  occur  in 

nothing  like  the  modem  sense.    When  they  speak 


of  the  Son  of  God  "  hiding  "  his  majesty  in  our 
flesh  and  blood,  or  of  an  "  exaltation  according  to 
both  natures,"  they  are  merely  Crypto-Calvinists. 
It  is  against  them  that  the  condemnation  of  the 
FormiUa  of  Concord  is  pronounced:  "  We  reject 
the  opinion  that  to  Christ  according  to  his  divine 
nature  all  power  in  heaven  and  in  earth  was  re- 
stored at  his  resiurrection  and  ascension,  as  though 
he  had  laid  aside  and  stripped  himself  of  th&t 
power,  even  according  to  his  divinity,  while  he  was 
in  the  state  of  hunodliation."  The  condemnation 
goes  further  than  was  necessary  at  the  time,  for 
neither  Philippists  nor  Calvinists  taught  a  "  trans- 
mutation of  the  divine  nature  ";  the  important 
point  is  that  it  goes  far  enough  to  reach  the  modem 
kenotics. 
For  the  Giessen-Tabingen  controversy  see  Chbis- 

TOLOGT,  IX. 

The  official  or  ecclesiastical  theology  of  all  ages, 
then,  has  rejected  the  idea  of  kenosis  as  now  held. 
Just  as  in  the  early  Church  it  appeared  only  in  in- 
ferior  undercurrents   and   with   the   "  heretical " 

Apollinarists,  so  it  was  in  the  period 

13.  Sam-    from  the  sixteenth  to  the  eighteenth 

maxy.       century.    Echoes  of  kenotic  thought 

appear  especially  in  Schwenckfeld,  and 
an  indubitable  kenosis  theory  in  Menno  Simons; 
but  in  anything  like  official  Protestant  theology 
they  occur  first  in  the  reckless  speculation  of  Zin- 
zendorf — although  here  there  is  no  consistently 
worked  out  theory,  and  the  kenotic  ideas  are  crossed 
by  regard  paid  to  the  official  doctrine,  including 
the  communicatio  idiomatum.  But  if  not  the  men- 
tal ancestors,  at  least  the  f  orerunneis  of  the  modern 
kenotics  are  (with  the  nameless  persons  condemned 
by  Hilary  and  Cyril  and  with  the  Apollinarists) 
Menno  Simons  and  Zinsendorf .  The  kenosis  theory 
is  an  attempt,  made  at  the  cost  of  breaking  with 
certain  undeniably  ecclesiastical  traditions,  to  save 
what  has  been  characteristic  of  the  official  Chris- 
tology of  1,700  years — a  doctrine  of  the  Incar- 
nation constructed  frcHn  above  downward.  Were 
it  tenable  in  itself,  modem  theolpgy  would  have 
no  ground  to  reproach  it  with  not  being  tradi- 
tional. But  its  weaknesses,  nay,  its  impossibili- 
ties, have  been  frequently  indicated,  and  there 
is  not  space  here  to  go  into  them  again.  It  might 
be  pointed  out  that  the  theory  proceeds  from  views 
of  the  Trinity  which  are  not  far  from  an  intoler- 
able tritheism.  If  the  Logos  can  become  man  in 
such  a  manner  that  "  outside  of  the  human  form 
assimied  by  him,  he  has  not  reserved  to  himself  & 
special  existence,  a  special  consdousness,  a  special 
sphere  of  operation  or  possession  of  power  "  (Tho- 
masius,  ii.  201),  little  is  left  of  the  principle  of  the 
Athanasian  Creed, ''  not  three  Gods,  but  One  God." 
The  justification  of  the  theory,  so  far  as  it  has  one, 
lies  in  the  recognition,  on  the  negative  side,  of  the 
insufficiency  of  the  old  Christology,  and  on  the 
positive  in  the  necessity  of  leaving  room  for  a  real, 
true  human  life  of  Jesus.  But  all  theories  men 
can  make  of  the  Incarnation  of  God  are  temerarious 
at  best;  and  the  most  temerarious  of  all,  because 
it  assumes  to  describe  the  inmost  secrets  of  the 
Word  as  he  becomes  man,  is  the  modem  doctrine 
of  kenosis.  (F.  Loofs.) 


819 


REUGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Kenoais 
X«nt 


English  and  American  theories  of   kenosis  are 
scaroely  more  than  reproductions  of  German  spec- 
ulation on  the  same  subject,  influenced  by  the 
same   motives  and   exhibiting   the   same  general 
types  (see  Christology).    Tbe  conditions  which 
determined  this  movement  in  Christology  were — 
the  pantheistic  philosophy  of  Hegel  and  Schleier- 
macher  which  broke  down  the  division  wall  be- 
tween God  and  man  and  introduced  a 
13.  Eng-    universal  principle  of  identity;   a  hu- 
liah  and     manitarian  spirit  which  directed  at- 
American   tention  to  the  nature,  the  ideals,  and 
Treatment  the  possibilities  of  man;   a  new  inter- 
est in  the  historical  Christ,  fostered 
and  made  fruitful  by  a  more  adequate  study  of 
Christ  and  his  times,  especially  by  means  of  the 
synoptic  Gospels;  and  a  better  method  of  psychol- 
ogy by  which  the  human  consciousness  is  inter- 
preted and  a  truer  estimate  of  personality  reached. 
The  three  types  of  kenosis  represented  by  English 
and  American  writers  are:    (1)  During  the  whole 
period  of  the  Incarnation,  although  the  essential 
deity  existed  necessarily  at  all  times  and  in  all 
places,  yet  his  conscious  and  efficient  deity  was 
wholly  quiescent;   he  became  very  man.    Only  at 
the  resurrection  did  he  reassume  the  full  power  of 
deity — ^a   condition   insoluble   to   the   reason    (H. 
Crosby,  The  True  Humanity  cf  Christ,  New  York, 
1880).     (2)  The  Son  of  God  voluntarily  surren- 
dered or  abandoned  certain  natural  prerogatives 
or  external  attributes  of  God,   while  he  yet  re- 
tained the  essential,  ethical  properties  of  truth, 
holiness,  and  lore  (C.  Gore,  The  Incarnation,  New 
York,  1891,  p.  172;    A.  M.  Fairbairn,   The  Place 
of  Christ  in  Modem  Thought,  New  York,  1893,  p. 
476).     (3)  On  the  basis  of  an  original  kinship  of 
God  and  man,  in  the  incarnation  by  self-limitation 
God  has  become  man  '(W.  N.  Clarke,  An  Outline  of 
Christian  Theology,  New  York,  1898,  pp.  291-293; 
H.   Van  Dyke,   The  Gospel  for  an  Age  of  Doubt: 
The   Human  Life  of  Ood,  New  York,   1897,  pp. 
123-167).    Two  explanations  of  this  alleged  inner 
change  of  the  Logos  in  the  Incarnation  are  given. 
One  is  the  capacity  of  consciousness  to  retire  a 
portion  of  its  riches  into  the  region  of  the  sub- 
conscious so  that  for  the  time  they  become  as  if 
they  were  not  (R.  H.  Hutton,  Essays  Theological 
and   Literary,   London,    1871,  pp.  259-260).     The 
other  suggestion  is  derived  from  the  assumption  of 
a  self-limitation  of  God  in  the  creative  action  and 
with  reference  to  future  choices  and  deeds  of  moral 
beings;   and  the  Incarnation  is  a  further  exhibition 
of  the  principle  by  which  God  governs  himself  in 
relation  to  the  world  (D.  W.  Simon,  Reconciliation 
through  Incarnation,  Edinburgh,    1898).      There    is 
at  present  a  strong  tendency  to  seek  a  solution  of 
the  problems  raised  by  the  personal  life  of  Christ 
by  the  ethical,  rather  than  by  the  metaphysical, 
path.  C.  A.  B. 

Bibuoorapht:  The  history  of  the  subject  is  neoeoBarily 
dealt  with  in  the  treatises  on  tlie  history  of  doctrme  and 
on  dogmatics,  especially  in  the  sections  on  Christology. 
Consult  further:  F.  C.  Baur,  Di$  dirUUidie  Lehrt  von  der 
r>reieiniokeit  und  Mentehwerduno  Oottea,  3  vols.,  Tflbin- 
gen.  1841-43;  M.  Sohneckenburger,  Zur  kirefUu^en  Theo- 
loffU.  Die  crthodoxe  Lehrt  vom  doppeUen  Stande,  Pfors- 
beim.  1848;  I.  A.  Domer,  EntwickelunovMckichte  der  Lehre 


von  der  Pereon  Ckriati,  2  vols.,  Stuttgart.  1846-63,  Eng. 
transl..  Hist,  oi  <As  Deiodovmind  of  (he  Doctrine  oi  ike  Pereon 
(Kf  Christ,  6  toIs.,  Edinburgh,  1861-63;  idem,  in  JahrhOdur 
fur  deuteeha  Theotogie,  i  (1866),  861-416;  A.  Tholuok.  Die- 
nutaao  dirietotooioa  ds  .  .  .  PhiL  %%.  6-9,  Halle.  1848; 
Q.  Thomasius,  Chrieti  Pereon  und  Work,  vol  ii.  Erlangen, 
1857;  H.  Sehults,  Die  Lehre  von  der  OoUheit  Chrieti, 
Ootha,  1881;  F.  J.  Hall,  The  KenoHe  Theory  Considered, 
vfUh  ParHeviar  Rsfsrence  to  tto  Anolioan  Forme,  London, 
1808;  O.  BensoW,  Die  Lehre  von  der  Kenoee,  Leipsic  1003; 
R.  C.  Mofgan,  Ood*e  Self^empHed  Servant,  ib.  1006;  Har- 
naok,  Doinna,  iv.  140,  161-162.  tu.  244;  DCG,  I  027- 
028;   and  the  commentaries  on  Philippians. 

KENRICK,  FRANCIS  PATRICK:  Archbishop 
of  Baltimore;  b.  at  Dublin,  Ireland,  Dec.  3,  1797; 
d.  at  Baltimore  July  8,  1863.  He  received  his  the- 
ological training  in  the  College  of  the  Propaganda, 
Rome,  and  came  to  America  in  1821.  He  was  the 
head  of  the  Roman  Catholic  seminary  at  Bards- 
town,  Ky.,  1821-30,  coadjutor  bishop  of  Philadel- 
phia 1830-42,  bishop  of  Philadelphia  1842-^51,  and 
archbishop  of  Baltimore  1851-4^.  As  apostoUc 
delegate  he  presided  over  the  first  plenary  coun- 
cil of  the  United  States,  convened  at  Baltimore 
May,  1852  (see  Baltimobb  Counciub);  and  in  1850 
the  pope  conferred  upon  him  and  his  successors 
the  "primacy  of  honor"  over  other  American  arch- 
bishops. Besides  polemical  works,  he  wrote  Theo- 
logia  dogmatica  (4  vols.,  Philadelphia,  1839-40; 
2d  ed.,  3  vols.,  Mechlin,  1858),  and  Theologia  mar- 
alis  (3  vols.,  1841-43;  2d  ed.,  Mechlin,  1859). 
These  volumes  constitute  a  complete  body  of  di- 
vinity, and  are  considered  classical  in  the  Roman 
Catholic  seminaries  of  America.  He  also  pub- 
lished an  annotated  and  revised  translation  of  the 
entire  New  Testament  (2  vols..  New  York,  1849- 
1851),  and  of  the  Psalms,  Book  of  Wisdom,  and  Can- 
ticles (Baltimore,  1857),  Job  and  the  Prophets 
(1859),  the  Pentateuch  (1860),  and  historical  books 
of  the  Old  Testament  (1862). 
Biblxoorapht:    J.  J.  O'Shea,  The  Tw>  Kewrieke,  Philadel- 

phia,  10O4. 

KENRICK,  PETER  RICHARD:  Archbishop  of 
St.  Louis,  brother  of  Francis  Patrick  Kenrick  (q.v.); 
b.  at  Dublin,  Ireland,  Aug.  17,  1806;  d.  at  St. 
Louis  Mar.  4,  1896.  He  studied  theology  at  May- 
nooth,  came  to  Philadelphia  in  1833,  took  charge 
of  The  Catholic  Herald,  and  became  pastor  of  the 
cathedral  parish  of  Philadelphia  in  1835.  After 
having  been  for  a  time  president  of  the  diocesan 
seminary  he  became  vicar-general  about  1837.  He 
was  coadjutor  bishop  of  St.  Louis  1841-43,  bishop 
1843-47,  and  archbishop  1847-96.  In  the  Vatican 
Council  he  opposed  the  dogma  of  papal  infallibility, 
but  accepted  it  when  it  was  promulgated.  Be- 
sides a  number  of  translations,  he  published  The 
Holy  House  of  Loretto  (Philadelphia,  n.d.),  and  The 
Validity  of  Anglican  Ordinations  Examined  (1841). 
Bibuoorapht:  J.  J.  O'Sbea,  The  Tvo  Kenrieke,  Philadel- 
phia, 10O4. 

KENT,  CHARLES  FOSTER:  Congregational- 
ist;  b.  at  Pahnyra,  N.  Y.,  Aug.  13,  1867.  He  was 
educated  at  Yale  (B.A.,  1880;  Ph.D.,  1891),  Yale 
Divinity  School  (B.D.,  1891),  and  the  University  of 
Berlin  (1891-92).  After  being  instructor  in  the 
University  of  Clucago(  1893-95)  and  professor  of 
Biblical  literature  and  history  in  Brown  University 
(1895-1901),  he  became,  in  1901,  Woolsey  professor 


Kenttoer 
Keswick 


OoBvantion 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


820 


of  Biblical  literature  in  Yale  Univeraity.  Be- 
sides his  work  as  editor  of  The  Hidorical  Series  for 
Bible  Students  (in  collaboration  with  F.  K.  Sanders; 
New  York,  1899  sqq.),  he  has  published:  The  Mes- 
sages of  the  Bible  (1899  sqq.);  Ltbrary  of  AncierU 
Inscriptions  (in  collaboration  with  F.  K.  Sanders; 
1904  sqq.),  and  The  StuderU*8  Old  Testament  (1904 
sqq.),  he  has  written  Outlines  of  Hebrew  History 
(Providence,  R.  I.,  1895);  The  Wise  Men  of  Ancient 
Israd  and  their  Proverbs  (New  York,  1895);  A 
History  of  the  Hebrew  People:  The  United  Kingdom 
(1896);  A  History  of  the  Hebrew  People:  The  Divided 
Kingdom  (1897);  A  History  of  the  Jewish  People: 
The  Babylonian,  Persian,  and  Greek  Periods  (1899); 
The  Messages  of  the  Earlier  Prophets  (1899);  The 
Messages  of  the  Later  Prophets  (1900);  The  Messages 
of  Israel's  Lawgivers  (1902) ;  Narratives  of  the  Begin- 
nings of  Hebrew  History  (1904);  Israel's  Historical 
and  Biographical  Narratives  (1905);  Origin  and  Per- 
manent Value  of  the  Old  Testament  (1906) ;  Israd*s 
Laws  and  Legal  Precedents  (1907);  Founders  and 
Rulers  of  United  Israd  from  .  .  .  Moses  to  the  Divir 
sion  of  die  Hebrew  Kingdom  (1908) ;  Heroes  and  Crises 
of  Early  Hdrrew  History  (1908) ;  and  Kings  and 
Prophtis  of  Israel  and  Judah  (1909). 

KENTIOERH,  ken'ti-gem,  SAINT:  known  also 
as  St  Mango:  The  apostle  of  the  Strathdyde 
Britons  and  patron  of  the  city  of  Glasgow;  accord- 
ing to  his  twelfth-century  lives,  b.  at  Culross,  prob- 
ably in  518;  d.  in  Glasgow  Jan.  13,  603.  His  birth 
is  surrounded  with  a  halo  of  mystery,  and  his 
mother  may  have  been  a  nun.  He  was  trained  in 
a  monastic  school  at  Culross,  and  in  early  manhood 
settled  at  Cathures  (Glasgow)  and  became  bishop 
of  those  who  had  remained  Christian  from  the  time 
of  Ninian.  Because  of  attacks  from  the  heathen  he 
went  to  Wales  and  foimded  there  the  monastery  of 
Llanelwy  (St.  Asaph).  In  573  the  Christians  gained 
the  supremacy  in  the  north  and  Kentigem  returned. 
He  reclaimed  the  Picts  of  Galloway  and  the  Strath- 
dyde Britons  who  had  lapsed  into  paganism,  visited 
the  land  northeast  of  the  Forth,  and  is  even  said  to 
have  sent  missionaries  to  the  islands,  to  Norway, 
and  to  Iceland.  His  life  was  written  by  Jocelln  of 
Fumess,  c.  1180. 

Bibuoorapht:  Livea  cf  St.  Ninian  and  St.  KenHgem,  ed. 
A.  P.  Forbes,  Edinburgh,  1874;  idem,  Kalendart  of  Scot- 
tiah  SainU,  pp.  362-373,  Edinburgh,  1872;  T.  MacLauch- 
Ian,  The  Early  Scotch  Church,  chap,  z.,  Edinburgh,  1806; 
DNB,  xzzi.  26-27;  DCB,  603-606  (excellent  for  sources). 

KEPHART,    kepOiOrt,    ISAIAH    LAFAYETTE: 

United  Brethren;  b.  in  Decatur  Township,  Pa., 
Dec.  10,  1832.  He  studied  at  Otterbein  Univer- 
sity, Westerville,  O.  (1857-61),  was  licensed  to 
preach  in  1859,  joined  the  All^heny  Conference 
of  his  denomination,  and  was  at  East  Salem,  Pa., 
1861-63.  He  was  chaplain  of  the  Twenty-First 
Pennsylvania  Cavalry  throughout  the  war,  and 
preached  at  Hummelstown,  Pa.,  1865-67.  He  be- 
came principal  of  the  public  schools  of  Jefferson, 
la.,  1867;  superintendent  of  schools  in  Greene 
County,  la.,  1860;  professor  of  natural  science  in 
Western  College,  la.,  1871,  actuary  of  the  United 
Brethren  Aid  Society  of  Pennsylvania,  residing  at 
Lebanon,  Pa.,  1876;  professor  of  mental  and  moral 


science  in  San  Joaquin  Valley  ColliQge,  Gal.,  1883; 
president  of  Westfield  College,  Westfiekl,  HL,  1885; 
editor  of  The  Religious  Teluoope,  the  official  organ 
of  his  denomination,  1889.  He  has  written:  Biog- 
raphy of  Rev.  Jacob  S.  Kessier  (Dayton,  O.,  1867); 
Evils  <jr  the  Use  qf  Tobacco  by  Christians  (1882); 
The  Holy  SpirU  in  the  Devout  Life  (1904);  and  Life 
of  Esekid  Boring  Kephart  (1908). 


KERI  AHD  KETHIBH:  Words  (in  the  form  of 
Aramaic  participles)  employed  by  the  MasQretes 
(see  MAflOBAH)  to  distinguish  the  pointed  or  vow- 
eled  from  the  unpointed  text  of  the  Old  Testam^t. 
Kethibh,  "  written  "  or  "  what  is  written,"  desig- 
nates the  original  form  of  the  text  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament in  which  the  words  were  represented  by 
their  consonants  alone;  ibm,  "  read  "  or  "  what  is 
to  be  read,"  refers  to  the  completely  vocalised  text. 
Of  the  kethibh  it  is  necessary  to  say  only  that  it 
was  intended  to  represent  the  form  in  which  all  the 
Hebrew  Scriptures  were  written  (without  vowels) 
by  their  authors,  and  that  after  it  was  adopted  as 
the  authorized  text,  no  alteration  in  the  words  or 
letters  was  ever  permitted.  The  keri  serves  two 
main  purposes.  It  makes  the  exact  reading  or 
pronunciation  of  the  words  perfectly  clear  by  in- 
serting their  vowels;  and  it  is  used  to  correct  the 
possible  errors  which,  perhaps  from  the  very  be- 
ginning, were  observed  in  the  kethibh  or  traditional 
text.  Since  the  second  purpose  could  not  be  at- 
tained by  introducing  notes  into  the  body  of  the 
text,  the  divergences  of  the  keri  from  the  kethibh 
were  pointed  out  in  the  margin  by  characteristic 
methods  and  devices  which  may  be  observed  in 
any  current  copy  of  the  Hebrew  Bible.  As  a  help 
to  the  understanding  of  them,  several  modem  edi- 
tions contain  a  useful  Maaoretio  davis. 

Some  common  and  natural  misoonoeptionfi  may 
be  alluded  to.  The  keri,  when  cited  in  the  maigin, 
is  not  always  intended  as  a  substitute  for  the  ke- 
thibh or  official  reading.  It  often  merely  records  a 
traditional  variant  reading.  Nor,  on  the  other 
hand,  was  the  kethibh  made  an  unchangeable  text 
because  it  was  thought  to  be  infallible.  The  official 
text  (authorised  not  long  after  the  destnicticxi  of 
Jerusalem,  70  a.d.),  was  chosen  not  because  it  was 
perfect  but  because  it  was  thought  to  be  the  most 
correct,  and  because  a  single  archetype  was  (per- 
haps wisely)  deemed  necessaiy.  This  is  proved 
by  the  fact  that  even  the  accidental  peculiarities 
of  the  copy  thus  chosen  were  retained  and  still  re- 
main. AgBjn,  the  Maaoretes  or  Jewish  editors  did 
not  establish  or  even  seek  to  influence  the  keri  or 
the  traditional  readings  as  marked  by  the  vowel 
signs.  The  received  form  of  words  goes  back  to 
times  several  centuries  before  the  Masoretes  began 
their  work.  It  was  perpetuated  chiefly  by  the 
synagogal  services  (see  Synagogue)  ;  and,  of  course, 
without  the  pronunciation  of  the  words  the  kethibh 
itself  could  not  have  been  preserved. 

J.  F.  MoCORDT. 

Bibuoobafbt:  C.  D;  Qinsbnrg,  Introdtution  to  Hke  Jfw- 
•orefioo-CrilteoZ  Edition  pf  the  Hebrmo  BtUe.  Ixindan. 
1897;  F.  G.  Kenyon,  Our  BiU$  and  the  Ancient  JIfSS.,  ih 
1896;  T.  H.  Weir,  A  Short  HiaL  «4  <^  Ud»r€w  T^xt  4^  At 
0.  T.,  ib.  1890.  Much  of  the  literatim  in  the  bibGogimphy 
under  Bible  Text,  I.,  conteiuB  information  on  the  eobjecl 


321 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


KentiMm 

Keswlok  Convention 


KERll,  JOHN  ADAM:  Methodist  Episcopal, 
South;  b.  near  Winchester,  Va.,  Apr.  23,  1846. 
He  studied  at  the  University  of  Virginia  1868-70, 
having  already  entered  the  ministry  of  his  denom- 
ination in  1864.  For  twenty-one  years  he  was  en- 
gaged in  pastoral  work  in  the  Baltimore  Confer- 
ence. From  1886  to  1893  he  was  professor  of 
moral  philosophy  in  Bandolph-Macon  College,  of 
which  he  became  vice-president  in  1893  and  presi- 
dent in  1897.  Since  1899  he  has  been  professor  of 
practical  theology  in  Vanderbilt  University,  Nash- 
ville, Tenn.  He  has  been  elected  four  times  to  the 
General  Conference  of  his  denomination,  and  in 
theology  is  Evangelical,  and  favorable  to  all  revei^ 
ent  and  scholarly  study  of  the  Scriptures  and  devel- 
opment of  Christian  doctrine.  He  has  written  The 
Ministry  to  the  Congregation  (Nashville,  Tenn., 
1897);  The  Way  of  the  Preacher  (1902);  The  Idea  of 
the  Church  (1906);  and  The  Listening  Heart  (1908). 

KERO:  A  monk  said  to  have  lived  in  the  mon- 
astery of  St.  Gall  during  the  rule  of  Abbot  Othmar 
(720-759)  and  formerly  supposed  to  have  been  the 
author  of  the  Old  High  German  interlinear  version 
of  the  Benedictine  rule  and  the  **  Keronian  glosses." 
This  tradition,  however,  originated  with  Jodocus 
Metzler  (d.  1639),  and  owes  its  currency  chiefly  to 
Melchior  Goldast  (d.  1635).  Other  works  were  also 
attributed  to  Kero,  probably  on  the  basis  of  the 
name  Kero  or  Kerolt  written  at  the  end  of  a  St. 
Gall  manuscript  which  was  biuned  in  1768.  There 
was  actually  a  Kero  at  this  monastery  in  the  latter 
part  of  the  eighth  century,  but  he  can  not  have 
been  the  author  of  the  translation  of  the  Benedic- 
tine rule  prepared  shortly  after  802  at  the  com- 
mand of  Charlemagne,  for  this  version,  uncouth, 
corrupt,  and  grossly  unintelligent,  was  the  work  of 
several  hands.  The  Keronian  glosses,  moreover, 
are  an  extract  from  an  Old  High  German  interlinear 
translation  of  a  Latin  dictionary,  the  version  ap- 
parently originating  at  Freising  about  740. 

(E.  Steinmeter.) 

Bibuoorapht:  On  Kero  consult:  B.  Pes,  ThMouruM  anec- 
doiorum  novianmu*,  i.  3,  p.  686.  Augsbuis,  1721;  W. 
Scherer,  in  Zeittduift  fUr  deutacKeM  AUertum,  zviiL  145- 
149;  KL,  vii.  303.  On  the  Benedictine  rule,  P.  Piper, 
Nachtrlkoe  twr  iOtem  deuUchen  LiUeratur,  pp.  22-162,  Stutt- 
gart. 1898;  on  the  glosses,  R.  KOgel.  Ueber  da§  Kero- 
maeh0aio$9ar,  HftUe.  1870. 

KESSLER,  JOHARN  JOHANHES  CHESSELIUS, 
or  AHENARIUS):  Reformer  and  chronicler  of 
St.  Gall;  b.  at  St.  GaU,  Switzerland,  1502  (1503?); 
d.  there  Feb.  24,  1574.  He  studied  theology  at 
Basel,  and  in  1522,  attracted  by  Luther's  fame, 
went  to  Wittenberg,  where  he  was  fully  won  for  the 
Reformation.  On  his  return  to  St.  Gall  in  1523  he 
abandoned  the  idea  of  taking  orders,  and  became 
a  saddler.  Nevertheless,  in  1524  he  began  to 
preach  and  hold  meetings  in  private  houses,  and 
the  impr^ion  he  made  was  so  strong  that  the  mag- 
istrates became  alarmed  and  interfered.  In  1525 
he  resumed  his  ministerial  work,  and  in  1536  he 
became,  with  the  consent  of  the  council,  the  regular 
preacher  to  the  Evangelical  congregation  of  St. 
Mai^ret.  Vadian  introduced  him  into  the  circle 
of  his  friends,  and  the  council  elected  him  to  vari- 
ous positions.  In  1537  he  became  teacher  of  an- 
VI.-21 


cient  languages  at  the  gymnasium,  and  in  1542  reg- 
ular pastor  of  St.  Gall.  On  the  death  of  Vadian 
in  1551  it  became  the  task  of  Kessler  to  continue 
the  Reformation.  He  was  a  careful  observer  and 
made  use  of  his  leisure  hours  to  write  a  chronicle 
on  the  persons  and  events  of  his  time,  which  he 
entitled  Sabbata  (ed.  Ernst  Gdtzinger,  in  MiUeilr 
ungen  zur  vaterldndtschen  Oeschiehte,  v.-x.,  St.  Gall, 
1866-68).  It  is  one  of  the  beet  and  most  fruitful 
sources  for  the  history  of  the  Swiss  Reformation 
from  1519  to  1539,  and  for  the  history  of  the  inner 
life  of  the  time.  (Emil  EaufO 

Bibuoorapht:  Sourees  an  his  own  letters,  preserved  at 
St.  Gall  and  his  writings.  A  new  ed.  of  the  Sabbaia,  with 
notes  and  biography,  was  published  by  £.  Egli  and  R. 
Sohooh.  St.  QaU,  1902.  Consult  also:  J.  J.  Bemet. 
Johann  Ke$aler,  ib.  1826;  Sohaff.  Chriutian  Church,  yL 
386.  viL  127;  S.  M.  Jackson.  Huldreidi,  Zwingli,  New  York, 
1003. 

KESWICK  COKVENTION:  A  smmner  religious 
reunion,  lasting  one  week,  which  has  been  held 
annually  at  Keswick  (24  m.  s.s.w.  of  Carlisle),  Eng- 
land, since  1875,  chiefly  "  for  the  promotion  of 
practical  holiness  "  by  means  of  prayer,  discussion, 
and  personal  intercourse.  It  may  be  said  to  have 
had  its  origin  in  the  general  revival  that  swept  over 
England  in  the  early  seventies  (Moody  and  Sankey, 
and  others).  The  first  meeting  was  held  at  Broad- 
lands,  near  Romsey,  July  17-23,  1874,  followed  by 
a  convention  at  Oxford  Aug.  29  to  Sept.  7,  1874, 
and  one  at  Brighton  May  29  to  June  7,  1875.  At 
the  Brighton  convention  Canon  Harford-Battersby, 
vicar  of  St.  John's,  Keswick,  suggested  a  conven- 
tion at  Keswick,  to  be  held  the  foUowing  July  on 
the  grounds  of  his  own  vicarage.  Since  then  the 
convention  has  met  annually  at  Keswick,  the  last 
week  in  July,  and  year  by  year  it  has  grown  in 
numbers  and  influence,  llie  meetings  are  held  in 
a  large  tent  and  are  attended  by  several  thousand 
people,  including  representatives  from  foreign 
countries.  The  services  are  notable  for  their  spii^ 
itual  character,  for  the  prominence  given  to  silent 
prayer,  and  for  their  apostolic  simplicity,  music 
and  all  else  being  subordinated  to  the  one  object 
— the  glory  of  God  through  the  promotion  of  truth 
and  holiness.  Since  the  Holy  Spirit  is  recognized 
as  the  leader  of  all  meetings,  there  has  never  been 
any  formal  election  of  a  chairman.  During  his 
lifetime  Canon  Harford-Battersby  presided  over 
the  convention.  After  his  death  the  chairmanship 
passed  by  general  consent  to  Mr.  Henry  Bowker, 
and,  after  him,  to  Mr.  Robert  Wilson.  The  Kes- 
wick movement  is  distinctly  Evangelical  in  charac- 
ter, and  is  supported  chiefly  by  the  Evangelical 
branch  of  the  Church  of  England.  Keswick  stands 
for  no  new  school  of  theological  thought.  The 
Keswick  speakers  and  teachers,  some  fifty  in  num- 
ber, are  conservative  in  spirit,  clinging  to  old  truths 
and  avoiding  new  and  strange  doctrines.  With- 
out exception  they  hold  to  the  absolute  plenary 
inspiration  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  in  every  part. 
To  them  the  Bible  is  the  filial  court  of  appeal  in 
matters  both  of  faith  and  duty.  In  the  Keswick 
teaching  stress  is  laid  upon  the  infilling  of  the 
Spirit,  and  upon  the  power  of  faith  to  claim  prom- 
ised blessings.  The  convention  takes  an  active 
interest  in  missions  and  maintains  a  number  of 


Keys,  Pofw«r  of  tha 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


8S2 


missionaries  in  foreign  fields.  The  literature  of 
the  convention  includes  the  Lift  qf  Faith  (Lon- 
don, 1879  aqq,),  the  weekly  organ  of  Keswick 
teaching,  The  Ketvrick  Week  (an  annual  volume 
containing  addresses  delivered  at  the  convention), 
and  the  Keswick  Library  (London,  1894  aqq,),  a 
series  of  religious  booklets. 
Biblioorapbt:    The  Kuwick  Convention:    tto  if«M0t,  Ub 

Method,  and  Ue  Men,  ed.  C.  F.  Harford,  London,  1907; 

A.  T.  Pieraon,  The  Keewick  Moffoment,  New  York.  1907; 

E.  H.    Hopkins.    The   Story   of  Keewiek,  London.  1802; 

and  T.  D.  Hnrford-Battonby,  Memaire  of  the  Keewiek  Con- 

venHon,  ib.,  1890. 

KETHE,  WILLIAIL    See  Stbrxhold,  Thomas. 

KBTHUBHIIL  See  Canon  of  Scriptube,  I.,  4, 
J  2. 

KBTTBLER,  ket'te-ler,  WILHELM  EMANUEL, 
BARON  VON:  Bishop  of  Mains;  b.  at  MOnster 
Dec.  25,  1811;  d.  at  Burghausen  (58  m.  e.  of  Mu- 
nich), Upper  Bavaria,  July  13,  1877.  He  was  ed- 
ucated by  the  Jesuits  at  Brieg,  Switzerland.  He 
studied  law  at  Gdttingen,  Berlin,  Munich,  and 
Heidelberg,  and  was  Referendar  at  Mtlnster  1834- 
1838.  After  studying  theology  at  Munich  and  Mon- 
ster he  received  ordination  in  1844,  became  pastor 
at  Hopsten,  Westphalia,  in  1846,  and  provost  of 
the  Hedwigskirche,  Berlin,  in  1849.  He  was  ap- 
pointed bishop  of  Mains  in  1850.  To  restore  the 
Church  of  Rome  to  its  old  power  and  splendor  was 
the  great  idea  of  his  life;  and,  as  the  admowledged 
leader  of  the  Ultramontane  party  in  Germany,  he 
fought  for  this  idea  with  as  much  adroitness  as  au- 
dacity. At  the  Council  of  the  Vatican  he  belonged 
to  the  minority,  but,  as  soon  as  the  dogma  of  papal 
infallibility  was  promulgated,  he  accepted  it  and 
published  it  in  his  diocese.  Well  aware  of  the  dan- 
ger to  the  realisation  of  his  ideas  which  arose  from 
the  estabUshment  of  a  German  empire  under  the 
Protestant  house  of  HohensoUem,  he  resisted  the 
consolidation  of  the  new  organisation  in  every  pos- 
sible way.  He  opposed  vigorously  Bismiarck's 
policy  of  placing  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  in 
its  relation  to  the  State,  on  an  equality  with  other 
social  institutions,  and  advocated  a  policy  of  re- 
sistance to  state  legislation  involving  ecclesiastical 
affairs.  His  numerous  writings  include,  FreiheU, 
Atdaritdt,  und  Kirche  (Mainz,  1862);  Die  wahren 
GrufuUagen  dee  reliffideen  Friedene  (1868);  Dae  all- 
gemeine  Komil  und  seine  Bedeulung  fOr  uneere  Zeii 
(1869);  Die  Katholiken  im  deiUachen  Reich  (1873); 
Der  Ktdturkampf  (1874);  and  Predigten  (2  vols., 
1878). 

Bibuooraprt:  O.  PffUf.  Bietkc^  von  KttUUm,  8  vols., 
Mains.  1800;  F.  Qreiffenrmth,  Bietki^  .  .  .  von  Ketteler 
und  die  dexUeche  Socialrtform,  Frmnkfort,  1803;  J.  Weo- 
lel,  W.  E.  .  .  .  von  Ketteler,  der  Lehrer  .  ,  .  der  katho- 
liech-eoeialen  Beetrebunffen,  Berlin.  1805;  E.  de  Girmrd, 
Ketteler  et  la  ipieetion  ouvriire.  Bene,  1806;  KL.  vi.  402> 
406. 

KETTENBACH,  ket'ten-bOH,   HBINRICH  VON: 

German  Franciscan  monk.  The  place  and  year  of 
his  birth  and  death,  as  well  as  his  ancestry,  are  un- 
known, and  there  seems  to  be  little  foimdation  for 
the  common  belief  that  he  was  a  member  of  a 
*  noble  family,  although  from  the  style  of  his  writings 
it  might  be  presumed  that  he  was  of  Franconian 
prigin.     In  the  latter  part  of  1521  he  was  in  the 


Franciscan  monastery  at  Uhn,  where  he  displayed 
great  seal  as  a  preacher  and  denounced  the  idleness 
and  corruption  of  the  cleigy  with  fearless  satire. 
In  a  controversy  with  the  Dominican  preacher 
Peter  Nestler  he  denied  that  the  Church  was  em- 
powered to  amend  or  supplement  the  sanctions  of 
the  Scriptures,  declaring  that  it  was  based  on  an 
unalterable  Gospel,  ridiculing  the  doctrine  of  papal 
infallibility,  and  praising  Luther,  Melanchthon  and 
Karlstadt  as  soldiers  in  the  divine  cause.  In  his 
sermon  Von  der  chrietlichen  Kirche  (Ulm  15227), 
delivered  in  the  simimer  of  1522,  he  expounded  the 
doctrine  of  a  Church  consisting  of  the  community 
of  the  elect,  living  in  common  possession  of  service, 
chattels,  iaya  and  sorrows,  and  founded  upon  Christ 
and  not  upon  Peter,  whose  church  was  rather  the 
synagogue  of  Satan,  the  imposture  of  the  western 
world,  as  Mohammed's  is  of  the  East.  Luther  is 
hailed  as  the  prophet  of  the  times,  laboring  in  the 
spirit  of  Elijah  and  with  the  wisdom  of  Daniel.  In 
spite  of  the  Edict  of  Worms  and  the  opposition  of 
the  bishop  of  Constance,  Kettenbach  remained  at 
his  post  till  late  in  1522,  supported  by  the  good-will 
of  a  large  part  of  the  population.  At  tl^  end  of 
the  year,  however,  he  was  obliged  to  make  a  pre- 
cipitate retreat  from  the  city.  It  is  not  definitely 
known  where  he  went,  although,  from  his  active 
participation  in  Frans  von  Siddngen's  expedition 
against  Treves,  it  might  be  inferred  that  that  region 
was  his  immediate  place  of  refuge.  The  imprint 
of  his  later  works  would  point  to  a  residence  in 
Saxony. 

The  character  of  Kettenbach's  works  reveals  the 
growth  of  an  opposition  to  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church  which  found  vent  in  exhortations  to  the 
deigy  and  the  cities  to  take  up  arms  for  the  Re- 
formed religion.  The  Vergleidmng  dee  AtterheHig' 
sten  Herm  und  Vaiere,  dee  Papete,  gegen  den  edteam 
fremden  Oast  in  der  Chrietenheiiy  genannl  Jesut 
(Aug^urg,  1523)  is  a  succession  of  sharply  drawn 
antitheses  between  the  doctrines  of  the  Gospel  and 
those  of  the  Church.  In  his  Pradica,  praktineri 
aue  der  BUbd  a\rf  vid  tukUttftige  Jahre  (1523),  Ket- 
tenbach addressed  himself  to  the  inhabitants  of  the 
imperial  towns,  urging  them  to  embrace  the  cause  of 
the  lower  nobility  against  the  princes,  and  defend- 
ing Luther  against  the  charge  of  having  brought 
disorder  into  the  country.  The  magistracy  of  Nu- 
remberg prohibited  and  confiscated  the  Prudiioa  on 
Sept.  15,  1523,  because  of  its  attack  cm  the  pope 
and  the  emperor.  After  the  death  of  Frans  von 
Sickingen  in  May,  1523,  Kettenbach  published  the 
Vermahnung  Franeene  von  Sickingen  an  eein  Heer, 
in  which  the  attempt  was  made  to  vindicate  him 
from  the  accusation  of  having  brought  civil  war 
into  Germany.  There  is  no  certain  proof,  how- 
ever, that  Kettenbach  himself  was  the  author.  The 
last  of  his  important  writings  was  Eine  neue  Apologia 
und  Veranttoortung  Martini  Luthere  wider  der  Pa- 
pieten  Mordgeechrei  (Wittenberg,  1523),  in  which 
the  Reformer  is  cleared  of  such  charges  as  those  of 
opposing  the  sacraments,  minimising  the  in^xx^ 
tanoe  of  confession,  attacking  the  mass,  and  intro- 
ducing disorder  into  the  Church.  After  such  in- 
tense literary  activity  during  1522  and  1523  it  is 
surprising  to  find  him  silent  during  the  following 


898 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Ksysy  Pofw«r  of  ths 


year.  He  is  known  to  have  preached  a  sermon 
on  Matt.  vii.  15  in  the  summer  of  1525,  but  this  is 
the  last  trace  of  his  existence.  It  has  been  con- 
jectured that  he  may  have  perished  in  the  Peas- 
ants' Revolt  or  that  he  may  have  been  identical 
with  the  Franciscan  Heinrich  Spelt  who  was  still 
active  in  1526.  (G.  Kawerau.) 

Bxbuoorapht:   G.  Veeaenmeyer,  Bej/trAoe  tur  CfetehichU  dtr 

LUteratur  und  ReformaHon,  pp.  79-117,  Ulm«  1792;  ADB, 

XV.  67eMJ78. 

KETTLER,  GOTTHARD:  Last  master  of  the 
Teutonic  order  in  Livonia  and  first  duke  of  Cour- 
land;  b.  in  Westphalia  1511;  d.  at  Mitau  (25  m. 
s.w.  of  Riga),  Courland,  May  17,  1587.  He  was  of 
prominent  family  and  was  educated  for  the  minis- 
try. When  about  twenty  years  old,  he  went  to 
Livonia  and  entered  the  service  of  the  Teutonic 
order,  in  which  he  won  high  respect  by  his  prudence 
and  energy.  The  Reformation  had  aheady  found 
its  way  into  Livonia,  and  Kettler  did  not  oppose 
its  progress;  he  was  strengthened  and  confirmed  in 
Evangelical  convictions  by  repeated  sojourns  at  Wit- 
tenbeig  (1553  and  1556),  where  be  became  person- 
ally acquainted  with  Melanchthon.  To  strengthen 
his  order  against  attacks  from  Russia,  he  worked 
eagerly  for  an  alliance  with  Poland,  and  became 
the  foremost  representative  of  the  Polish  party  in 
Livonia.  He  soon  overcame  the  opposition  of  Wil- 
helm  FUrstenberg,  the  master  of  the  order  in 
Livonia,  and  in  1559  succeeded  to  his  position. 
Kettler's  main  efforts  were  now  directed  toward  a 
secularization  of  the  order  in  Livonia  after  the 
model  of  Prussia  (see  Texttonic  Obdeb).  The 
king  of  Poland  would  assist  Livonia  against  the 
Russians  only  on  condition  of  its  entire  submission 
to  Polish  rule,  and  under  the  force  of  circumstances 
Kettler  had  to  comply  with  this  demand;  he  be- 
came merely  feudal  duke  of  Courland  (1562).  As 
such  he  devoted  his  whole  time  and  energy  to  the 
reform  and  regulation  of  ecclesiastical  conditions 
in  his  state  and  achieved  remarkable  results. 
Church  affairs  in  Courland  were  in  a  very  entangled 
and  neglected  condition.  The  people  had  adopted 
Christianity  only  in  an  external  form,  and  heathen 


traditions  and  superstitions  still  prevailed  among 
them.  The  introduction  of  the  Reformation  bad 
effected  no  essential  change.  A  lack  of  preachers 
and  churches  obstructed  fdl  efforts  toward  a  thor- 
ough-going reform.  In  1567  the  state  assembly 
decreed  at  Kettler's  instance  the  erection  of  seventy 
new  churches.  Church  visitations  were  instituted, 
and  Superintendent  Alexander  Eichhom  was  ccmi- 
missioned  to  draw  up  a  church  order  which  was  ap- 
proved by  the  duke  in  1570  and  printed  in  1572. 
The  first  part,  the  "  Church  Reformation,"  relates 
chiefly  to  the  organisation  of  the  Church,  to  the 
foundation  and  maintenance  of  churches,  schools 
and  charitable  institutions,  and  regulates  the  ap- 
pointment of  preachers  and  their  visitation  by  the 
superintendent.  In  the  second  part,  the  "  Church 
Visitation,"  the  confessional  writings  of  the  Lu- 
theran Church  are  treated  as  the  norm  of  the  Church, 
beside  the  Bible  and  the  ecumenical  symbols.  Then 
follow  the  precepts  for  pastors  in  regard  to  their 
practical  dealings  with  the  congregation.  The  at- 
tendance at  church  was  strictly  controlled  by  the 
elders;  fines  and  other  punishments  were  to  be 
imposed,  and  culprits  to  be  delivered  to  the  secu- 
lar authorities  if  they  did  not  change  their  fives. 
Church  government  was  exercised  m  the  beginning 
by  the  superintendents  and  visitators;  a  consistory 
was  instituted  later.  (F.  HoBRSCHBUCANNt.) 

Bxblioorapht:  8.  Henning,  B«ricAl  tpu  m  in  Reli4fion»' 
Boeken  im  ,  .  .  KurlandoduOUn  warden^  Rostock,  1680;  T. 
KftUmeyerp  Dia  Begrlbtduno  der  evangeiUcMuikmB^mi 
Kirche  in  Kurland,  Riga,  1861;  T.  Schiwnann.  in  HiMior- 
iadtit  DaratMuno^n  und  arcMvalitekt  Studitn,  p.  91,  Ham- 
buig-Mitau.  1886. 

KEVm,  SAINT.    See  Ccsicgbn,  Saint. 

KEY,  JOSBPH  STAUNTON:  Bishop  of  the 
Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  South;  b.  at  La 
Grange,  La.,  July  18,  1829.  He  was  educated  at 
Emory  College,  Oxford,  Ga.  (A.B.,  1848),  and  was 
a  pastor  or  presiding  elder  from  the  year  of  his 
graduation  until  1886,  when  he  was  elected  a  bishop 
of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  South.  In  his 
official  capacity  he  has  made  repeated  tours  of 
Mexico,  China,  Japan,  and  Korea. 


KETS»  POWER   OP  THE. 


I.  Bibtioal  SouroeB  of  the  Dootrine. 
XL  The  Pfttristie  Period. 

8ub-ApoetoUe  Views  (|  1). 
Extension  of  the  Power  (|  2). 
Origen,    Cyprian,   and    Auguetine 

(§3). 
Sins  Controlled  by  the  Power  (|  4). 
Treatment  of  the  Lapsed  and  Pen- 
itent (S  5). 
The  Power  and  the  Priesthood  (|  6). 


lU  The  Middle  Ages  and  the  Roman 

Catholic  Dootrine. 
Penanoe  (|  1). 
The  Priest  as  Judge  or  as  Mediator 

(§2). 
Combination    of    the  Two  Views 

(§8). 
The   Twofold    Key    and  Thomas 

Aquinas  (|  4). 
The  Tridentine  Decree  (|  5). 


L  Biblical  Sources  of  the  Doctrine:  The  *'  power 
of  the  keys  "  is  a  symbolical  term  whidi  in  its 
more  extended  sense  denotes  the  whole  range  of 
the  power  of  the  Church,  while  in  its  restricted 
usage  it  connotes  simply  the  power  of  granting 
or  refusing  absolution.  The  concept  goes  back  to 
Christ's  words  to  Peter  (Matt.  xvi.  19),  "  I  will 
give  unto  thee  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven."  This  is  doubtless  based  on  "  the  key  of 
the  house  of  David  "  mentioned  in  Isa.  xxii.  22, 


The  PioUem  of  FtiMUy  FaUibffity 

(le). 

Tlie  Keys  in  the  Grsek  Church  (1 7). 
IV.  The  Reformation  and  the  Protes- 
tant Doctrine. 

Luther  and  Melanchthon  (I  1). 

The  Oalvinistio  Theory  (I  2). 

Lutheran  Attacks  on  the  Doctrine 
(§8). 

Theological  Aspect  of  the  Doctrine 
(§4). 

and  quoted  in  Rev.  iii.  7,  and  implies  that  the 
steward  of  the  house  received  the  keys  so  that  no 
one  might  open  the  door  he  had  shut,  or  shut  the 
door  he  had  opened.  This  metaphor  is  not  carried 
through  in  Matt.  xvi.  19,  but  passages  like  Matt, 
xxiii.  13  and  Luke  xi.  52  prove  that  "  binding  and., 
loosing  "  must  have  been  related  to  the  concept  of* 
admission  and  exclusion.  In  Matt,  xviii.  18,  where 
the  power  of  binding  and  loosing  is  conferred  upon 
all  disdples  as  the  representatives  of  the  Churchy 


KeySf  Pow«r  of  the 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


824 


the  oonneotion  of  the  passage  leaves  no  doubt  that 
it  refers  to  the  exclusion  of  sinners  from  or  the  ad- 
mission of  penitents  to  the  congregation.  Nor  can 
the  similar  words  in  Matt.  zvi.  19  have  an  essentially 
di£Ferent  meaning,  so  that  the  concept  of  the  early 
Church,  which  is  shared  by  the  Greek  exegetes, 
can  not  be  wrong  in  interpreting  the  passage  by 
John  XX.  23.  It  is  especially  to  be  emphasised  that 
in  both  passages  the  disciples  receive  no  conunis- 
sion  of  a  new  function,  but  are  merely  assured  that 
the  exerdse  of  their  former  function  is  valid  before 
God.  It  is  still  more  desirable  to  interpret  the 
passage  in  Matthew  from  the  whole  connection  of 
the  Synoptic  Gospels,  and  it  thus  beconoes  plain 
that  in  consideration  of  such  passages  as  Matt, 
xxiii.  8-10  we  can  not  ascribe  any  legislative  power 
to  the  disciples.  The  sense  of  the  **  power  of  the 
keys  "  seems  to  be,  therefore,  that  Jesus  gave  Peter, 
or  his  disciples,  or  the  body  of  Christian  believers, 
authority  to  receive  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven  by 
forgiveness  of  sins  or  to  exclude  from  it  by  refusal 
of  pardon,  thus  forgiving  sin  (especially  on  earth) 
in  the  name  of  God  and  with  efficacy  with  God  in 
the  same  way  as  the  Son  of  Man  had  hitherto  ex- 
ercised it  (of.  Matt.  ix.  6). 

n.  The  Patristic  Period:  In  the  patristic  period 
the  '*  power  of  the  keys  "  was  held  to  connote 
strictly  the  remission  (or  retention)  of  sins,  and 
not  Ic^  enactments.  This  is  clear  from  Tertul- 
lian  (Scorpiace,  x.;  De  pudicUia,  xxi.),  from  the 
letter  of  the  churches  at  Lyons  and  Vienne  (Euse- 
bius.  Hist,  ecd.,  V.,  ii.  5),  from  Cyprian  (Epist., 
Ixxiii.  7,  Ixxv.  16),  and  from  other  sources  (Am- 
brose, De  p<gniUnliaf  i.  2;  Augustine,  Contra  ad- 
versanum  legis  et  prophdaram,  136;  Faustus  of 
Rtez,  Sermo  vi.;  Leo  the  Great,  Sermo  xlix.  3; 
Apostolic  Constitutions,  ii.  11  sqq.).  It  would  be 
erroneous  to  suppose  that  this  was  a 

X.  Sab-     narrowing  of  the  concept.    The  de- 

ApottoUc  velopment  was  rather  in  the  opposite 
Views,  direction,  for  when  the  ''  power  of  the 
keys  "  came  to  be  interpreted  as  a  ju- 
dicial act,  especially  in  relation  to  the  lapsed,  the 
furtherance  of  the  juristic  aspect  of  the  concept  was 
easy.  Thus  the  pseudo-Clementine  Homilies  (iii. 
72;  cf.  Clement,  Epiat.  ad  Jacobum^  2)  see  in  the 
''  power  to  bind  and  loose  "  the  functions  of  the 
episcopal  office. 

While  in  the  primitive  Chureh  the  ^*  power  of  the 
keys "  may  be  regarded,  roughly  speaking,  as 
ascribed  to  the  Church,  or  to  its  officials,  or  to  those 
endowed  with  the  Spirit,  in  the  sense  that  all  three 
concurred,  nevertheless  the  official  element  grad- 
ually superseded  the  other  two.  In  this  early 
period  the  ^'  power  of  the  kejrs  "  was  indubitably 
possessed  by  the  Church  as  a  whole  (cf.  Tertullian, 
Scorpiace,  10;  Cyprian,  Epist.,  bnrv.  16),  the 
Church  consisting  of  the  bishops,  the  clergy,  and 
the  body  of  the  faithful  (Cyprian  (Epistf  xxxiii.  1). 
Cyprian  is  the  first  to  permit  to  the  cleigy  what  he 
ascribes  to  the  Chureh,  since  **  the  Chureh  is  fotmded 
upon  the  bishops,  and  every  act  of  the  Church  is 
controlled  by  these  same  rulers  **  (Epitt.f  xxxiii.  1), 
although  he  still  maintains  that  "  remission  of  sins 
can  not  be  given  by  those  who,  it  is  certain,  have 
not  the  Holy  Spirit  "  (Epist.,  bcix.  11).     Elsewhere 


the  idea  is  found  (cf.  Eusebius,  Hist,  ecd.,  V.,  xviii. 
7;  Cyprian,  Epist.,  xviiL  1,  xix.  2,  xxxiiL  2;  De 
lapgis,  19)  that  apostles  and  prophets,  as  well  as 
martyrs,  have  the  right  to  forgive  sins  as  posses- 
sing the  Holy  Ghost.    It  is  not  dear,  however,  that 

they  exercised  this  ftmction  without 

3.  Exten-  the  cooperation  of  the  other  agents  al- 

sion  of  the  ready  mentioned,   nor  does  Cyprian 

Power,     grant  the  martyrs  more  than  interces- 

sionary  powers,  the  remission  itself  be- 
ing granted  by  the  priest  (De  lapnSf  16,  29;  Epist., 
Iv.  24)  who  is  "  judge  in  the  place  of  Christ "  (Epia., 
lix.  7).  But  these  three  classes  were  never  held  to 
be  the  sole  decisive  possessors  of  the  ''  power  of  the 
keys,"  and  Montanistic  expressions  contain  indubi- 
table innovations.  Thus  Tertullian  mentions 
"  God's  dear  ones  "  (De  pcerdtentia,  9)  as  those  to 
whom  the  lapsed  should  kneel  next  after  the 
presbyters.  When,  however,  he  grants  the  "  power 
of  the  keys  "  to  the  "  spiritual,"  whether  prophets 
or  apostles  (De  pudidtia,  21),  he  includes  the 
Chureh,  instead  of  excluding  it,  opposing  only  a 
priesthood  in  which  he  fails  to  find  this  spiritual 
characteristic. 

Alexandrine  theology  seems  to  have  made  little 
change.  Origen,  while  energetically  vindicating 
the  "  power  of  the  keys  "  to  Christians  of  true 
spiritual  insight,  presupposes,  in  the  case  of  griev- 
ous faults,  the  participation  of  priests  or  bishops  in 
the  forgiveness  of  sins  (Deoratione,  28;  Commentary 
on  Matthew,  xii.  14),  thus  restricting  to  them  such  a 
spiritual  character.  It  is  evident,  moreover,  that 
the  "  power  of  the  keys  "  was  held  to  be  vested  in 
the  bishop  (cf.  Tertullian,  De  baptismate,  17;  Apos- 
tolic Constitutions,  ii.  11);  but  there  is  no  evidence 
in  Cyprian  to  show  that  Peter,  to  say  nothing  of 
his  successors  at  Rome,  had  any  prerogative  of  this 

power  over  other  apostles  or  bishops 

3.  Origen,  (Epist.,  Ixxv.  16),  his  view  being  that 

Cyprian    Christ  gave  this  privilege  first  to  Peter, 

and        and  then  to  his  fellow  apostles  (Epist., 

Augustine,  lix.  19;   De  unitate,  4).    So  according 

to  Augustine,  the  keys  were  given  to 
the  Chureh,  represented  by  Peter  (Epist.,  cxlix. 
7,  ocxcv.  2).  The  Chureh  is  administered  by 
the  bishops  (Sermo  cccli.  9),  but  it  is  the  Holy 
Ghost  which  remits  sins  both  **  above  man  "  and 
**  through  man  "  (Sermo  xdx.  9).  The  bishops 
of  Rome,  however,  laid  special  claims  at  an  early 
date  to  the  "  power  of  the  keys  "  in  virtue  of  their 
succession  to  Peter  (cf.  Tertullian,  De  pudidtia^ 
1,  21;  Cyprian,  EpUt.,  Ixxv.  17);  while  Leo  the 
Great  (on  Matt.  xvi.  19),  maintaining  the  "  priv- 
ilege of  Peter,"  held  that  the  "  power  of  the  keys  " 
was  extended  to  the  other  apostles  and  to  all  the 
heads  of  the  Chureh;  and  Optatus  (De  echismcUe 
Donati,  vii.  3)  believed  that  Peter  received  this 
prerogative  that  he  might  communicate  it  to  the 
other  apostles. 

The  "  power  of  the  keys  "  was  iised  by  the  Chureh 
especially  in  the  administration  of  baptism,  and 
also  in  penance  for  grievous  sins  conmiitted  after 
baptism,  more  venial  faults  being  atoned  for  by 
the  daily  penitence  of  the  faithful  heart,  the  fifth 
petition  of  the  Lord's  Prayer,  fasting,  the  oblations, 
and  the  Eucharist.    Although  the  list  of  grievous 


385 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Keys,  Pow«r  of  the 


sins  was  somewhat  uncertain  (cf.  Tertullian,  De 
pudxcitia,  19;  Adventis  Marcionem,  iv.  9;  Augus- 
tine, Sermo  cccli.  4;  Pacianus,  PartBneais  ad  pamir 
terUiamt  3),  practically  idolatry,  murder,  and  adul- 
tery were  from  the  very  first  the  chief 

4.  Sins     objects     of    ecclesiastical    discipline. 

Controlled  The  passages  supposed  to  prove  that 
by  the      in  the  Greek  Church  the  belief  was 

Power,  early  prevalent  that  all  sins  might  be 
forgiven  (Clement,  StromaUiy  ii.  13; 
Origen,  Contra  Cdaunif  iii.  51;  Dionysius  of  Corinth 
in  Eusebius,  Hist.  eccL,  iv.  23,  6)  are  too  vague  to 
admit  of  this  interpretation;  and  while  it  is  clear, 
from  TertuUian's  De  pudicitia  that  no  rigid  rule 
was  followed  with  respect  to  carnal  sins,  he  states 
as  a  general  principle  (De  pudicitia,  12;  cf.  22  and 
Origen,  De  oratiane,  xxviii.)  that  idolatry  and 
murder  were  considered  tmpardonable. 

The  Western  Church,  on  the  other  hand,  steadily 
extended  pardon  to  all  sins,  thus  connecting  the 
"  power  of  the  keys  "  more  closely  with  the  epis- 
copal office.  After  250  even  the  lapsed  (see  Lapsi) 
were  admitted  to  pardon,  thus  postulating  for- 
giveness for  idolatry,  although  in  many  regions 
the  more  rigid  practise  was  retained  as 

5.  Treat-    in  Spain  at  the  beginning  of  the  fourth 

ment  of     century  and  at  Csesarea  in  Cappadocia. 

the  Lapsed  Pardon  for  a  second  lapse,  however, 

and        was   forbidden  by  Pope  Siricius  and 

Penitent  was  unknown  to  Augustine  {Epist. 
cliii.  7),  besides  being  rejected  by  the 
eleventh  canon  of  the  third  Synod  of  Toledo,  al- 
though Sozomen  had  already  declared  his  convic- 
tion that  ''  God  has  decreed  that  pardon  should  be 
extended  to  the  penitent,  even  after  many  trans- 
gressions **  {Hist,  ecd.,  vii.  16). 

As  a  matter  of  fact  the  "  power  of  the  keys  ''  was 
exercised  by  the  clergy  under  the  supervision  of 
the  bishop,  and  the  laity  took  no  further  part  as 
early  as  the  middle  of  the  third  century  (cf.  Cyp- 
rian, Epist.,  xix.  2,  xlix.,  lix.  15;  Augustine,  Sermo 
cccli.).  After  excommunication  and  penance  for 
a  mortal  sin,  the  penitent  was  again  received  into 
the  Church.  This  act  was  termed  reconciliation, 
and  was  performed  by  the  laying  on  of  hands, 
prayer,  and  the  kiss  of  peace  by  the  bishop,  assisted 
by  the  clergy  before  the  altar  in  the  presence  of  the 
congregation.  The  pardoning  power  of  the  Church 
thus  coincided  with  absolution  (see  Confession), 
though  not  in  the  medieval  sense,  since  the  atoning 
force  of  penance  rested  in  the  act  of  the  penitent 
himself,  not  in  the  reconciling  power  of  the  Church. 
While  God  alone  forgave  sins,  the  Church,  as  his 
merciful  institution,  could  not  refuse  her  coopera- 
tion, but  pointed  out  to  the  penitent  the  way  in 
which  the  wound  of  sin  might  be  healed.  Then 
evolved  the  attitude  represented  by  Cyprian: 
"  Outside  the  Church  there  is  no  salvation,"  even 
though  the  absolving  power  of  the  Church  was  not 
final,  but  must  be  confirmed  at  the  Last  Judgment, 
thus  requiring  prayer  and  the  laying  on  of  hands. 

Beginning  with  Augustine,  the  tendency  arises 
to  bring  the  priest's  activity  in  the  exercise  of  the 
"  power  of  the  keys  "  into  closer  connection  with 
divine  grace;  and  the  sinner  is  no  longer  consid- 
ered as  a  wounded  man  to  be  healed,  but  as  a  corpse 


to  be  revived.    Since  this  is  impossible  for  the 
Church,  a  preliminary  working  of  grace  in  the  heart 
is  assumed,  which  is  later  to  be  completed  by  the 
operation   of  the  **  power  of   the  keys."    While 
Augustine  bases  forgiveness  in  reconciliation  sim- 
ply on  the  petition  of  the  congregation  of  the  faith- 
ful, Leo  the  Great  regards  the  priests 
6.  The     as   the   specific   intercessors   for   the 
Power      fallen,  basing  his  view  on  Matt,  xxviii. 
and  the     20,  which  he  restricts  to  the  deigy 
Priesthood.  (Epist.,   Ixxxii.;    Ad   Theodorum,   2). 
The   Roman   (Catholic    concept   of  a 
clerical  priesthood  independent  of  the  laity,  and 
with  whose  mediation  all  works  of  grace  are  con- 
nected, thus  received  sharp  and  conscious  expres- 
sion, and  the  accretions  of  later  times  are  but  the 
development  of  the  basal  idea  of  Leo.    There  was, 
however,   as  yet    no    formal   pronouncement   of 
absolution.    An  entirely  different  view  is  advanced 
by  other  Fathers.    On  the  basis  of  Lev.  xiv.  2  sqq., 
Jerome  (Commentary  on  Matthew,  iii.)  held  that 
ecclesiastical  authority  possessed  merely  the  right 
to  decide  that  they  were  set  free  whom  the  inward 
grace  of  God  had  freed,  and  that  they  were  bound 
whom  divine  grace  had  not  set  free.    Very  similar 
are  the  terms  used  by  Gregory  the  Great  iHomUia 
xxvi,  in  EvangeUa,  6),  but  it  is  clear  from  his  own 
statements  how  little  this  theoretic  distinction  prac- 
tically implied. 

IIL  The  Middle  Ages  and  the  Roman  Catholic 
Doctrine:  The  primitive  Church  distinguished  be- 
tween three  classes  of  members — the  faithful,  cate- 
chumens, and  penitents.  The  "  power  of  the  keys  " 
was  established  chiefly  for  the  third  class,  though  in 
some  respects  also  for  the  second;  for  these  two 
classes  alone  stood  in  need  of  ecclesiastical  recon- 
ciliation or  absolution.  Early  in  the  Middle  Ages, 
however,  a  tendency  arose  among  the  newly  con- 
verted Germanic  peoples  to  make  penance,  which 
originally  was  a  special  institution  for  special  occar 
sions,  a  general  characteristic  of  the 
I.  Penance,  whole  Church,  and  to  establish  the 
"power  of  the  kejrs,"  which  originally 
dealt  with  penitents  only,  as  a  general  court  of  judi- 
cature above  all  the  faithful.  The  first  indication  of 
this  tendency  was  that,  through  monastic  discipline, 
sins  in  thought  gradually  became  subject  to  the 
"power  of  the  keys,"  deviating  herein  from  the 
practise  of  the  early  Church.  In  the  monasteries  it 
was  considered  a  rule  of  discipline  to  confess  to  the 
brethren  even  the  slightest  occurrences  of  sinful 
emotions.  The  penitential  of  the  Irish  Vinnians 
prescribes  for  sins  in  thought  a  rigid  fast  for  half  a 
year,  and  abstinence  from  wine  and  meat  for  a  whole 
year.  The  Anglo-Saxon  penitential,  which  bears 
the  name  of  Theodore  of  Canterbury,  prescribes 
from  twenty  to  forty  days'  fast  for  feeling  lust. 
This  system  was  introduced  into  the  Prankish 
Church  by  St.  Columban  of  Luxeuil  (q.v.)  and  his 
pupils,  and  received  the  support  of  the  Prankish 
bishops,  as  is  evidenced  by  the  eighth  canon  of  the 
Synod  of  Chalon-sur-Sa6ne  (after  644).  It  must 
also  be  noted,  however,  that  as  early  as  the  fifth 
century,  Johannes  Cassianus  of  Marseilles  (q.v.),  a 
semi-Pelagian  influenced  by  Eastern  monasticism, 
had  postulated  eight  "  principal  sins  "  of  thought, 


Mmw^t  Pow«r  of  th« 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


896 


which  Utor  developed  Into  the  Mven  deadly  sins 
of  sehobstidBOL  The  first  provincial  synod  which 
made  oonfessioii  a  general  duty  was  that  of  Aenham 
(1109),  and  Innocent  III.  (1108-1216)  finally  m- 
troduoed  confession,  and  the  consequent  extension 
of  the  "  power  of  the  keys  "  over  all  Christians, 
throughout  the  Church  in  spite  of  the  opposition 
which  the  penitentials  produced  in  France,  his 
evident  object  being  to  check  the  growth  of  heresy. 
The  result  was  a  radical  change  in  the  treatment  of 
penance  and  reconciliation;  for  whereas  since  the 
fourth  centiuy  reconciliation  had  invariably  been 
public,  while  private  penance  had  been  prescribed 
for  secret  sins,  private  penance  was  now  restricted 
to  cases  of  voluntary  private  confession;  and  pub- 
lic penance  (followed  by  public  reconciliation, 
gradually  termed  absolution)  was  reserved  for  open 
sins  attested  by  witnesses,  or  for  such  heinous 
crimes  as  murder  (Coundb  of  Aries  [813],  canon 
26;  ChAkm-Bur-fiadne  [813],  canon  25;  Mains  [847], 
canon  31;  Pavia  [850],  canon  6;  llains  [852],  canon 
10  sqq.;  Capitularia  Regum  Franoarum,  ed.  S. 
Baluse,  Fmna,  1677,  v.  112).  Public  penance  and 
reconciliation  still  remained  the  prerogative  of  the 
biBhop,  while  private  confession  and  abrolution  were 
delegated  to  the  priests,  though  only  as  the  dele- 
gates of  the  bishop  (cf .  Ratramnus,  contra  OrcBcor- 
um  opponia,  iv.  7;  Cajriiularia  Regum  Franoorum, 
vi.  206).  Wliereas,  moreover,  reconciliation  primar 
rily  foUowed  immediately  after  the  completion  of 
penance,  the  penitential  of  Glldas  (|  1)  permitted 
private  reconciliation  on  the  expiration  of  half 
the  period  of  penance,  and  that  of  Theodore  of 
Ganterbiuy  after  a  year  or  six  months  (i.  12,  |  4), 
while  in  the  so-called  Statutes  of  Boniface  (cap. 
31)  reconciliation  mist  immediately  follow  confes- 
sion. In  the  course  of  the  Middle  Ages,  however, 
public  penance  and  public  reconciliation — ^the  lat- 
ter performed  in  the  Roman  Church  on  Maundy 
Thursday  as  early  as  the  fifth  century,  and  on 
Good  Friday  in  the  Milanese  and  Spanish  churches 
— were  steadily  superseded  by  private  confession 
and  private  absolution,  so  that  since  the  Reforma- 
tion they  have  become  entirely  antiquated. 

With  regard  to  the  theological  definition  of  abso- 
lution, and  the  share  of  the  priest  in  its  administrar 
tion,  two  opposing  views,  inherited  from  the  patristic 
period,  run  almost  parallel  with  each  other  during 
the  fint  part  of  the  Middle  Ages.  According  to 
the  one,  the  priest  is  simply  judge  in  faro  ecdena; 
he  declares  that  forgiveness  has  taken 
a.  The  place  by  the  act  of  divine  grace  in  the 
Priest      penitent  soul,  but  takes  no  part  hlm- 

«s  Jndge  self  in  the  act  of  forgiving.  The  divine 
or  as       forgiveness  takes  place  before  the  ab- 

Mediator.  solution  by  the  priest,  and  even  before 
confession,  in  the  very  moment  the 
heart  repents;  so  that  the  Church's  absolution  is  but 
the  declaration  of  what  God  has  already  done.  How 
prominent  this  view  was,  even  in  the  thirteenth  cen- 
tury, may  be  seen  from  the  manner  in  which  Gratian 
treats  the  subject.  He  raises  the  question  whether 
a  sinner  can  satisfy  God  by  repentance  and  secret 
penance  without  confession,  then  states  the  argu- 
ments and  authorities  on  both  sides,  and  fiiudly 
leaves  the  reader  to  deckle  the  question  for  himself. 


Peter  the  Lombard,  the  contemporary  of  Gratian, 
defines  (iv.  17)  the  priest's  power  to  bind  and  to 
loose  merely  as  a  power  of  declaration,  signifying 
simply  he  loosed  before  the  Church  him  who  was 
loosed  in  the  sight  of  God.  Similar  but  still  more 
explicit  were  the  views  of  Cardinal  Robert  Pulleyn 
(Sent.  vi.  62,  61,  vii.  1)  and  Peter  of  Poitiers,  chan- 
cellor of  the  University  of  Paris  (d.  about  1204). 
According  to  the  other  view,  represented  by  Leo 
the  Great  and  Alcuin,  the  priest  is  not  simply  a 
judge  in/aro  ecdesiiEf  but  is  a  mediator,  intercessor 
and  reconciler  between  God  and  the  penitent.  This 
position,  taken  by  the  priests  throughout  the  peni- 
tentials, and  exercising  a  profound  influence  on  the 
development  of  the  doctrine  of  the  "  power  of  the 
keys,"  attained  Increased  importance  in  the  De 
vera  et  falsa  pcmUentia,  a  work  belonging  to  the 
eleventh  or  twelfth  century,  but  aBcrtt)ed  to  Au- 
gustine. Here  the  priest  appears  as  the  representsr 
tlve  of  God  in  confession,  and  his  forgiveness  is  the 
forgiveness  of  God;  while  the  view  of  Gregory  the 
Great,  that  sins  in  themselves  beyond  forgiveness 
become  forgivable  through  penance  (but  not  through 
absolution),  ia  here  modified  so  that  the  siimer  in  his 
confession  does  not  become  clean  in  the  sight  of 
God,  but  has  his  mortal  sin  changed  to  venial.  This 
residue  of  venial  sins  no  longer  involves  eternal 
punishment,  but  must  be  atoned  for  either  by  pen- 
ance on  earth  or  purgatory  after  death  (chaps.  25, 
35).  These  concepts  were  now  evolved  into  a  for- 
mal system  by  the  Victorines.  To  Hugo  of  St. 
Victor  the  priest  represents  the  humanity  of  Christ, 
is  the  visible  medium  needed  by  sin-boimd  man  to 
draw  near  to  God,  and  is  used  by  God  to  pour  his 
grace  into  the  human  heart.  Thus  the  priestly  ab- 
solution not  only  declares  forgiveness,  but  effects  it 
(De  tacramentie,  il.  1  sqq.,  8).  Hugo  regards  the 
sinner  as  bound  by  the  inner  bondage  of  hardness 
of  heart  and  the  outer  chain  of  merited  damnation, 
the  former  loosed  by  God  alone  through  contrition, 
and  the  latter  by  the  priest  as  the  divine  instrument. 
Going  still  further,  Hugo's  pupil,  Richard  of  St. 
Victor,  in  his  Z>e  potedate  ligandi  el  solvendi  held 
that  God  himself  released  from  sin  either  immedi- 
ately or  through  the  mediation  of  men  who  were 
not  necessarily  priests,  this  being  done  by  contri- 
tion even  before  confession.  He  also  held  that 
through  the  priest,  who  possessed  the  "  power  of 
the  keys,"  God  transformed  eternal  punishment 
into  a  transitory  one,  and  that  the  priest  trans- 
formed transitory  ptmishment  into  penance. 

In  the  case  of  two  views  so  divergent,  yet  run- 
ning parallel,  further  progress  could  be  possible 
only  In  their  dialectic  reconciliation  and  combina- 
tion.   This  was  attained  by  the  great  scholastics 
of  the  thirteenth  century,  especially  by  Thomas 
Aquinas,  although  Richard  of  St.  Victor  had  plainly 
sought  to  effect  such  a  result.    In  his 
3.  Combi-  Summa  iheologia  (pars  Iv.,  qusstio  20, 
nation  of    membrum  iii.,    art.  2;    quasstio   21, 
the  Two    membrum  I.;  membrum  ii.,  arts.  1-3) 
Views.      Alexander  of  Hales,  closely  followed 
by  Bonaventura  and  Albertus  Magnus, 
held  that,  while  the  power  to  bind  and  to  loose 
belonged  to  God  alone,  the  priest  merely  praying 
for  and  obtaining  absolution,  but  not  imparting  it, 


dd7 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Keys,  Power  of  the 


nevertheless,  the  priest,  as  the  medium  between  the 
sinner  and  God,  being  the  spokesman  both  of  the 
sinner  and  of  God,  was  deprecator  and  judge  in 
one.  Eternal  punishment  can  not  be  remitted  by 
the  priest,  but  only  by  God.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
"  power  of  the  keys  "  extends  to  temporal  punish- 
ment, since  the  priest  is  a  divinely  appointed  judge; 
while  purgatory  is  remitted  only  per  acddens,  the 
priest  being  able  to  change  the  pains  of  purgatory 
into  temporal  punishment,  and  thus  into  penance. 

On  this  basis  Thomas  Aquinas  completed  the 
Roman  Catholic  doctrine  of  the  ''  power  of  the 
keys."  He  distinguished  between  the  davi8  or- 
dims  and  the  davis  jurisdictionis  (Summaf  qusostio 
19,  art.  3,  resp.),  the  former,  received  by  the  priest 
in  his  ordination,  opening  heaven  immediately  to 
individuals  through  sacramentary  absolution;  and 
the  latter  having  this  e£Fect  only  through  excom- 
munication and  absolution  before  the  forum  of  the 
Church.  The  davia  ordinU  alone  having  a  sacra- 
mental nature,  laymen  and  deacons  may  possess 
the  davis  jwrMidionM,  which  also  includes  the 
granting  of  indulgences  (qusostio  25, 
4.  The  art.  2  ad  1  m.).  The  exercise  of  the 
Twofold  davia  ardinis  presupposes  the  posses- 
K^  and  •  sion  of  the  davia  furisdidwms;  but, 
Thomas  on  the  other  hand,  the  davia  ordinia  be- 
Aquisas.  comes  e£Fective  only  through  the  davia 
juriadietUnda  (qusostio  20,  art.  1-2, 
resp.),  so  that  by  depriving  schismatics,  heretics,  and 
the  like  of  the  davia  juriadictianiaf  a  bishop  may 
withdraw  from  them  the  power  of  exercising  the 
davia  ordinia  (qusostio  19,  art.  6,  resp.).  The  sacra- 
mental davia  ordinia  finds  its  exercise  in  priestly 
Absolution,  and  it  was  through  Thomas  Aquinas  that 
the  individual  elements  of  the  sacrament  of  penance 
were  united  in  the  Roman  Catholic  doctrine  of  the 
"  power  of  the  keys."  He  bases  his  view  on  the 
concept  that  God  alone  remits  sin  and  eternal  ptm- 
ishment  as  a  return  for  a  contrition  which  is  per- 
fected by  fulness  of  love  and  by  a  desire  for 
sacramental  confession  and  absolution.  Such  a 
penitent  has  the  grace  given  him  increased  by  the 
**  power  of  the  keys  **;  and  in  case  his  contrition  is 
not  sufficiently  deep,  the  same  power  removes  the 
obstacles  to  the  entrance  of  the  atoning  grace,  pro- 
vided the  sinner  himself  sets  up  no  opposing  bar- 
riers. The  "power  of  the  keys"  remits  a  portion 
of  the  temporal  punishment,  the  residue  being 
atoned  for  by  the  prayers,  ahns,  and  fasting  pre- 
scribed to  the  penitent  by  the  priest  as  satisfaction 
(qiuestio  18,  art.  2-3).  These  latter,  moreover, 
may  be  remitted  by  the  davia  jtariadictionia  through 
indulgences  (quasstio  25,  art.  1,  resp.),  which,  in 
view  of  the  concept  of  vicarious  satisfaction  on 
which  they  are  based,  may  be  used  for  the  benefit 
of  souls  in  purgatory.  This  development  of  the 
"  power  of  the  Ireys  "  essentially  changed  the  form 
of  absolution;  for  although  Alexander  of  Hales 
states  that  in  his  time  the  deprecatory  formula  was 
followed  by  the  indicative,  the  latter  must  have 
been  an  innovation,  since  until  thirty  years  before 
Thomas  Aquinas  the  formula  used  by  all  priests 
had  been  AhaohUionem  el  remiaaionem  tibi  trUnuU 
Deua.  He  himself  defended  the  use  of  Ego  ie  ab- 
aeivo  on  its  analogy  to  the  other  sacraments,  and 


as  exactly  expressing  the  efifect  of  the  sacrament 
of  penance  and  the  "  power  of  the  keys,"  even 
though  retaining  the  deprecatory  formula  as  a 
prayer  before  the  indicative,  a  usage  still  followed 
by  the  ROvale  Romanum. 

The  teaching  of  Thomas  Aquinas  on  the  "  power 
of  the  kejrs  '*  was  essentially  adopted  by  Eugene 
IV.  at  the  Council  of  Florence  (1439)  and  still  more 
fully  by  the  fourteenth  session  of  the  Council  of 
Trent  (Nov.  25,  1551).  While  the  Decree  (cap.  6) 
and  the  Canons  (9-10)  of  the  Council 

5.  The     of  Trent  declare  that  the  absolution  is 
Tridentine  not  a  mere  statement  of  forgiveness,  but 

Decree,  is  a  judicial  and  sacramental  act,  the 
Roman  Catechism  makes  the  "  power  of 
the  keys  "  extend  to  all  sins  without  exception  (i.  11, 
5),  while  the  absolution  pronounced  by  the  priest, 
who  represents  in  all  sacraments  the  person  of 
Christ,  actually  effects  the  forgiveness  of  sins  (ii. 
5,  10,  11,  17).  While,  moreover,  in  contrition,  con- 
fession, and  satisfaction  the  penitent  is  active 
{opua  operana),  he  is  absolutely  passive  and  recep- 
tive toward  absolution,  which  works  entirely  ex 
opera  operato. 

From  another  point  of  view,  the  Roman  Catholic 
priest  is  essentially  a  judge,  not  only  in/oro  ecde- 
aicB,  but  in/oro  Dei.  In  this  capacity  he  investi- 
gates the  sins  of  the  penitent  to  determine  their 
proper  punishment,  and  considers  the  spiritual 
state  of  him  who  makes  confession,  that  he  may 
know  whether  to  bind  or  loose.  Since,  however, 
on  the  one  hand,  the  formula  Ego  te  abaolvo  implies 
that  the  absolution  is  infallible  and  absolute;  while, 
on  the  other  hand,  the  possible  error 

6.  The     of  the  priest,  the  infrequency  of  his 
Problem  of  ability  to  know  completely  the  state  of 

Priestly  his  penitent's  soul,  and  the  insuffi- 
Fallibtlity.  ciency  of  confession  as  a  substitute  for 
omniscience,  render  his  decision  only 
conditional,  Roman  Catholic  dogmatics  wavers  as  a 
result  of  the  combination,  without  true  imion,  of  the 
two  courses  of  development  sketched  above.  Prao- 
ticaUy,  however,  the  entire  remission  of  sins  requires 
from  the  penitents  only  contrition  (repentance 
made  perfect  in  love),  confession,  and  satisfaction. 
For  contrition  is  substituted  attrition  (mere  fear 
of  punishment),  and  what  it  lacks  in  earnestness 
and  depth  is  made  up  by  confession  in  its  entirety 
and  by  absolution.  The  latter  transmutes  eternal 
punishment  into  temporal,  and  temporal  into  pen- 
ance, this  being  remitted  by  indulgences.  Thus 
the  infallible  judgment  of  the  priest  becomes  falli- 
ble only  in  the  case  of  the  deliberate  hypocrite; 
and  the  one  firm  and  inunutable  result  of  the  con- 
fused course  of  development  here  sketched  is  the 
infallibility  of  the  power  of  the  Church  to  bind  and 
loose,  the  single  unalterable  kernel  of  the  entire 
dogma  of  the  "  power  of  the  keys  **  and  of  the  sacra- 
ment of  penance. 

In  the  Greek  Church  private  confession  was  in- 
troduced for  the  monks  by  Basil  (d.  379);  and  from 
about  the  end  of  the  iconoclastic  controversy  (see 
IifAOBS  AND  Imaob  WORSHIP,  II.)  Until  the  middle 
of  the  thirteenth  century  the  "  power  of  the  keys  " 
was  vested  exclusively  in  the  monks  according  to 
their  ecclesiastical  grade.    Collision  with  the  priest- 


Keys,  Power  of  tho 
Kief 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


328 


hood  was  avoided  by  ordaining  monks  as  priests 
and  appointing  them  as  confessors;   but  since  the 

thirteenth  century,  without  annulling 

7.  The     the  prerogatives  of  the  monks,  the 

Kqrs  hi     '*  power  of  the  keys  "  has  gradually 

the  Greek   been  taken  from  the  monastic  orders 

Church,     and  entrusted  to  the  priests;    while, 

under  Roman  Catholic  influence,  pen- 
ance has  become  a  sacrament.  The  doctrines  of  the 
Greek  Church  in  this  respect,  however,  have  re- 
mained more  general  tlum  the  Roman  Catholic, 
and  have  not  assumed  so  juristic  a  character. 

IV.  The  Reforouitk>n  and  the  Protestant  Doc- 
trine: The  entire  concept  of  the  "power  of  the 
keys  "  was  transformed  by  the  Reformation,  Luther 
especially  representing  a  return  to  early  beliefs. 
Holding  that  the  "  power  of  the  keys ''  was  not 
legalistic,  but  denoted  simply  the  foigiveness  or 
retention  of  sins,  he  emphasised  its  entirely  spiri- 
tual character  as  contrasted  with  its  secular  usage. 

He  taught,  moreover,  that  it  concerned 

X.  Luther  the  personal  relation  of  the  sinner  to 

and  Me-    God,  and  that  it  opened  or  closed  the 

lanchtfaon.  path  to  sharing  in  the  divine  grace, 

and  was  not  a  mode  of  punishment. 
As  a  power  conferred  on  man  by  God  or  Christ,  it 
belonged  to  the  Church,  this  being  not  the  pope  or 
the  clergy,  but  the  body  of  the  faithful  who  have  the 
Holy  Spirit.  While,  however,  in  theory  every  Chris- 
tian has  this  power  and  can  exerdse  it  in  the  name 
of  the  Church,  practically  only  one  commissioned  by 
the  Church  may  do  so,  again  in  the  name  of  the 
Church,  and  as  obeying  God  and  acting  in  his  stead. 
The  spiritual  Church  thus  becomes  a  mediator  be- 
tween the  individual  and  God.  The  key  of  binding 
proclaims  the  unrepentant  sinner  doomed  to  eter- 
nal death;  but  if  he  repents,  the  key  of  loosing 
pronotmces  him  free  from  sin  and  renews  the  prom- 
ise of  everlasting  life  (Von  den  Schluaaeln,  Erlangen 
edition,  xzxi.  178).  The  **  power  of  the  kejrs  "  is 
exercised  by  the  Church  first  in  preaching,  the 
preaching  of  the  law  binding  and  the  preaching  of 
the  Gospel  loosing;  in  public  and  private  absolu- 
tion; and  in  excommimication,  or  prohibition  to 
receive  the  Sacrament  or  to  share  in  the  other 
blessings  of  the  Church  until  repentance  and  amend- 
ment, although  the  person  so  excommunicated  was 
not  to  be  prevented  from  hearing  sermons.  All 
forgiveness  was  conditioned  by  faith,  but  excom- 
munication was  to  be  pronounced  only  on  gross 
and  open  sinners,  who  were  to  permit  this  judg- 
ment of  God  and  the  Church  to  work  in  them  to 
repentance.  Melanchthon  agreed  with  Luther  in 
his  doctrine  of  the  "  power  of  the  keys,"  and  main- 
tained the  right  of  the  Church  to  appoint  officials 
to  exercise  it.  He  insisted,  moreover,  on  confes- 
sion and  absolution  before  receiving  the  Sacrament, 
and,  influenced  by  Roman  CathoUdsm,  he  distin- 
guished the  "  power  of  the  keys,"  as  a  potestas  fur 
TiadtctionM,  from  the  patesUu  ordims.  He  likewise 
held  that  the  "  power  of  the  keys  "  belonged,  at 
least  in  practise,  to  the  deigy,  while  the  Reformed 
concept  of  the  Church  regarded  her  as  the  essential 
possessor  of  this  power. 

The  divergent  view  of  the  "  power  of  the  keys  " 
held  by  the  Reformed,  and  especially  by  Calvin, 


was  intimately  connected  with  their  distinction  be- 
tween the  invisible  Church  of  the  predestined  and 
the  visible  Church  which  was  to  be 
3.  The  organised  and  ruled  according  to  the 
Calvinistic  word  of  God;  additional  elements  be- 
Theoiy.  ing  the  line  drawn  between  the  divine 
and  the  created  factors  of  salvation  and 
a  concept  by  which  forgiveness  of  sins  presupposed 
only  the  true  renewal  by  the  Holy  Ghost  in  regener- 
ation. Accordingly,  Calvin,  distinguishing  between 
Matt.  xvi.  and  John  xx.  on  the  one  hand  and  Matt. 
xviii.  on  the  other,  postulated  a  double  "  power  of 
the  keys  "  (Institutes,  IV.,  xi.  1).  Proceeding  from 
the  theory  of  individual  need  and  individual  pastoral 
care,  he  approximates  the  Lutheran  idea  of  the 
consolation  of  private  absolution  (III.,  iv.  14,  IV., 
i.  22)  although  this  never  gains  the  importance  of 
an  actual  absolution.  From  this  **  power  of  the 
keys,"  which  rests  in  the  "  ministry  of  the  word  " 
(cf.  III.,  iv.  14,  IV.,  vi.  4),  must  be  distinguished  the 
"  spiritual  jurisdiction  and  discipline "  of  the 
Church,  which  concerns  the  punishment  meted  out 
by  the  Church  as  a  theocratic  and  secular  institu- 
tion. It  is  clear  that  here  there  is  no  question  o( 
a  direct  relation  to  God.  Despite  the  difficulty  of 
the  reconciliation  of  Calvin's  view  with  the  prom- 
ises of  Christ  regarding  the  "  power  of  the  keys," 
his  double  interpretation  was  retained  in  the  Re- 
formed confessions,  as  in  the  Helvetic  Confessicai, 
14,  and  the  Heidelberg  Catechism,  83.  The  Council 
of  Trent,  on  the  other  hand,  in  its  opposition  to  the 
Reformation,  while  abandoning  the  old  theory  of 
the  two  keys,  retained  the  substance  of  the  ancient 
dogma  (session  xxiii.  1);  and  postulated  still  more 
expUcitly  that  the  "  power  of  the  keys  "  was  a 
prerogative  granted  by  Christ  to  Peter  and  his  sue* 
cessors. 

In  the  Evangelical  churches,  and  especially  the 
Lutheran,  the  exercise  of  the  "  power  of  the  keys  " 
became  more  and  more  restricted  to  the  clergy, 
who  used  it,  on  the  one  hand,  in  private  absolution 
after  a  general  confession,  and,  on  the  other,  as  a 
punishment    in    the    form    of    excommunication, 
though,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  latter  was  restricted 
by  the  consistories  to  carnal  sins.    Gradually,  how- 
ever, protests  were  raised  agamst  the  "  power  of 
the  keys,"  in  part  through  a  more  or  less  mistaken 
idea  regarding  the  Reformatory  concept  of  the  con- 
solation and  the  sacramental  signification  of  the 
forgiveness  of  sins.    The  pioneer  of  this  tendency 
was  Theophilus  Grossgebauer,  who  required  only 
confession  to  God  for  secret  sins,  but  held  public 
confession    and    reconciliation    to   be 
3.  Lu-      necessary  for  open  sins,  in  which  alone 
theran      he  believed  the  power  to  bind  and 
Attacks     loose  to  be  effective,  judgment  being 
on  the      exercised  by  a  body  of  elders  chosen 
Doctrine,    by  the  congregations  concerned.    Spe- 
ner  sought  to  transform  private  confes- 
sion and  absolution  into  a  declaration  before  the 
pastor  for  counsel   and  spiritual  investigation;  but 
insisted  that  only  the  penitent  might  be  absolved, 
doubtful  cases  being  referred  to  a  body  of  elders  for 
judgment.    While  he  held  that  the  "  power  of  the 
keys  "  belonged  to  the  entire  Church  or  brotherhood, 
and  had  wrongly  become  restricted  to  the  clergy  and 


380 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Keys,  Power  of  the 
Kief 


the  authorities,  his  followers  assailed  private  con- 
fession still  more  vigorously.  On  Nov.  16,  16d8,  as 
a  result  of  the  diatribes  of  Johann  Kaspar  Schade  of 
Berlin,  an  electoral  resolution  made  general  confes- 
sion and  absolution  binding  on  all,  private  confession 
and  absolution  being  left  to  the  discretion  of  the  in- 
dividual. Prussia's  example  was  followed  by  the 
other  national  Churches;  and  what  Pietism  began 
rationalism  completed.  This  development  dimin- 
ished tbe  stress  laid  on  the  concept  of  the  **  power 
of  the  keys."  Schleiermacher,  though  reintroducing 
it  into  dogmatics,  restricted  it,  with  the  express 
exception  of  the  sermon,  to  the  legal  and  judicial 
authority  of  the  Church.  He  was  closely  fol- 
lowed by  Domer;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
"  Neo-Lutherans  "  of  the  nineteenth  century  en- 
deavored to  revive  the  "  power  of  the  keys  "  as  a 
specific  attribute  of  the  pastoral  office  which  had 
succeeded  the  apostolate,  only  to  meet  the  opposi- 
tion of  the  Erlangen  school. 

From  the  point  of  view  of  dogmatics  the  "  power 
of  the  keys ''  may  be  defined  as  the  duty  and  the 
authority  of  the  spiritual  Church  to  make  the  ever- 
lasting decision  for  mankind  and  for  individuals  de- 
pendent on  the  relation  to  her  as  the  body  of  Christ. 
In  this  sense  it  presupposes  not  only 
4.  Theo-    special  and  general  absolution,  but  the 
logical      entire    administration    of   the    sacra- 
A^iect      ments;   and  this  must  be  exercised  in 
of  the      the  Holy  Ghost.    The  determination  of 
Doctrine,    its  concrete  forms  and  its  transmission 
from  the  spiritual  to  the  earthly  Church 
falls   within   the  province   of  practical   theology. 
Natiuidly,  however,  the  "  power  of  the  keys  "  can 
be  ignored  only  where  the  Chiu'ch  is  regarded  merely 
as  a  religious  association  based  on  the  pious  thoughts 
of  men;    but  not  where  it  is  held  to  have  arisen 
from  the  determination  and  the  participation  of  the 
living  God.  (Johannes  Kunze.) 

Bxbuooeafbt:  J.  Morin,  Commentariu*  hi9taTicu§  de  di%- 
apUna  in  adminutraHone  tacramenH  poeniientiae,  Ant- 
werp,  1092;  J.  Wsterworth.  The  Faith  <4  Catholica,  I  08 
8qq.,  iii  1-26.  London,  1846;  C.  Elliott,  DelinealUm  of 
Raman  CaAoUeiim,  ed.  Hannah,  ib.  1851;  F.  W.  H.  Was- 
Berachleben,  Die  Bueeordnungen  der  abendlAndiachenKirehe, 
Halle,  1861;  G.  Steiti,  Dae  r&mieche  Bueeakrament, 
Frankfort,  1854;  idem.  Die  PHvatbeicKte  und  Prival- 
abeobUion,  ib.  1864;  idem,  in  TSK,  1866.  pp.  436-483; 
T.  Kliefoth,  Beichte  und  Aheolution,  Schwerin.  1866; 
G.  F.  Pfiflterer,  Luthere  Lehre  von  der  Beichte,  Stuttgart, 
1867;  J.  Barrow.  A  Treatiee  of  the  Pope'a  Supremacy, 
ed.  A.  Napier,  pp.  04.  146  et  pasaim,  Qsunbridge.  1859; 
J.  Bowen,  The  Power  of  the  Keya  and  the  Athanasian 
Creed,  London.  1860;  H.  L.  Ahrene,  Dae  Ami  der 
SddHeeel,  Hanover.  1864;  F.  Frank.  Die  Bueedieciplin, 
Mains.  1867;  F.  Probst.  Sakramente  und  Sakramenta- 
lien,  Tabingen,  1872;  E.  L6ning.  OeeehietUe  dee  deiUechen 
KirthtnrechU,  p.  262  sqq..  ii  448  aqq..  Strasburg.  1878; 
H.  J.  Scbmits.  Die  Bua^Hieher  und  die  Bueedieciplin  der 
ITtreAtf,  Mains,  1883;  H.  C.  Lea,  A  Formulary  of  the 
Papal  Penitentiary  in  the  ISth  Century,  Philadelphia, 
1802;  K  Holl,  Enthueiaemue  und  Bueeffewalt  beim  grie- 
diiet^ien  M/inehthum,  Leipsio.  1808;  F.  H.  Foster,  Fun- 
damental Ideas  of  the  ttoman  Catholic  Church,  pp.  41-42. 
284,  Philadelphia,  1800;  J.  Ktetlin.  Luthere  Theologie, 
u.  246  eqq.,  Stutt«art,  1001;  Neander.  Chrietian  Church, 
iL  200.  iii-v.  paaahn;   KL,  x.  1834-30;   DCO,  i.  020. 


SSLTSTY.    See  Russia,  III.,  §  4. 

KIDROll:  A  valley  or  ravine  east  of  Jerusa- 
lem, now  known  as  Wadi  Sitti  Maryam  ("  Valley 
of  St.  Mary  ")•    At  present  it  is  always  dry  except 


occasionally  after  severe  rains  in  the  winter  (see 
Jerusalem).  The  name  (Hebr.  kidhron)  occurs 
eleven  times  in  the  Old  Testament  and  once  (John 
xviii.  1)  in  the  New  Testament,  where  the  A.  V. 
has  "  the  brook  Gedron  "  (following  the  Greek  form, 
kedr9n),  the  R.  V.  "  the  brook  Kidron."  The  mar- 
ginal reading  of  the  R.  V.,  "  of  the  Cedars,"  is  a 
possible  translation  of  the  Greek,  but  not  applicable 
to  a  Hebrew  word;  kidhron  is  usually  referred  to 
the  root  kadhar,  ''  to  be  dark,  gloomy." 

SIBF,  ki'ef  (KIEW,  KIJEW):  A  city  of  Rus- 
sia, on  the  Dnieper,  noted  in  ecclesiastical  history 
as  an  ancient  metropolitan  see,  the  cradle  of  the 
Russian  Church.  In  1320  it  came  into  the  posses- 
sion of  the  Lithuanians,  and  thus  in  1386  became 
part  of  the  kingdom  of  Poland,  which  ceded  it  to 
Russia  in  1686.  Greek  missionaries  were  the  first 
to  preach  Christianity  in  this  region,  and  Christians 
are  found  there  as  early  as  the  b^;inning  of  the  tenth 
century.  After  the  conversion  of  Vladimir  in  988, 
the  Greek  patriarch  sent  thither  the  first  archbishop, 
Michael,  a  Syrian  by  birth  (988-992).  Under  the 
episcopate  of  Theopemptus  (1035-47)  the  great 
cathedral  of  St.  Sophia  was  built,  and  the  province 
then  included  twelve  dioceses,  to  which  Smolensk 
was  added  in  1137.  Early  in  the  twelfth  century 
the  relations  of  the  see  with  Rome  became  more 
and  more  strained.  Under  Matthew  (1200-20) 
Kief  was  destroyed  by  the  Mongolian  invaders,  and 
in  1299  the  see  was  formally  transferred  to  Vladi- 
mir, and  under  Peter  (1308-26)  to  Moscow,  the  old 
title  being  still  retained  of  '*  metropolitan  of  Kief 
and  aU  Russia."  Under  Gregory  I.  (1416-19)  the 
Ruthenian  Church  was  completely  separated  from 
Moscow  and  Constantinople,  and  he  seems  to  have 
been  disposed  to  promote  a  reunion  with  Rome 
and  to  have  attended  the  Council  of  Constance. 
Isidore  (1437-58)  took  more  decisive  steps  in  the 
same  direction,  labored  diligently  for  the  reimion 
scheme  of  the  Council  of  Ferrara-Florence,  and 
died  a  cardinal  and  (Latin)  patriarch-elect  of  Con- 
stantinople in  1463.  But  the  reunion  project  foimd 
little  favor  among  the  people,  and  a  state  of  schism 
and  conflict  followed,  the  union  being  wholly  dis- 
solved at  the  death  of  Joseph  II.  (1498-1517)  under 
the  influence  of  Helen,  the  Russian  wife  of  King 
Alexander  II.,  who  instigated  the  employment  of 
harsh  measures  against  its  adherents.  In  1595, 
however,  the  metropolitan  of  Kief  with  all  his  eight 
suffragans,  decided  once  more  to  look  to  Rome  for 
help  against  the  disorders  of  the  times,  and  Clem- 
ent VIII.  received  them,  permitting  them  to  re- 
tain their  own  ecclesiastical  language  and  customs. 
By  the  influence  of  Moscow  a  rival  line  of  Greek 
metropolitans  was  kept  up  imtil  1707  without  a 
break.  The  successive  divisions  of  Poland  and  the 
anti-Roman  influence  of  the  Empress  Catherine  II. 
tended  to  weaken  the  position  of  the  Uniat  Church 
in  the  eighteenth  century,  and  under  Russian  pres- 
sure in  1839  most  of  its  adherents  returned  to  the 
commimion  of  Moscow.  In  1771  they  had  num- 
bered twelve  millions;  in  1834  scarcely  a  million 
and  a  half  were  left. 

Bxbuooeapht:  M.  Le  Quien.  Oriene  Ckrietianue,  i.  1257- 
1282.  iii.  1127  sqq..  Paris.  1740;  C.  G.  Friese.  De  epieeo- 
patu   Kiovenei,   Wanaw,    1763;    L.   Lesooeur,   UBgliee 


THE  NEW  8CHAl!T.HERZO(5 


ftdO 


ooAoUfiM  en  Poloon*,  Paris.  1860;  A.  Piehler,  GmcAuAI* 
der  kirekUehen  Trennung,  U.  1  sqq..  Munich,  1864;  J. 
FsleM.  OMcKidUe  dtr  Union  d&r  rydh»nuchtn  Kireh»  mit 
Rom,  2  vob..  Viann*.  1878-80;  L.  K.  Ooeta.  Daa  Kiever 
Hohlmkloater  aU  Kulharwenirum  dea  vitrmongoUtdian  iSvw- 
lantU,  PlMnu,  1904;  KL,  vii.  428-440  (a  full  article). 
Further  material  will  be  found  in  the  literature  under 
Poiand;  Rttmia.  On  the  two  oouncila  of  the  Eaatem 
Church  held  there  consult:  E.  H.  Landon,  Manual  of 
CounciU,  London,  1846;  A.  N.  Mouravieff.  HimL  of  iMs 
Chtaxh  o/Ruuia,  pp.  36.  170,  Oxford,  1842. 

KIERAN,  SAINT.    See  Ciaban,  Saii«t. 

KIERKEGAARD,  kyer'ke-gOrd,  SORER  AABY: 
Danish  philoeopher  and  religious  author;  b.  in 
Copenhagen  May  6,  1813;  d.  there  Nov.  11,  1865. 
He  was  matriculated  at  the  University  of  Copen- 
hagen in  1830,  and  took  up  the  study  of  theology, 
devoting  also  considerable  time  to  philosophy  and 
esthetics.  His  first  literary  product  was  a  small 
pamphlet  in  which  he  attacked  Hans  Christian 
Andersen,  contending  that  the  latter  was  mistaken 
in  making  the  hero  of  his  "  Only  a  Fiddler  "  a 
peevish  nature,  and  maintaining  that  genius  can 
know  of  no  defeat,  but  that,  like  a  thunder-shower, 
it  will  force  itself  against  the  wind.  This  utter- 
ance may  serve  as  a  specimen  of  Kierkegaard's 
thought.  In  1840  he  obtained  his  first  degree  in 
theology,  and  in  the  following  year  the  master's 
degree  for  a  dissertation  on  the  conception  of  irony, 
with  special  reference  to  Socrates.  Shortly  after- 
ward, he  went  to  Berlin.  He  wished  to  demon- 
strate the  truth  of  Christianity,  but  not,  like  other 
apologists,  by  explaining  its  dogmas.  On  Feb.  20, 
1843,  the  first  part  of  his  large  work  "  Whethei^ 
Or"  appeared  pseudonymously,  rapidly  followed 
by  the  second  part,  entitled  "  Neither,"  in  which 
he  answers  the  question  propounded  by  himself  as 
to  whether  the  esthetical  or  the  ethical  type  of  life 
ought  to  be  chosen.  Between  1843  and  1846  nu- 
merous other  works  appeared  from  his  pen,  of  which 
may  be  mentioned  "  Fear  and  Trembling,"  "  Bits 
of  PhUosophy,"  "  What  is  Fear?"  and  "  Stations  on 
the  Path  of  Life,"  in  all  of  which  he  conceals  his 
identity  behind  various  alleged  contemporary  au- 
thors, representing  himself  as  merely  the  pub- 
lisher of  their  pseudonymous  literature.  Only  his 
sermons  were  published  over  his  own  name. 

The  first  part  of  these  works  endeavors  to  impress 
the  solemnity  of  Christianity  upon  an  age  which 
lived,  either  without  Christianity,  or  with  a  Chris- 
tianity founded  on  custom  only.  The  theme 
"  only  the  truth  which  builds  is  worth  having  " 
forms  the  substance  of  the  entire  pseudonymous 
literature  published  by  Kierkegaard,  and  by  his 
treatment  of  this  theme  he  became  a  religious  re- 
viver of  great  importance.  His  positive  construc- 
tion of  Christianity,  however,  did  not  fail  to  find 
opponents.  Dogmatically  he  defined  Christianity 
as  the  paradox;  ethically,  as  unmixed  suffering; 
psychologicaUy,  as  a  passionate  departure  from  the 
ways  of  the  world.  He  rejected  the  ideas  of  creed, 
church,  priest,  etc.,  and  according  to  his  conception 
a  Christian  is  an  isolated  individual,  alone  with 
God,  and  in  contact  with  the  world  only  through 
suffering.  When  this  part  of  his  literary  activity 
was  completed  he  felt  as  though  he  had  fulfilled  his 
mission,  and  desired  to  retire  to  a  secluded  par- 
sonage;  the  attacks  of  which  he  now  became  the 


subject  in  the  press,  however,  led  his  activity  into 
a  new  channel,  and  the  mental  suffering  which  he 
had  endured  led  him  to  consider  the  influence 
which  mental  agony  exerts  upon  the  life  of  a  Chm- 
tian.  The  fundamental  idea  in  his  subseqiient 
writings  became  more  religious,  more  Christian;  his 
sermons  treated  of  the  gospel  of  suffering. 

From  his  early  childhood  Kierkegaard  bad  re- 
garded the  oki  bishop  of  Zealand,  J.  P.  Mynster 
(q.v.),  with  great  reverence,  for  the  latter  had  been 
''  his  father's  pastor."    But  now  that  he  had  come 
to  consider  it  the  duty  of  a  Christian  to  lead  a  life 
of  suffering  he  asked  himself  if  Mynster's  preaching 
was  not  rather  an  esthetic  misrepresentation  of 
the  paradox  and  the  gospel  of  suffering  than  true 
Christianity;  and  was  Mjmster's  life  a  martyrdom? 
For  a  long  time  Kierke^ard  hoped  that  Mynster 
would  admit  that  the  Christian  ideal  had  been  co^ 
rectly  defined  in  his  writings,  and  ako  that  he,  the 
primate  of  the  Danish  churdi,  did  not  live  accord- 
ing to  this  ideal.    Mynster,  however,  maintained 
silence,  and  as  Kierkegaard  did  not  wish  to  dis- 
turb the  old  prelate's  tranquillity  of  mind  he  also 
refrained  from  uttering  his  opinicms.    On  the  death 
of  Mjmster,  however,  a  sermon  preached  by  Mar- 
tensen,  in  which  the  latter  designated   the  late 
bishop  as  "  a  faithful  witness  of  truth,"  aroused 
Kierkegaard's  ire,  and  he  wrote  a  protest,  the  pub- 
lication of  which,  however,  he  delayed  for  some 
time.    But  when  Martensen,  nine  months  later, 
was  appointed  Mynster's  successor  as  bishop  of 
Zealand  this  protest  appeared  in  the  periodical 
FcBdrelandet  of  Dec.  18,  1854,  under  the  title  "  Was 
Bishop  Mynster  a  Witness  of  Truth,  a   Faithful 
Witness  of  Truth— Is   this  Truth?  "    Martensen 
practically  ignored  this  attack,  simply  stigmatizing 
Kierkegaard  as  a  Thersites  who  danced  upon  the 
tombs  of  heroes;    this,  however,  enraged  Kierke- 
gaard all  the  more,  and  he  returned  to  the  attack 
with  various  articles  and  brochures  in  all  of  which 
he  censured  "  official  Christendom,"  its  divine  sei^ 
vices,  its  religious  acts,  and  its  adherents.    As  an 
advocate  of  individualism  Kierkegaard  had  no  sym- 
pathy for  the   multitude,  or  for  the  awakening 
tendency  to  organization.    The  enormous  mental 
strain  which  his  attack  on  organized  Christianity 
had  necessitated  left  him  physically  weak,  and 
hastened  his  death.    Kierkegaard's  works  have  es- 
tablished in  Denmark  a  literature  so  rich,  so  original, 
and  so  complete  in  form  that  it  is  absolutely  with- 
out parallel  in  that  country.         (F.  NixiBSNt.) 
Bxbuoorapht:    Seleotions  from  KierkegMud's  nnpubluhed 
papers,   which  throw  much  light  upon  his    books,   ed. 
H.  P.  Baraod  and  H.  Gottsched,  appeared  in  8  toIsw  st 
Copenhagen,  180»^1.    His  "Works."  ed.  A.  B.  Diach- 
mann,  J.  L.  Heiberg.  and  O.  H.  Lange,  appeared,  14  vob., 
Copenhagen,  1901-1906.     There  are  biogtaphiee  in  Ds- 
nish  by  G.  Brandes,  Copenhagen,    1877,   Germ.   tnuuL. 
Leipsic.  1879;   C.  Koch,  Copenhagen.  1898;   P.  A.  Rosen- 
berg, Copenhagen,  1898.     Of  the  voluminous  literature, 
mention  may  be  made  of  A.   B&rthold,  SOren  Kierkt- 
Oaard,   nne   Verfaner  Exiatens  eigener  AH,   Halberstadt, 
1873;    idem,  Aum  und  Ober  S&rtn  Kitrkeoaard,  ib.  1874; 
idem,    Noten    su    SHren    Kierkeoaard*»    LsdensgescAicMe. 
Halle.  1876;    idem.  Die  Bedeutung  der  MKetUehen  Sekrif- 
ten  S&ren  Kierkegaard* »,  ib.   1879;    idem,  S&ren  Kierki' 
gaard'e   Perednlidikeii  in   ikrer    Verwiekiung  der   Ideak, 
GQtersloh,  1886;    V.  Deleuran.  Eeguiete  d'une  Hude  wr 
SOren  Kierkegaard,   Paris.   1897;    AuegewOhUe  ekrieOiikt 
Reden,  German  by  Julie  von  Reinoke,  with  an  account  of 


331 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Kieran 


his  family  and  life  from  peraonal  reminifloenoea  of  hia 
meoe,  Gieaaen,  1901;  P.  MOnoh,  Die  Haupl'  und  Orund- 
gedanken  dtr  PkUoaophiB  8dnn  Kierkegaard*,  Laipflio,  1902. 

Kn.HAM,  ALEXANDER:  Founder  of  the  Meth- 
odist New  Connection,  frequently  called  Kilham- 
ites;  b.  at  Epworth  (21  m.  n.n.w.  of  Lincoln), 
Linoolnflhire,  July  10,  1762;  d.  at  Nottingham  Dec. 
20,  1798.  He  began  to  preach  in  1783,  and  was 
received  by  Wesley  into  the  regular  itinerant  min- 
istry in  1786.  On  the  death  of  Wesley  (1791)  he 
became  an  eneigetic  leader  of  the  faction  favoring 
complete  separation  of  the  Methodists  from  the 
Church  of  England  and  published  a  number  of 
rather  violent  pamphlets  in  support  of  his  views. 
At  the  conference  held  in  London  in  1792  he  was 
censured,  and  at  the  conference  of  1796,  also  held 
in  London,  he  was  imanimously  expelled  from  the 
conference.  On  Aug.  9,  1797,  Kilham  met  three 
other  Methodist  deigymen  and  a  number  of  lay- 
men at  Leeds  and  organised  the  Methodist  New 
Connection.  See  Mkthodibtb,  I.,  3. 
Bibuoobapht:  His  Life  (written  by  himself)  was  edited 
with  a  preface  by  J.  GrundelU  and  R.  Hall,  Nottingham, 
1799;  [J.  BlackweUJ  Life  cf  Rev.  Alexander  Kilham, 
London,  1838;  W.  J.  Townaend,  Alexander  KiOatn,  the 
FiretMelhodiel  Reformer,  ib.  1890;  DNB,  xxd.  102-103. 

KnJAn,  SAINT:  Irish  cleric  m  Germany, 
who,  with  several  companions,  met  a  martyr's 
death  at  Wdrzbuig  in  the  eighth  century.  He  is 
called  Bishop  Chilianus  in  a  necrology  of  the  time 
and  in  the  martyrology  of  Rabanus  is  spoken  of  as 
coming  from  Ireland  to  preach  the  Gospel  of  Christ 
in  those  regions  and  meeting  death  because  of  his 
faith.  There  are  difficulties  connected  with  the 
tradition,  not  the  least  being  that  the  Franks 
dwelling  on  the  middle  Main  were  no  longer  a  pagan 
people  and  KiUan's  labors,  therefore,  were  not 
those  of  a  missionary.  Only  the  fact  of  the  Cel-* 
tic  bishop's  violent  death  is  undoubted;  the  exact 
period  of  his  martyrdom  at  the  hands  of  a  Dtix  or 
a  Judge  Gosbert  can  not  be  verified.  Concerning 
the  form  of  the  name ''  Kilian  "  the  following  seems 
to  be  well  established.  The  Ch  of  the  **  Chilianus  '' 
in  the  oldest  authority  is  to  be  ascribed  to  the  reg- 
ular working  of  the  laws  of  Germanic  phonology. 
Irish  names  ending  in  an,  iane,  ene  are  always 
nicknames,  appellatives,  etc.,  as  in  the  case  of  the 
abbot  of  Armagh,  about  640,  addressed  by  Pope 
John  V.  as  Tomian  and  Tomene.  The  old  Irish  cell 
(gen.  eeUe,  dat.  and  ace.  eiU,  o  being  always  pro- 
noimced  like  k)  signified  the  cell  of  an  anchorite, 
a  monastery  or  a  church,  and  Cellan  and  Cillene 
were  common  names  among  the  Irish  clergy  in  the 
seventh  and  eighth  centuries,  signifying  "  anchor- 
ite." On  the  uialQgy  of  Tomian  and  Tomene,  Kil- 
lian,  spelled  with  two  Ts  might  properly  be  regarded 
as  a  variant  of  Cillene.  The  difficulty  presented 
by  the  fact  that  the  Franldsh  form  is  Kihan,  with 
single  1,  may  be  explained  by  supposing  the  sub- 
stitution for  the  liquid  double  1  of  a  single  letter 
bearing  the  same  sound.  St.  Kilian 's  reputation 
dates  from  the  time  of  Burchard,  bishop  of  Wttrz- 
burg  (d.  about  764).  (A.  Hauck.) 

Bibuoobapht:   An  early  Vita,  with  comment,  b  in  ASB, 

July.  ii..  699-614.     Conault:     T.    D.    Hardy.    DeecripHre 

Caialoffue  of  MateriaU,  i.  1,  p.  339,  in  RoUm  Series,  no.  26. 

London,  1862;  W.  D.  KiUen,  Ecdeeiaetictd  Hial,  of  Irdand, 


2  vols.,  London,  1875;  H.  Zimmer,  The  Irieh  Element  in 
Medimwd  Ctdtvre,  New  York,  18Q1;  Rettbeis,  KD,  u.  303; 
Hauck.  KD,  i.  370;  DCB,  l  544^666;  KL,  vii.  446-448* 
DNB,  X.  363-364. 

KILLEH,  WILLIAM  DOOL:  Irish  Presbyterian; 
b.  at  Ballymena  (23  m.  n.w.  of  Belfast),  County 
Antrim,  Apr.  5,  1806;  d.  at  Belfast  Jan.  10,  1902. 
He  studied  at  the  Belfast  Academical  Institution, 
and  in  1829  was  ordained  minister  of  Raphoe, 
County  Donegal.  From  1841  he  was  professor  of 
church  history  and  pastoral  theology,  and  from 
1869  until  his  death  was  president  of  the  Presby- 
terian College,  Belfast.  In  theology  he  was  a  lib- 
eral Evangelical.  He  wrote:  The  Ancient  Church 
(London,  1859);  Memorial  of  John  Edgar  (Belfast, 
1867);  The  Old  Catholic  Church  from  the  Ajtostolic 
Age  to  A.D.  766  (Edinburgh,  1871);  The  Ecdesi- 
aitical  Hielory  of  Ireland  from  the  Eariiest  Period 
to  the  Present  Time  (2  vols.,  London,  1875);  The 
Ignatian  Letters  Entirely  Spurious  (Edinbuigh, 
1886);  The  Framework  of  the  Church:  A  Treatise 
on  Church  Oovemment  (1890);  and  Reminiscences 
of  a  Long  Life  (London,  1901);  he  also  continued 
J.  S.  Eeid's  History  cf  the  Presbyterian  Church  in 
Ireland  from  173S  (Belfast,  1853). 

KILWARDBY,  ROBERT:    Archbishop  of  Can- 
terbuiy;   b.  in  England  c.  1200;  d.  at  Viterbo  (42 
m.  n.n.w.  of  Rome),  Italy,  Sept.   11,  1279.    He 
probably  studied  at  Oxfoni,  but  certainly  at  the 
University  of  Paris,  where  he  first  distinguished 
himself  as  a  lecturer  and  writer  on  gnunmar  and 
logic.    Later  he  joined  the  order  of  St.  Dominic  and 
devoted  himself  to  theology,  distinguishing  Iwn- 
self  in  this  field  by  dividing  most  of  Augustine's 
works  into  chapters  and  prefixing  to  each  an  anal- 
ysis of  its  contents.    He  was  provincial  prior  of  his 
order  in  England  1261-72,  arehbishop  of  Cantei^ 
bury  1272-78,  and  cardinal-bishop  of  Porto  1278- 
1279.    He  was  the  first  mendicant  advanced  to  a 
great  post  in  the  English  Church.    As  arehbishop 
he  held  frequent  synods.    Those  of  1273  and  1277 
mark  important  developments  in  the  representa- 
tion of  the  lower  deigy.    On  leaving  England  in 
July,  1279,  he  took  with  him,  along  with  other 
property  of  the  see,  all  the  records  of  Canterbury. 
To  this  day  the  oldest  records  of  the  see  date  from 
the  time  of  Archbishop  Peckham,  Kilwardby's  suc- 
cessor.   Kilwardby  was  a  voluminous  writer,  and 
in  his  day  he  was  widely  studied.    Manuscripts  of 
his  De  ortu  scientiarum,  his  most  important  work, 
are  preserved  in  the  Bibliothdque  Nationale,  Paris, 
and  in  the  Bodleian  Library,  C)xford. 
Biblzooeafbt:   Sources  are:   N.  Trivet,  Annalee  eex  regum 
Angliae^  ed.  T.  Hog.  London,  1845;   ,and  in  the  RoUe 
Seriee:    Anntdee   MonaeOei,    5   vob.,    London,    1864-69 
(conault  Index);    Chronielee  of  the  Reigne  of  Sdward  I. 
and  II.,  ed.  W.  Stubbe.  2  vols.,  ib.  1882-83;  Bartholomew 
of  Cdton,  HiaL  Anglieana,  ed.  H.  R.  Luard.  London,  1869. 
Consult:  J.  Qutftif  and  J.  Echard,  Scriptoree  ordinie  prae- 
dieatortim,  I  874-380.  Paris.  1719;    W.  F.  Hook.  Arch- 
hiehepe  of  CanteHnery,   iii.   304-826.    12  vols..    London. 
1860-76;    J.  B.  Haurteu,  Hiet.  de  la  phUoBophie  scotos- 
tUpte,  XL.  ii  28-33.  Paris.  1880;  DNB,  xxxl  120-122. 

EIMCHI,  kim'kt  (KIMHI):  The  name  of  a 
Jewish  family  of  scholars  of  Spanish  descent,  flour- 
ishing in  France  in  the  twelfth  and  thirteenth  cen- 
turies. 

1.  Joseph   ben    Isaac  Kimchi,  b.  in    southern 


Kingdom 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


882 


Spain  c.  1100;  d.  probably  in  Narbonne  c.  1175; 
migrated  from  Spain  to  Narbonne.  In  his  gram- 
matical studies  he  was  influenced  by  Judah  ben 
Qayyuj,  Abul-Walid,  and  Abraham  ibn  Esra.  His 
gnunmar,  Sepker  zikkaron, "  Book  of  remembrance  " 
(cf.  Mai.  iii.  16),  gives  for  the  first  time  the  division 
of  the  Hebrew  vowels  into  five  long  ones  and  five 
short  ones.  The  Sepher  haggoLui,  ''  Book  of  Open 
Evidence "  (cf .  Jer.  xzxii.  14)  is  a  criticism  of  the 
dictionary  of  Menahem  ben  Saruk  and  its  defense 
by  Jacob  ben  Meir.  Joseph  wrote  also  commen- 
taries on  Proverbs,  Job  and  the  Song  of  Songs. 
Codex  de  Rossi  166  contains  excerpts  from  an  ex- 
position of  the  Pentateuch,  and  marginal  notes  in 
the  Codex  de  Rossi  1070  give  comments  on  the 
prophets.  A  commentary  on  the  whole  Bible  be- 
longed, according  to  the  catalogue  CoUedio  Davidia, 
p.  525,  to  the  library  of  Oppenheimer.  According 
to  Zunz  {Litteratvrgeachichte  der  syruigogdlen  PoeaiSf 
p.  460,  Berlin,  1865),  Joseph  wrote  also  six  litur- 
gical poems.  From  the  Arabic  he  translated  the 
Mibhhar  happeninim  of  Solomon  ibn  Gabirol  and  a 
large  part  of  the  **  Duties  of  the  Heart"  of  Bachja 
ibn  Pakuda.  Of  his  Sepher  habberith,  "  Book  of 
the  Covenant "  (cf.  Ex.  xxiv.  7),  a  conversation 
between  a  believing  Jew  and  an  infidel,  only  the 
beginning  has  been  preserved. 

2.  Moses  Eimchl,  the  older  son  of  Joseph,  d. 
about  1190,  has  become  generally  known  by  his 
Mahalakh  ahebile  hadda'ath,  ''Guide  to  the  Paths  of 
Science,"  a  concise  epitome  of  Hebrew  grammar. 
His  granunatical  work  Sepher  Tahbosheth  quoted 
by  David  Kimchi  seems  to  have  been  lost.  Zunz 
(ut  sup.,  p.  462)  enumerates  four  liturgical  poems 
by  Moses.  His  exposition  of  Proverbs  was  com- 
pleted 1178,  that  of  Job  1184. 

8.  David  Kimchi,  usually  called  Redak,  the 
younger  son  of  Joseph,  was  bom  at  Narbonne  c. 
1160;  d.  there  ^235.  He  often  calls  his  father  and 
his  brother  his  teachers.  As  a  grammarian  and 
exegete  David  distinguishes  himseljf  by  his  diligent 
compilation  of  facts,  sober  judgment  and  clear  ex- 
pression. By  making  an  exhaustive  use  of  Abul- 
Walid,  he  enjoyed  great  authority  among  both 
Christians  and  Jews,  although  he  possessed  little 
originality.  Reuchlin  and  Sebastian  MOnster  made 
large  use  of  his  works.  These  have  been  very  fre- 
quently printed,  many  of  his  conunentaries  with 
Latin  translations.  £.  KOnig's  Lehrgtbdude  der 
Mbr&iachen  Sprache  (Leipsic,  1881  sqq.)  was  com- 
piled "  in  constant  dependence  upon  Qknchi,"  and 
even  now  scholars  may  receive  many  a  suggestion 
from  Kimchi's  works.  (H.  L.  Stkack.) 

Bxblioorapbt:  In  general:  G.  B.  de  Robsi,  HiMtoritehet 
WOrierbueh  der  jUdiacken  SdtriftateOer,  pp.  lM-171, 
Bsutsen,  1839;  Ench  and  Gruber,  Eneuelopddu,  II. 
xxxvi.  54-57;  J.  Winter  and  A.  Wansehe.  Die  jodiecke 
LUUrtUur,  ii  191-205.  806-314,  Treves.  1894;  JE,  vii. 
494-497. 

On  1:  £.  Bluth.  in  MagaHn  fibr  die  Wiemnachaft  dee 
JuderUhufne,  1891-92  passim;  W.  Bacher.  in  Revue  dee 
Hudee  juivee,  vi  (1883).  208-221.  On  2;  W.  Bacher. 
ut  sup.,  xzi  (1890).  281-285.  On  8:  J.  Tauber.  Stand- 
punkt  und  Leietwng  dee  David  Kimehi  die  CframmatUcer, 
Breslau.  1867;    Encydopadia  Britannica^  adv.  77-78. 

KING,  HENRT  CHURCHILL:  Congregation- 
alist;  b.  at  Hillsdale,  Mich.,  Sept.  18,  1858.  He 
studied  at  Hillsdale  College,  Oberlin  College  (B.A., 


1879),  Oberlin  Theological  Seminary  (from  which 
he  was  graduated  in  1882),  Harvard  (1882-84), 
and  Berlin  (1893-94).  While  a  student  in  the 
seminary  he  was  tutor  in  Latin  (1879-81)  and  math- 
ematics (1881-82)  in  the  preparatory  department 
of  his  college.  He  returned  to  Oberlin  in  1884  and 
was  associate  professor  of  mathematics  there  until 
1890,  when  he  was  transferred  to  the  department  of 
philosophy,  being  promoted  to  a  full  professorship 
of  the  latter  subject  in  the  following  year.  Since 
1897  he  has  been  professor  of  theology  in  the  same 
institution,  of  which  he  was  elected  sixth  president 
in  1902.  He  was  a  member  of  the  committee  of  ten 
appointed  in  1893  by  the  National  Education  As- 
sociation to  report  on  studies  in  secondary  schools, 
and  has  written:  OtUline  of  Erdmann*8  History  of 
PkOoeophy  (New  York,  1892);  AppedL  of  the  ChUd 
(baccalaureate  sermons;  Oberlin,  1900);  Ovi- 
line  of  the  "  Microcoeme  "  of  Hermann  Lotze  (1901); 
Reconstruction  in  Theology  (New  York,  1901);  The- 
ology and  the  Social  Conaciouen^ea  (1902);  Personal 
and  Ideal  Elements  in  Education  (1904);  Rationoi 
Living:  Some  Practical  Inferences  from  Modem 
Psychology  (1905);  Letters  to  Sunday  School  Teackm 
on  the  Great  Truths  of  our  Christian  Faith  (Bostoo, 
1906) ;  Seeming  Unreality  of  the  Spiritual  Life  (Xev 
York,  1908) ;  and  Laws  of  Friendship—Human  and 
Divine  (1909). 

KIlfG,  JOHH:  Bishop  of  London;  b.  at  Wonn- 
inghall  (8  m.  e.  of  Oxford),  Buckinghamshire,  c 
1559;  d.  in  London  Mar.  30,  1621.  He  studied  at 
the  Westminster  School  and  at  Christ  Church,  Ox- 
ford (B.A.,  1580;  M.  A.,  1583;  B.D.,  1591;  D.D, 
1601)  and,  on  taking  orders,  became  domestic  chap- 
lain to  John  Piers,  archbishop  of  York.  He  was 
made  archdeacon  of  Nottingham  1590,  rector  <^ 
St.  Andrew,  Holbom,  1597,  prebendary  of  St.  Paul's 
1599,  dean  of  Christ  Church,  Oxford,  1605,  preb- 
endary of  Lincoln  1610,  and  bishop  of  London 
1611.  He  was  vice-chancellor  of  the  University  of 
Oxford  1607-10,  and  was  also  a  royal  chaplain,  both 
imder  Queen  Elizabeth  and  James  I.,  who  styled 
him  the  "  King  of  preachers."  The  report  that  on 
his  death-bed  he  became  reconciled  to  the  Church  of 
Rome  is  unfounded.  He  published  several  single 
sermons  and  Lectures  upon  Jonas,  Ddivered  d 
Yorke  in  ,  .  .  1694  (Oxford,  1597),  reprinted  in 
Nichols'  Commentaries  qf  the  Puritan  Period  (vol. 
i.,  London,  1864). 
Bxbuogbapht:    A.  k  Wood,   Atkenae  Oxotdeneee,  ed.  P. 

BUbs.  u.  294,  <S34,  861.  iii.  889,  Faeti,  L  248,  255.  4  toU. 

London.  1813-20;   DNB,  xzxL  13&-138  (where  reference 

to  scattered  notioee  is  given). 

KUfGy  JOHAS:  Congregational  missionary;  b. 
at  Hawley,  Mass.,  July  29,  1792;  d.  at  Athens, 
Greece,  May  22,  1869.  He  was  graduated  at  Will- 
iams College,  1816,  and  at  Andover  Theologiol 
Seminary,  1819;  entered  the  Congregational  minis- 
try; labored  as  missionary  in  Syria  1823-26,  and 
in  Greece  from  July,  1828,  till  his  death.  Fixkd 
1821  till  1828  he  held  (nominally)  the  professorship 
of  Oriental  languages  and  literature  at  Amherst 
and  spent  a  part  of  his  time  stud3ring  in  Paris,  with 
a  view  to  entering  upon  the  duties  of  his  chair.  He 
published  several  volumes  of  translations,  and  orig- 
inal works  in  modem  Greek.    His  work  in  Athens 


888 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Ximohl 
Kinsdom 


was  at  all  times  disliked  by  the  ecclesiastical  au- 
thorities; and  in  Mar.,  1852,  he  was  convicted  of 
teaching  doctrines  contrary  to  the  religion  of  the 
Greek  Church,  and  sentenced  to  fifteen  days'  im- 
prisonment and  to  exile,  with  costs.  A  protest 
from  the  United  States  government  prevented  the 
execution  of  this  sentence,  and  in  1854  it  was  re- 
voked. King's  **  Miscellaneous  Works  "  (Modem 
Gk.,  2  vols.,  Athens,  1859)  include  documents  re- 
ferring to  his  trial. 

Biblxoorafbt:    Mrs.  F.  E.  H.  HaiiHMi,  Jonaa  King,  Mia- 
•ionary  to  Syria  and  Oreeee,  New  York,  1870. 

KING,  THOMAS  STARR:  Unitarian;  b.  in 
New  York  Dec.  16,  1824;  d.  in  San  Francisco  Mar. 
4,  1864.  His  education  was  interrupted  by  the 
death  of  his  father,  a  Universalist  clergyman  then 
residing  at  Charlestown,  Mass.,  and  he  was  com- 
pelled to  go  to  work  in  a  dry-goods  store.  Later, 
while  engaged  in  teaching,  he  studied  theology  in 
his  spare  time,  and  began  to  preach  in  1845.  He 
was  pastor  of  the  Universalist  Church  at  Charles- 
town  1846-i8,  of  the  Hollis  Street  Unitarian  Church, 
Boston,  1848-60,  and  of  the  Unitarian  Church  in 
San  Francisco  1860-64.  He  was  a  brilliant  speaker 
and  achieved  a  national  reputation  as  a  lecturer. 
At  the  outbreak  of  the  Civil  War,  when  it  seemed 
probable  that  California  would  secede,  King  threw 
himself  into  the  breach  and  by  his  eloquence  saved 
the  State  to  the  Union.  During  the  war  he  was  ac- 
tive in  the  interest  of  the  United  States  Sanitary 
Commission.  While  located  at  Boston  he  spent 
much  time  exploring  the  White  Mountains  and 
published  The  White  HUU,  their  Legends,  Land- 
scape,  and  Poetry  (Boston,  1859).  Patriotism  and 
other  Papers  (1864),  Christianity  and  Humanity 
( 1877) ,  Substance  and  Shaw,  and  other  Lectures  (1877) 
were  published  posthumously. 
Bibuoorapbt:   A  Memoir,  by  £.  P.  Whipple,  wm  prefixed 

to   ChriaUanUy  and   Humanity,   ut   sup.,    pp.   vii.-lxxx. 

Conmilt  also:     R.   Frothingham,   A    TrUnUe  to    Thomas 

Starr  King,  Boston,  1864;    O.  T.  Shuck,   Thomas  Starr 

King  in  Verse,  privately  printed.  1006. 

KEfG,  WILLIAM:  Archbishop  of  Dublin;  b. 
at  Antrim,  Ireland,  May  1,  1650;  d.  at  Dublin  May 
8,  1729.  He  studied  at  Trinity  College,  Dublin 
(B.A.,  1670;  M.A.,  1673;  D.D.,  1689),  and  took 
orders  in  1674.  He  became  provost  of  the  cathe- 
dral church  of  Tuam  1676,  chancellor  of  St.  Patrick's 
and  rector  of  St.  Werburgh's  1679,  dean  of  St.  Pat- 
rick's 1689,  bishop  of  Derry  1691,  and  archbishop  of 
Dublin  1703.  For  espousing  the  cause  of  William 
of  Orange  he  was  imprisoned  by  James  II.  in  1688 
and  again  in  1690,  but  was  liberated  after  the  de- 
feat of  James'  army  at  the  battle  of  the  Bo3me  (July 
1,  1690).  Though  a  Whig,  he  was  an  Irish  patriot, 
and  defended  vigorously  the  interests  of  the  Irish 
against  the  encroachments  of  the  English.  His 
major  work  is  De  origine  maU  (Dublin  and  London, 
1702;  Eng.  transl.  by  Edmund  Law,  London,  1731), 
which  attempts,  on  a  Lockean  basis,  to  reconcile 
the  existence  of  evil  with  the  goodness  of  God.  The 
work  attracted  considerable  attention,  and  was 
criticized  by  Bayle,  Leibnitz,  and  others.  King  also 
published  a  number  of  sermons  and  The  State  of  the 


Protestants  in  Ireland  under  ike  Late  King  James^ 
Oovemment  (London,  1691),  an  important  vindica- 
tion of  the  principles  of  the  Revolution. 

BiBuoaaAPHT:  The  chief  authority  is  J.  Ware,  Ardiiepis- 
coporum  Casseliensium  et  Tuamensium  viiae,  Dublin, 
1626;  very  valuable  is  A  Oreat  Archbishop  of  IhMin. 
WaUiam  King,  his  Autobiography,  Family,  and  a  Sdeetion 
from  his  Correspondence,  ed.  Sir  Charies  Simeoa  King, 
London,  1908.  For  other  scattered  referenoee  consult 
DNB,  xxxi  163-167. 

KUfGDOM,    BROTHERHOOD    OF    THE:    An 

organization  haying  for  its  aim  the  study  of  the 
teachings  of  Jesus  regarding  the  kingdom  of  God 
and  the  realization  of  these  teachings  in  a  spirit  of 
brotherhood.  There  are  no  officers  except  an  ex- 
ecutive conmiittee  elected  annually,  with  chair- 
man, and  corresponding  and  recording  secretaries. 
The  Brotherhood  was  founded  in  Dec.,  1892.  Shortly 
thereafter  the  compilation  of  a  series  of  essays  on 
the  kingdom  in  its  various  relations  was  suggested 
and  the  work  of  their  preparation  was  undertaken 
by  a  small  group  of  men.  Later,  it  was  agreed  that 
the  writers  should  meet  at  Marlborough  on  the 
Hudson,  N.  Y.,  in  the  month  of  August,  1893,  for 
the  purpose  of  comparing  their  essays  and  bringing 
them  into  a  full  agreement  and  imity.  The  sim- 
ple basis  of  organization,  entitled  Spirit  and  Aims 
of  the  Brotherhood,  was  then  adopted,  and  the  first 
executive  conmiittee  was  elected.  Thirteen  annual 
conferences  have  since  been  held,  all  but  one  at 
Marlborough,  and  a  few  smaller  conferences  have 
been  held  at  various  times  between  these  annual 
conferences,  in  the  city  of  New  York  and  elsewhere. 
The  first  conference  was  attended  by  eleven  men. 
The  second  being  more  largely  attended  and  ex- 
citing considerable  neighborhood  interest,  the 
meetings  took  on  a  more  public  character,  so  that 
in  announcing  the  third  conference  it  seemed  de- 
sirable to  extend  a  public  invitation  to  all  interested 
in  the  movement,  and  since  that  time  the  confer- 
ences have  been  entirely  open  to  the  public,  with 
the  exception  of  a  short  business  session  each  morn- 
ing, confined  to  the  enrolled  members  of  the  Broth- 
erhood. Reports  of  four  of  these  conferences  have 
been  published,  besides  tracts,  leaflets,  and  maga- 
zine articles  from  time  to  time. 

While  the  Brotherhood  has  as  yet  attempted 
little  beyond  the  holding  of  its  annual  conference 
and  the  putting  forth  of  occasional  expressions  of 
opinion  regarding  current  questions  of  a  social  and 
religious  character  in  pamphlets  and  circulars,  it 
has  made  preparation  for  a  larger  sphere  of  activ- 
ity in  the  future  in  several  ways.  It  has  a  standing 
conmiittee  on  evangelization,  whose  aim  is  to  pro- 
mote evangelistic  e£Fort  on  a  social  basis.  It  has 
also  a  committee  on  foreign  correspondence,  through 
which  it  seeks  to  come  into  touch  with  those  of 
similar  views  and  aims  in  England,  on  the  continent 
of  Europe,  and  elsewhere.  And  latterly,  as  the 
need  of  more  permanent  organization  and  lateral 
extension  has  become  manifest,  provision  has  been 
made  for  local  chapters  of  the  Brotherhood,  receiv- 
ing their  charters  from  it  and  pledged  to  its  spirit 
and  aims  as  their  unalterable  basis  of  constitution. 
Lbiohton  Wiluamb. 


Kingdom  of  GKkl 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


S84 


Jewish  Views  of  the  Kingdom  (I  1). 

The  Pftiiline  Doctrine  (I  2). 

The  Teaehing  of  Jesus  (|  3). 

The  Kingdom  Pievious  to  Augustine 

(14). 
Augustine's  Doetrine  of  the  Kingdom 

(15). 


KINGDOM  OF   GOD. 

Luther  on  the  Kingdom  (I  6). 
Luther's  Euthly  Kingdom  of  Qod 

(17). 
nieoriee  of  ZwingU  end  Gkhrin  (f  8). 
Fietisn  and  the  Enlightenment  on  the 

Kingdom  (f  9). 
Kant  and  Herder  (f  10). 


In  the  teaching  of  Jesus  "  kingdom  of  God  "  is 
a  phrase  denoting  his  adherence  to  the  expectation 
of  salvation  developed  from  the  Israelitic  belief  in 
God  as  the  king  of  the  people;  although  in  modern 
systematic  theology  it  implies  a  body  of  subjects 
who  obey  a  ruler,  so  that  the  highest  good,  in  the 
religious  and  ethical  sense,  is  regarded  as  a  saving 
gift  of  God  and  as  a  common  aim  to  be  attained. 
Since,  however,  the  Oriental  kingdom  is  not  an 
organic  nation,  but  dominion  over  a  territory,  the 
dominant  idea  is  not  so  much  the  rule  of  God  over 
his  people,  as  manifested  in  their  obedience,  as  the 
realization  of  the  future  kingdom  (Isa.  lii.  7;  Ob. 
21),  overcoming  its  present  obstacles  in  favor  of  his 
people.  From  this  kingdom  mankind  shall  reap 
abundant  blessings,  though  for  its  progress  they 
can  do  nothing,  since  it  comes  only  through  the 
miraculous  intervention  of  God,  and  by  means  of  a 
total  and  sudden  change  of  the  world  (Dan.  ii.  44). 
These  deviating  concepts  of  history  and  of  system- 
atic theology,  however,  are  supplementary  rather 
than  contradictory,  since  the  realisation  of  the 
kingdom  of  God  in  favor  of  his  people  presupposes 
that  they  are  obedient  to  the  divine  governance, 
as  is  evident  from  the  prophetical  writings  (cf.  Isa. 
vi.  sqq.,  x.  20  sqq.,  xlv.  8,  Ix.  21). 

The  hope  of  the  future  *'  kingdom  of  God  "  in 
Jewish  eschatology  had  various  forms  regarding 
the  obstacles  to  God's  rule,  whom  the  kingdom  con- 
cerned, the  manner  in  which  it  was  to  be  realised, 
and  the  consequences  of  its  establish- 

I.  Jewish  ment.  The  obstacle  to  God's  rule  was 
Views  seen  at  first  in  the  oppression  of  God's 
of  the      people  by  neighboring  nations  and  by 

Khigdom.  the  imiversal  empires  which  followed 
each  other;  later  in  the  oppression  of 
the  pious  by  impious  factions  and  rulers;  subse- 
quently in  the  dominion  of  hostile  spiritual  powers, 
such  as  stars,  avenging  angels,  and  Satan;  and 
finally,  about  the  first  centiuy  B.C.,  in  the  belief 
that  the  whole  present  world  is  evil  and  doomed. 
Those  whom  the  kingdom  of  God  concerned  were 
originally  the  people  of  Israel;  then  righteous  in- 
dividuals, first  in  Israel,  and  later  also  outside  the 
chosen  people.  Its  realization  meant  primarily 
the  restitution  of  the  old  national  glory  by  the  aid 
of  God  and  the  cooperation  of  man;  but  later,  as 
conditions  became  worse,  solely  by  miraculous  di- 
vine intervention.  Finally  there  was  expected  an 
entire  change  of  all  things,  a  new  world  which  al- 
ready exists  in  heaven  and  is  brought  about  by  the 
conquest  of  Satan,  the  last  judgment,  the  resurrec- 
tion of  the  dead,  and  the  downfall  of  the  old  world. 
The  gifts  of  the  kingdom  are  partly  temporal  and 
partly  heavenly,  consisting  on  the  one  hand  in  the 
imiversal  rule  of  Israel  or  of  the  pious,  with  peace 
on  earth;  and  on  the  other  hand  in  eternal  life,  the 
cessation  of  evil,  Sabbath  rest,  and  communion 


thb  Theory  of  SefaMermMher  (|  11). 
Reooneiliation  of  Conflietiiig  Views  by 

Schleiermaeher  (f  12). 
Ritsohl's    Theory  of  the   Kingrinm 

(I  13). 
The  Kingdom  of  Qod  and  the  Chnroh 

(I  14). 

with  God  and  the  angels.  Nevertheless,  there  was 
only  a  partial  spiritualisation,  and  the  expectation 
of  the  bleastngB  of  salvation  was  still  more  or  leas 
connected  wiUi  the  idea  of  a  recompense  f  (»>  the 
fulfilment  of  the  law. 

In  the  New  Testament  both  the  old  elements  of 
Judaism  and  the  new  concepts  of  Christianity  are 
clearly  represented  by  Paul.    He  shares  with  Juda- 
ism the  pessimistic  view  of  the  present  world  which 
stands  under  the  dominion  of  Satan  (II  Cor.  iv.  4; 
ef.  GaL  i.  4;   Rom.  viii.  20  sqq.,  xii.  2);  and,  as  in 
Judaism,  only  the  righteous,  who  fulfil  the  law,  can 
inherit  the  future  kingdom  of  God  (Gal.  v.  21; 
I  Gor.  vi.  9;  I  Thess.  ii.  12,  iii.  13;  cf.  I  Cor.  xv.  50 
sqq.).    With  him,  too,  the  ''  kingdom  "  is  the  do- 
minion of  God,  who  will  be  "  all  in  all  "  (I  Cor.  xv. 
28),  and  the  just  shall  rule  with  him  (Rom.  v.  17, 
iv.  13).    He  goes  beyond  the  Jewish  conception, 
on  the  other  hand,  by  dating  the  arrival  of  the 
kingdom  from  the  coming  of  Jesus  the  Messiah,  by 
substituting  universal  human  moral  requirements 
for  spedfiodly  national  conditions,  by  spiritual- 
ising the  gifts  of  the  kingdom  (Rom.  zi.  17,  cf.  viiL 
19  sqq.),  and  by  abolishing  the  concepts  of  legal- 
ism and  reward,  which  are  replaced  by  ethical  ful- 
fihnents  (Rom.  xiv.  18;   Gal.  vi.  7  sqq.).    Whik 
these  dumges  may  still  be  considered  as  purifying 
and  completing  the  Jewish  idea,  Paul 
3.  The     differed  essentially  from  Judaisin  by 
Pauline     the  new  concept  that  the  future  world 
Doctrine,    with  its  miraculous  powera  projects 
into  the  present  world  (Rom.  viii.  24 
sqq.;  Phil.  iii.  20),  and  that  upon  earth  God  grants 
the  blessings  of  the  kingdom  to  those  who  believe 
in  C!hrist,  as  partaking  already,  in  a  sense,  oi  the 
life  of  the  world  to  come  (II  Cor.  i.  22,  v.  5,  17; 
I  Cor.  XV.  24  sqq.;  Gal.  i.  4;  Ck>L  i.  13).     Nor  does 
the  Pauline  equation  of  the  Church  and  the  king- 
dom of  Christ  (which  represents  no  essential  change 
in  the  concept,  but  only  a  divergent  view  of  the 
initiation  and  the  development  of  the  oonsunmui- 
tion)  denote  a  human  society  for  the  independent 
solution  of  ethical  problems,  much  less  a  legalis- 
tically  organised  association,  but  an  oiganism  of 
divinely  granted  powers  or  "graces,"  by  which 
God  permits  the  Church  to  grow  as  the  body  of 
Christ  (Eph.  ii.  19-22,  iv.  16).    Paul  again  tran- 
scends the  Jewish  concept  by  not  considering  these 
divine  powers  to  be  ethically  indifferent  "  graces/' 
but  by  regarding  the  moral  life  of  the  Christians  in 
sanctification  and  love  as  the  fruit  of  the  supnr 
natural   and   supramundane  power  of  the  Spirit 
(Gal.  V.  22  sqq.),  and  by  valuing  the  other  "  graces  " 
according  to  their  usefulness  for  the  moral  up- 
building of  the  Chureh  (I  Cor.  xiv.  5). 

In  consequence  of  this  projection  of  the  future 
kingdom  of  God  with  its  powers  into  the  present 
world,  the  fundamental  ethical  and  religious  ideas 


835 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDU 


TTinydoui  of  Ood 


of  the  kingdom  as,  on  the  one  hand,  an  obedient 
people  ruled  by  God,  and,  on  the  other,  as  the 
totality  of  gifta  which  God's  rule  vouchsafes  to  its 
members,  approach  each  other  much  more  closely 
than  in  the  Jewish  scheme.  The  exercise  of  the 
"  graces/'  by  which  the  kingdom  of  God  or  Christ 
is  extended,  becomes  an  ethical  task  for  the  Chris- 
tian, however  much  before  and  after  the  efiforts  of 
his  will  he  may  be  filled  with  the  consciousness  of 
his  dependence  on  the  working  of  divine  grace 
(Rom.  xii.  6-8;  I  Cor.  xii.  14  sqq.);  so  that  Paul 
calls  his  missionary  associates  '^  fellow  workers  unto 
the  kingdom  of  God  "  (Col.  iv.  11). 

The  Apocalypse,  in  like  manner,  recognizes  not 
only  a  future  kingdom  of  God  (xix.-xxi.),  but  also 
one  that  is  active  in  this  present  world.  The  be- 
lievers are  already  rulers  (i.  6,  v.  10),  though  the 
special  blessings  of  the  divine  kingdom  are  prom- 
ises and  there  is  no  organic  connection  between 
obedience  and  promise.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
Gospel  and  Epistles  of  John  set  forth  the  same  con- 
cept as  that  of  Paul,  except  for  the  individualism 
and  spiritualism  of  Hellenistic  terminology,  as  ex- 
emplified in  the  substitution  of  eternal  life  for  the 
kingdom  (except  in  John  iii.  3,  5,  xviii.  36  sqq.). 
While,  however,  Paul  makes  the  arrival  of  the 
kingdom  in  this  world  dependent  upon  the  eleva- 
tion of  Jesus  to  the  right  hand  of  God,  for  John  the 
kingdom  comes  immediately  through  the  knowl- 
edge of  God  (xvii.  3,  xviii.  37,  xiv.  9). 

In  distinction  from  Paul  and  John,  the  preach- 
ing of  Jesus  follows  the  Jewish  scheme,  in  that  he 
urges  the  will  of  man  to  the  acquisition  of  moral 
justice  by  pointing  to  the  future  kingdom,  since 
God  will  reward  such  an  attitude  alone  with  a  share 
in  his  kingdom  (Matt.  v.  1-12,  vi.  2,  33,  vii.  21, 
xviii.  3,  8  sqq.,  xix.  21,  27-29,  xxv.  34;  Luke  xii. 
35-48).  By  the  kingdom  Jesus  understood  the 
establishment  of  the  rule  of  God  in  the  immediate 
future,  with  a  general  resurrection  and  judgment 
by  a  miracle  of  God,  accompanied  with  a  renovation 
of  the  world  denoting  for  the  just  the  enjoyment 
of  an  abundance  of  blessings,  such  as  participation 
in  the  divine  governance  (Matt.  xix.  28),  a  share  in 
the  Messianic  meal  with  the  patriarchs  (Matt.  viii. 
11,  xxvi.  29),  and  the  sight  of  God,  whose  children 
they  become,  being  equal  to  the  angels  (Matt.  v. 
6,  8,  9;  Luke  xx.  36).  From  Jewish  hopes  he  drew 
the  political  and  national  factor  and 
3.  The  the  portrayal  of  physical  pleasures,  but 
Teaching  he  did  not  use  the  term  "  kingdom  of 
of  Jesofl.  God  "  to  signify  the  obedient  subjects 
of  God,  or  an  organized  eommimity  of 
such  subjects.  Whether  the  view  of  Paul  and  John 
concerning  the  projection  of  the  future  kingdom 
of  God  into  this  world  was  foreign  to  the  spirit  of 
Jesus  depends  on  the  question  whether  the  justice 
demanded  by  him  as  a  condition  for  a  share  in 
God's  kingdom  was  of  the  same  high  quality  as  the 
gifts  of  t^  kingdom;  whether  he  considered  those 
gifts  as  an  organic  completion  of  justice  or  as  a  re- 
ward which  stood  only  in  a  mechanical  relation  to 
it;  and  whether  his  preaching  was  merely  manda- 
tory, or  possessed  a  creating  and  saving  power,  so 
that  voltmtary  obedience  to  it  could  at  once  be 
felt  to  be  the  reception  of  miraculous,  morally  sa- 


ving, and  beatifying  powers  of  God.  As  to  the  first 
point,  we  know  that  Jesus  abolished  the  heteronomy 
of  the  legalistic  attitude,  and  consequently  the  basis 
of  a  mechanical  concept  of  a  future  reward,  by  lay- 
ing all  stress  upon  the  disposition  of  the  heart 
(Mark  vii.  15;  Matt.  vii.  1&-17),  by  substituting 
for  the  legalistic  relation  the  relation  of  children  to 
a  father  (Mark  x.  14  sqq.),  by  denying  any  legal 
claims  to  reward  (Matt.  xx.  1  sqq.;  Luke  xvii.  7- 
10),  by  making  God  himself  the  model  (Matt.  v. 
48),  and  by  promising  the  kingdom  of  God  to  those 
who  long  for  righteousness  (Matt.  v.  6).  At  the 
same  time,  Jesus  subordinated  temporal  rewards 
to  the  spiritual  blessings  of  the  kingdom,  so  that 
with  him  there  is  an  organic  relation  between  the 
moral  condition  in  this  world  and  the  blessings  of 
the  world  to  come.  Jesus  himself  knew  that  son- 
ship  with  God  was  a  blessed  thing  (Matt.  xL  27), 
and  he  admonished  others  to  feel  themselves  to  be 
the  children  of  God  (Matt.  x.  29-32;  Luke  x.  19). 
He  promised  rest  to  all  who  should  take  his  yoke 
upon  them  (Matt.  xi.  28-30),  and  he  urged  his  hear- 
ers to  trust  boldly  in  God  with  the  fuJl  assurance 
that  their  prayers  were  heard  (Mark  xi.  22  sqq.; 
Matt.  vii.  7),  and  to  live  in  purity  of  heart  and  in 
love  even  of  their  enemies.  It  is  thus  dear  that, 
despite  divergencies  in  terminology  and  concept, 
the  teachings  of  John  and  Paul  on  the  kingdom  of 
God  were  in  harmony  with  the  preaching  of  Jesus. 
It  is  plain  from  Matt.  xii.  28  and  Luke  x.  18-20 
that  Jesus  held  that  the  kingdom  of  God  had  al- 
ready come  in  its  religious,  though  not  in  its  ethical, 
concept;  and  in  like  manner  the  comparison  of 
John  the  Baptist  to  the  least  in  the  Idngdom  of 
heaven  (Matt.  xi.  11;  cf.  Luke  xvi.  16)  implies  that 
with  him  the  time  of  prophecy  had  ended  and  that 
of  fulfilment  begun.  Such  parables  as  those  of  the 
grain  of  mustarid  seed,  the  leaven,  and  the  tares 
also  teach  that  the  kingdom  had  already  begun, 
and  foreshadow  the  progress  of  revelation  and  of 
the  divine  power  entered  into  the  world;  while  the 
victories  over  the  powers  of  evil  and  the  divine  suc- 
cess of  his  preaching  of  the  Idngdom  also  confirmed 
his  belief. 

In  later  primitive  Christianity  the  kingdom  of 
God  was  an  exdusively  eschatological  concept,  so 
that,  according  to  Hegesippus,  lonsfolk  of  Jesus 
declared  to  Domitian  that  "  the  kingdom  of  Christ 
is  not  cosmic  or  earthly,  but  heavenly  and  angelic  at 
the  consummation  of  the  age"  (cf.  also  I  Qem. 
xlii.  3;  Hennas,  Simaitttdes,  x.  12, 8).    The  Church 
is  distinguished  from  the  kingdom  of 
4.  The     God;    s^  will  be  gathered  from  the 
Kingdom    four  comers  of  the  earth  into  the  king- 
Previous    dom  which  God  has  prepared  for  her 
to  Augus-   (Didachef  ix.  4,  x.  5).    For  Tertullian, 
tine.       Cyprian,    Justin,    and    Irenaeus    the 
characteristic  feature  of  the  coming  of 
the  kingdom  is  the  rule  of  God,  by  which  they  un- 
derstood the  discontinuance  of  their  state  of  serv- 
itude and  oppression,  and  the  enjoyment  of  a  won- 
derfully increased  fertility  of  the  earth.    On  the 
other  hand,  Lactantius  (Divinae  inMutumeSj  VII., 
xxiv.  4)  held  that  the  righteous  wouM  reign  with 
God  and  Christ  on  earth,  the  wicked  being  not  en- 
tirely destroyed,  but  doomed  to  perpetual  bondage 


wi«ig>.i<w«  of  GKkl 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOQ 


886 


and  the  objects  of  the  victory  of  God  and  the  tri- 
umph of  the  just.  Irenaeus  (Haer,,  v.  32  sqq.),  in 
opposition  to  the  Gnostic  all^orical  interpretation  of 
the  New  Testament,  understood  the  cosmic  Sabbath 
of  the  millennium  (cf.  Heb.  iv.),  and  the  heavenly 
feast  (Matt.  viii.  11)  as  the  expectation  of  the  king- 
dom, that  the  just  might  rightly  enjoy  the  reward 
of  their  patience  where  they  had  suffered  oppres- 
sion. Among  the  Greek  Fathers  it  was  Origen  who, 
under  the  influence  of  the  Greek  ideal  of  the  do- 
minion of  reason  over  the  passions,  originated  an 
ethical  and  individuahstic  concept  of  the  kingdom 
of  God  based  on  Luke  xvii.  21;  Rom.  xiv.  17,  vi. 
12;  I  Cor.  xv.  28,  but  so  modified  that  the  gift  of 
God  and  of  his  saving  blessings  transcends  ethical 
duty,  and  the  spiritual  state  of  the  Christian  is  con- 
sidered the  beginning  of  heavenly  perfection.  He 
understands  the  second  petition  of  the  Lord's 
Prayer  expressly  after  the  analogy  of  the  rule  of  a 
king  over  his  subjects  in  a  well-ordered  city,  so  that 
the  soul  must  submit  to  the  governance  of  God 
and  obey  his  spiritual  laws.  The  perfection  of  the 
kingdom  of  God,  so  that  God  will  be  all  in  all,  takes 
place  in  every  individual  when  Christ  has  con- 
quered the  enemies  in  him,  and  he  progresses  un- 
ceasingly until  knowledge,  wisdom,  and  other  vir- 
tues come  to  perfection  in  him.  The  same  thoughts 
are  found  in  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  ("  Mystagogical 
Lectures,"  v.  13)  and  Gregory  of  Nyssa  (De  arc^ 
Hone,  ii.),  while  Chrysostom,  influenced  by  the  Stoic 
idea  of  the  wise  man  as  king,  develops  the  thought 
that  with  the  coming  of  the  kingdom  the  soul  itself 
will  become  a  king,  thus  coming  into  harmony  with 
the  New-Testament  test  of  the  kingdom  of  God 
that  we  shall  acquire  dominion  in  it  (De  oraHone 
dominica  horn,).  Ephraem  (Cohoriatio  ad  pcmiten- 
tiam,  xxiv.,  cf.  ix.,  x.),  like  Johannes  Cassianus  (Co- 
hortatio,  i.  13),  following  Origen,  laid  stronger  stress 
on  the  mystic  indwelling  of  God. 

Augustine  unites  in  the  concept  of  the  kingdom 
of  God  the  two  characteristics  of  **  being  rul^  by 
God  "  and  of  "  reigning  with  God,"  the  latter,  which 
begins  after  the  resurrection,  being  the  decisive  indi- 
cation.   The  saints  or  the  just  themselves  constitute 
the  kingdom  of  God,  since  their  hearts  are  governed 
inwardly  by  Christ  or  God  (AfPL,  xxxix.  830,  832); 
but  the  kingdom,  strictly  speaking,  is  still  in  the 
future  {MPL,  xxxiv.  1814,  xxxvi.  388),  and  he  de- 
clared it  madness  to  connect  temporal  life  with  the 
kingdom  of  heaven.    With  Augustine 
5.  Augus-  the  future  "  reigning  with  God  "  had 
tine's  Doc-  no  analogy  with  a  rule  to  be  exercised 
trine  of  the  over  others  or  with  an  influence  upon 
Kingdom,   others,  but  consisted  wholly  of  the  con- 
templation  and    enjoyment   of   God. 
Nevertheless,  Augustine  gave  up  his  former  expec- 
tation of  the  millennium  and  referred  the  promises 
of  Rev.  XX.  to  the  present  (De  civUate  Dei,  xx.  9), 
so  that  the  reign  of  the  saints  with  Christ  promised 
for  the  millennium  must  exist  in  the  present,  though 
with  a  power  far  inferior  to  that  of  the  future.    The 
kingdom  consequently  implies  for  him,  as  for  Bama^ 
bas  before  him.  Sabbath  rest  (ed.  MPL,  xxxvi. 
1198).    However  personal  this  conception  of  the 
kingdom  in  which  God  rules  may  be,  Augustine  re- 
garded it  from  the  very  first  as  a  community,  a 


phase  in  the  battle  which  is  waged  in  the  course  of 
the  world  between  the  ''  kingdom  of  heaven  **  and 
the  "  kingdom  of  earth  "  or  "  of  the  devil"  On 
the  other  hand,  he  also  identified  the  empirical 
church,  which  includes  sinners,  with  the  kingdom 
of  God  (AfPZr,  xxxvi.  409,  xxxvii.  672  sqq.).  This 
organization  is  for  him  an  instrument  of  the  rule 
of  God,  and  the  activity  of  its  ministers  is  useful  to 
the  kingdom,  even  if  their  personal  conduct  is  evil 
(AfPL,  xxxvi.  1169).  It  was  not  strange,  there- 
fore, that  scholasticism  should  make  Augustine's 
ethical  "Church  of  conflict"  the  "Church  mili- 
tant," and  in  like  manner  he  influenced  the  course 
of  medieval  development  by  his  idea  that  the  secu- 
lar state  should  submit  to  the  guidance  of  the 
Church,  which  embodies  true  justice  for  the  com- 
munity. Alongside  the  concept  of  the  kingdom  of 
God  as  relating  to  organized  society,  there  developed 
after  Augustine  the  idea  of  the  kingdom  in  relation 
to  the  individual.  St.  Bernard,  like  the  Greek 
Fathers  (cf .  Thomas  Aquinas,  CaJtena  aurea,  on  Matt, 
vi.  and  Luke  xi.)  and  Augustine,  distinguished,  on 
the  basis  of  Luke  xvii.  21,  between  a  free  submis- 
sion of  man's  will  to  the  will  of  God  in  the  present 
world,  and  the  future  reign  with  Christ.  Bona- 
ventura  (StimuluB  amoris,  iii.  17)  regards  devotion 
to  God  and  the  experience  of  salvation  as  the  high- 
est good,  which  is  the  indwelling  of  God;  while  ac- 
cording to  Tauler  (Predigten,  Frankfort,  1703,  774, 
926,  1202,  1206),  the  kingdom  of  God  is  God  him- 
self, dwelling  in  the  soul  in  his  own  nature  and 
essence,  with  all  his  heavenly  gifts  and  treasures. 

Luther  follows,  on  the  whole,  the  thoughts  of 
Augustine,  though  with  important  modifications. 
He  treats  the  kingdom  of  God  from  the  standpoint 
of  the  law  and  the  Gospel,  the  law  expressing  the 
eternal  destiny  of  man,  which  is  realized  by  the 
Gospel,  BO  that  life  according  to  the  law  is  life  in  the 
kingdom  of  God.     In  this  connection 

6.  Luther  he  also  uses  the  analogy  of  a  command- 
on  the      ing  king  and  an  obedient  people.    The 

Kingdom,  life  of  voluntary  submission  to  the  will 
of  God  is  at  the  same  time  the  blessed 
life,  so  that  "  blessedness  means  that  God  rules  in 
us,  and  we  are  his  kingdom  "  (Werke,  Erlangen  ed., 
xxi.  184).  Thus  the  kingdom  of  God  as  the  ethical 
rule  of  God  is  for  him  tfa^s  highest  good  in  the  eth- 
ical as  well  as  in  the  religious  sense.  Man  is  under 
the  dominion  of  sin,  but  the  Gospel  comes  as  a  me»- 
sage  of  redemption  through  Christ,  whereby  the 
law  is  fulfilled,  or  the  rule  of  God  is  realized  ac- 
cording to  its  two  factors,  beginning  in  the  present 
and  completed  in  the  future.  Upon  earth  this  is 
called  the  kingdom  of  Christ,  but  for  Luther  there 
is  no  real  difference  between  the  kingdom  of  Christ 
and  that  of  God.  Owing  to  Luther's  concept  of 
redemption,  he  differs  from  Augustine  in  r^ard  to 
the  realization  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  While  both 
regard  the  kingdom  as  voluntary  devotion  un- 
trammeled  by  the  law,  and  as  a  miraculous  gift  of 
the  spirit  of  God,  Luther  derives  the  effect  of  this 
change,  which  still  takes  place  through  the  miracu- 
lous powers  of  God,  psychologicaUy  from  the  indi- 
vidual assurance  of  forgiveness  through  Christ. 
Moreover,  in  consequence  of  his  doctrine  that,  more 
than  all  human  actions,  faith  resting   upon    the 


887 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Xincdom  of  Ood 


pledge  of  forgiveness  in  Christ  is  the  certainty  of 
salvation,  the  faith  of  the  Christian  means  for 
Luther  experience  of  salvation  in  a  way  quite  dif- 
ferent from  that  of  Augustine,  and  thus  for  him  the 
future  ''  reigning  with  God  "  coincides  with  the 
present  "  nde  by  God  "  both  in  time  and  in  con- 
tent. Luther  extends  the  thought  of  the  royal 
dominion  of  the  believers  over  all  creatures  and 
over  heaven  and  earth,  in  the  sense  that  the  assur- 
ance of  the  fatherhood  of  God  includes  the  assur- 
ance that  all  things  work  together  for  good,  i.e.,  for 
eternal  life.  Thus  by  his  concept  of  the  kingdom, 
which  is  a  share  in  the  dominion  of  God  or  Christ 
over  all,  he  avoids  the  disregard  of  the  good  and 
evil  of  this  world  which  had  been  taught  by  Augus- 
tine and,  at  first,  by  himself. 

As  the  kingdom  of  God  consists  of  the  Christians 
over  whom  and  in  favor  of  whom  God  or  Christ 
rules,  and  who  rule  with  him,  it  was  but  natural 
for  Luther  to  regard  the  kingdom  on  earth  as  in  an 
extensive  and  intensive  state  of  growth,  so  that  it 

is  the  duty  of  every  Christian  to  in- 

7.  Luther's  crease  the  number  of  the  faithful  or  to 

Earthly     build  up  God's  kingdom  (Erlangen  ed., 

Kingdom    viii.  241,  xii.  319,  xxxiii.  344,  xxxix. 

of  God.     14,  1.  153,  236).    But  Luther  did  not 

go  far  enough  to  regard  the  kingdom 
of  God  as  the  highest  ethical  good  or  as  an  all-com- 
prehending ethiod  end.  This  was  because,  in  the 
first  place,  his  ethics  was  not  teleological  but  ex- 
periential, and  in  the  second  place  because  he  did 
not  subordinate  the  spheres  of  the  economic  and 
political  states  which,  together  with  the  Church, 
make  up  his  ideal  of  life  on  earth,  to  a  common  and 
eternal  purpose.  The  secular  spheres  and  their 
various  vocations  have  for  him  only  earthly  aims, 
and  their  works  are  governed  by  natural  law.  He 
did  not  think  of  the  possibility  and  necessity  of 
elevating  earthly  callings  to  a  higher  sphere  of 
morality  by  means  of  Christianity;  yet  he  did  not 
contradict  the  view  of  Melanchthon,  who  saw  in 
the  good  works  of  Christians  in  their  secular  call- 
ings a  *'  policy  of  Christ  to  show  his  kingdom  be- 
fore the  world."  For  Luther,  as  for  others,  the 
realization  of  the  kingdom  of  Christ  was  the  Church, 
which,  however,  he  held  to  be  the  congregation  of 
believers  whom  Christ  rules  through  the  Word  and 
the  Spirit.  On  the  other  hand,  he  recognized  the 
kingdom  of  God  wherever  faith  and  love  were  mani- 
fest in  earthly  callings,  and  he  held  the  Chureh  to 
be  the  kingdom  only  where  her  activity  truly  pro- 
ceeded from  faith  and  love  (Erlangen  ed.,  xxiii. 
385). 

With  ZwingH  the  ethical  conception  of  the  king- 
dom of  God  preponderated.  For  him  it  is  con- 
tained, in  the  first  place,  in  preaching,  i.e.,  in  the 
offering  of  heavenly  blessings  and  of  the  grace 
vouchsafed  in  Christ,  and,  in  the  second  place,  in 
the  Chureh,  to  which  preaching  caUs.    Where  the 

Gospel  is  received,  there  is  established 
8.  Theories  the  kingdom  of  God,  which  consists  of 
of  ZwingU  faith,  piety,  justice,  and  innocence,  so 
and  Calvin,  that  it  coincides  with  those  who  are 

regenerated  through  Christ  {Operas  ed. 
H.  Schuler  and  J.  Schulthess,  Zurich,  1828-42,  vi. 
210,  236,  239,  289,  302,  352,  390,  609,  693);  and  he 
VI.~-22 


emphasizes  the  view  that  the  "  people  of  God  "  are 
characterized  simply  and  solely  by  their  striving 
to  have  the  kingdom  of  God  within  them.  With 
Calvin  the  fundamental  characteristic  of  the  king- 
dom was  the  rule  of  God,  in  the  sense  of  the  sub- 
ordination of  man  to  the  divine  will  (CommenUxrii 
in  N.  T„  ed.  A.  Tholuck,  Berlm,  183^-34,  i.  167). 
It  is  not  in  the  future,  but  begins  in  faith  upon  earth 
through  the  Word  and  the  secret  working  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  (ib.,  i.  167,  iii.  44,  336).  It  is,  therefore, 
a  product  of  divine  as  well  as  human  activity;  nor 
did  it  first  come  with  Christ,  whose  office  it  was 
"  to  spread  through  all  the  world  the  kingdom  of 
God,  which  was  then  restricted  to  a  comer  of  Ju- 
daea "  (ib.,  i.  287).  The  future  kingdom  is  thus 
the  completion  of  the  one  begun  on  earth,  and  is 
characterized  by  continued  progress  (ib.,  i.  167; 
CR,  XXX.  667).  Unlike  Luther,  Calvin  sought  to 
bring  the  kingdom  of  God  to  expression  in  the  ex- 
ternal forms  of  life.  The  realization  of  the  rule  of 
God  is,  in  the  eyes  of  Calvin  also,  the  Chureh,  and 
the  commimion  of  saints  is  the  test  of  the  empirical 
chureh  (ed.  A.  Tholuck,  i.  146,  262,  ii.  198;  Cfl, 
XXX.  757).  He  again  dififered  from  Luther  in  so 
far  as  he  was  inclined  to  regard  the  constitution  of 
the  New  Testament  as  an  eternal  law  given  by  God, 
and  to  regard  church  discipline  as  an  order  insti- 
tuted by  God  for  the  conservation  of  the  spiritual 
state  (CR,  776  sqq.,  867  sqq.,  891  sqq.);  while  he 
carefully  distinguished  political  from  ecclesiastical 
dominion  (C/2,  xxv.  1092  sqq.). 

In  Pietism  (q.v.)  the  longing  for  the  betterment 
of  religious  conditions  led  to  a  distinction  between 
the  kingdom  of  God  and  the  official  Chureh  or 
Christian  morality.  Spener  advocated  the  expec- 
tation of  better  times  for  the  Church,  interpreting 
this  as  a  preparatory  triumph  of  the 

9.  Pietism  glorious  kingdom  of  Christ;   a  time  of 
and  the     the  expansion  and  awakening  of  the 

Enlighten-  Church,  which  was  to  begin  with  the 
ment  on  the  destruction  of  Babylon    (the  Roman 

Kingdom.  Catholic  Chureh);  and  the  conversion 
of  the  Jews.  The  younger  generation 
of  Pietists,  like  J.  J.  Moser,  dated  the  bc^nning  of 
the  kingdom  from  the  movement  of  Spener,  think- 
ing of  the  contrast  between  traditional  and  genuine 
Christianity.  Emancipation  from  dogmatics,  a 
deeper  study  of  the  Bible,  and  its  historical  inter- 
pretation led  to  the  tenet  that  the  Scriptures  con- 
tain the  records  of  a  history  of  revelation  and  re- 
ligion passing  through  a  series  of  developments 
comprised  under  the  general  term  ''  kingdom  of 
God,*'  a  theory  represented  especially  by  Bengel, 
C.  A.  Crusius.  and  Johann  Jakob  Hess.  The  period 
of  the  Enlightenment  (q.v.)  emphasized  primarily 
the  active  ethical  side  in  the  kingdom  of  God  and  its 
analogy  with  a  conununity  of  obedient  subjects, 
but  did  not  overlook  the  religious  side,  since  it  was 
only  through  God's  government  of  the  world  that 
the  harmony  between  the  sphere  of  morality  and 
that  of  nature  was  accomplished,  or  that  the  con>- 
prehensive  union  of  humanity  was  effected  which 
was  necessary  for  the  realization  of  the  moral  idea. 
Owing  to  the  indelible  goodness  of  the  heart,  it  was 
held  that  there  is  no  sharp  distinction  between  the 
history  of  natural  humanity  and  the  histoiy  of  sal- 


Xiaffdom  of  Gtod 
Kinffo 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


838 


vation,  so  that  the  kingdom  of  God  prpgreaaes  even 
outside  Judaism  and  Christianity.  Leibnitz  in- 
terpreted the  "  kingdom  of  grace  **  as  the  dominion 
of  God  in  the  spirit-world,  white  Semter  understood 
it  as  the  new  spiritual  reign  of  God  in  the  Church, 
and  Reinhard  conceived  it  as  an  ethical  brother- 
hood established  by  Jesus  to  include  all  peoples. 

Kant,  on  the  other  hand,  made  morality  entirely 
independent,  even  regeneration  being  an  act  of  the 
individual.  Morality  leads,  however,  to  a  religious 
faith  of  reason  in  so  far  as  the  duty  is  felt  to  aim 
at  a  highest  good.  The  power  of  morality  is  insuf- 
ficient to  realize  this;    and  it  must, 

xo.  Kant  therefore,  postulate  a  moral  niter  of 
and        the  world,  since  a  society  must  be  es- 

Herder.  tablished  according  to  the  laws  of  vir- 
tue for  the  protection  of  the  individual 
against  the  evil  prindpte  which  surrounds  him. 
This  ethical  community,  which  can  be  realized  only 
as  a  people  of  God  under  laws  of  virtue,  Kant  calls 
the  kingdom  of  God  on  earth,  and  uses  its  idea  as 
a  test  for  the  criticism  and  purification  of  the  em- 
pirical Church.  Herder  considered  the  kingdom 
of  God  to  be  the  development  of  humanity  as  it 
proceeds  under  the  laws  of  nature  or  of  the  good- 
ness, power,  and  wisdom  of  God,  who  furnishes  the 
means  and  endowments;  and  he  was  the  first  con- 
sciously to  combine  the  ethical  and  religious  sense 
of  Christianity  with  the  Greek  universal  and  free 
development  of  the  entire  personality. 

The  founder  of  the  specific  use  of  the  concept 
of  the  kingdom  of  God  in  modem  theology  was 
Schleiermacher.  The  idea  of  the  kingdom  of  God 
forms  the  basis  of  his  teaching,  governing  his  sys- 
tem both  of  doctrine  and  of  ethics.  The  kingdom 
of  God  is  the  purpose  and  realization  of  redemp- 
tion; and  it  is  not  only  the  highest  purpose  of  ac- 
tion,  but   also   the   highest   blessing 

IX.  The  {ChrUOiche  SiUe,  Berlin,  1843,  p.  78). 
Theoiy  of  He  conceives  the  kingdom  of  God  after 

ScUeier-    the  analogy  of  the  relation  between 

macher.  a  ruling  king  and  his  obedient  sub- 
jects, yet  so  that  the  king's  will  is  the 
will  of  all  who  serve  and  live  under  him.  The  man- 
ner in  which  the  rule  of  God  (or  the  being  of  God) 
is  exercised  in  man  is  consciousness  of  God,  which 
is  real  only  as  motivating  activity  or,  more  specifi- 
cally (since  God  is  the  supreme  all-embracing  unity), 
as  the  love  of  all  mankind  (Glaubenslehre,  Berlin, 
1821-22,  §1  90,  94).  This  consciousness  of  God 
raises  man  above  the  world,  and  through  it  is  real- 
ized the  further  progress  of  the  kingdom  of  God 
throughout  the  earth.  Unlike  Kant,  Schleier- 
macher not  only  conceived  moral  activity  as  im- 
mediately religious,  as  having  its  motive  in  the 
consciousness  of  God;  but  he  was  also  abte  to  un- 
derstand human  activity  as  the  working  of  the 
Divine,  in  virtue  of  his  ethical  fundamental  con- 
cept of  the  highest  good.  By  this  he  understood 
such  a  result  of  moral  activity  as  both  included  this 
activity  within  itself  and  propagated  it.  Never- 
theless, Schleiermacher's  restriction  of  the  blessed- 
ness arising  from  the  consciousness  of  God  to  those 
filled  with  the  love  of  all  mankind  was,  at  least  in 
terminology,  an  ethical  narrowing  of  the  concept 
of  the  immanent  kingdom  of  God.    For  Schleier- 


macher the  realization  of  the  kingdom  of  God  was 
the  work  of  Christ,  in  so  far  as  he,  through  the 
strength  and  bliss  of  his  consciousness  of  God,  ez- 
erds^  a  creative  power  of  attraction  which  origi- 
nated a  common  life  ruled  by  the  same  impulse  of 
divine  consciousness;  since  before  Christ  there  had 
never  been  so  great  a  power  of  pure  consciousnefis 
of  God,  and  hence  no  soctety  comprising  all  man- 
kind. 

In  endeavoring  to  harmonize  Christian  tradition 
with  the  point  of  view  of  historical  development, 
Schteiermacher  saw,  on  the  one  hand,  a  course  of 
evolution,  first  realized  in  Christ,  and,  on  the  other 
hand,  he  looked  upon  conditions  before  Christ  as 
a  universal  life  of  sin,  i.e.,  an  impediment  of  human 
nature  contrary  to  its  destiny,  and  upon  the  work 
of  Christ  in  founding  the  universal  life  of  the  king- 
dom of  God  as  redemption.  For  both 
X3.  Recon-  points  of  view  he  presupposed  the 
cUiation  of  original,  or  indelible,  perfection  of 
Conflicting  man  and  the  world.  He  thus  shared 
Views  by  the  vfew  of  primitive  Christianity,  re- 
Schteier-  garding  a  kingdom  of  evil  opposed  to 
macher.  the  kingdom  of  God,  even  though  he 
rejected  the  rule  of  a  personal  devil, 
and  replaced  the  Pauline  view  of  **  the  flesh "  and 
Augustine's  doctrine  of  original  sin  by  that  of  uni- 
versal sin;  but  he  contradicted  himself  by  consider- 
ing sin  a  necessary  step  in  development.  The  king- 
dom of  God  becomes  real  through  redemption  from 
sin  and  evil.  The  consciousness  of  God,  given  by 
Christ  to  the  believer,  is  pure  and  blessed  will  di- 
rected toward  the  kingdom  of  God;  but  this  con- 
tinual jnpulse  toward  the  kingdom  of  God  becomes 
real  in  tl»B  individual  only  in  so  far  as  the  spirit  of 
the  imiversal  life  founded  by  Christ  becomes  his 
own  impulse  (Olaubenslekre,  §  121).  This  universal 
life  of  the  kingdom  of  God  coincided  for  Schteier- 
macher with  his  concept  of  the  Chureh,  since  for 
him  the  existence  of  the  Church  was  a  matter  of 
faith  in  Christ,  who  alone  can  be  sure  that  in  a 
world  of  sin  and  evil  the  empirical  Church  is  a  place 
of  goodness  and  salvation.  His  position  here  is 
similar  to  that  of  Luther  in  so  far  as  he  too  held 
that  the  kingdom  of  God  can  not  be  tested  by  the 
legal  organization  of  the  Church  and  does  not  coin- 
cide with  the  empirical  Chureh.  White  there  is  a 
wide  divergence  between  the  concept,  both  in  primi- 
tive Christianity  and  later,  that  the  inmianent  king- 
dom of  God  comes  to  pass  through  the  miraculous 
power  of  the  Spirit  proceeding  from  the  exalted 
Christ,  and  Schleiermacher's  view  that  the  personal 
life  of  Christ  on  earth  became  the  motivating  power 
of  the  universal  spirit  of  the  universal  life,  this  di- 
vei^gence  is  based  merely  on  a  changed  psychology. 
On  the  other  hand,  there  is  an  essential  limitation 
of  Christian  hope  when  it  is  reduced  to  an  expecta- 
tion of  infinite  organic  progress,  with  a  rejection  of 
the  eternal  perfection  of  the  individual  and  the  mass. 
Schleiermacher  marked,  however,  an  important 
development  not  only  in  the  doctrine  of  faith,  but 
also  in  the  doctrine  of  ethics,  since  the  doctrine  of 
faith  developed  for  him  into  the  ethical  impulse  to 
do  all  that  is  in  our  power  for  the  realization  of  the 
kingdom  of  God,  while  in  the  religious  satisfaction 
granted  by  God  is  found  a  sufficient  motive  for  mo- 


339 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Kingdom  of  Qod 
Kinffo 


rality.  At  the  same  time  it  becomes  possible  to 
harmonuse  the  divergent  incentives  to  morality  pre- 
sented in  the  New  Testament,  and  to  blend  in  the 
concept  of  a  single  moral  highest  good  the  two  pre- 
vious varieties  of  Christian  ethics,  the  theory  of 
duty  and  the  theory  of  virtue.  It  likewise  obvi- 
ates the  danger  of  quietism  in  case  there  is  no  end 
to  stimulate  the  will,  and,  finally,  it  affords  a  basis 
of  uniting  early  Christian  and  pre-Christian  ethics. 
Ritschl  followed  Schleiermacher,  but  deepened 
his  thoughts  by  a  closer  approach  to  the  New  Tes- 
tament and  to  Luther.  He  took  his  stand  in  the 
historical  life  of  the  body  of  believers,  which  is  as- 
sured that  it  is  established  through  the  revelation 
of  the  free  grace  of  God  in  Christ  which 
13.  Ritschl'B  brings  forgiveness  of  sins.  Like  Schlei- 
Theoiy  ermacher,  he  united  the  recognition 
of  the  of  a  moral  development  which  cul- 
Kingdom.  minates  in  Christ  with  the  concept  of 
sin,  but  to  him  sin  was  more  than  im- 
perfect development,  it  was  the  contradiction  of 
good,  and  its  judgment  as  our  own  action  and  guilt 
was  not  phenomenological,  as  it  was  with  Schleier- 
macher, but  inherent,  and  according  to  the  judg- 
ment of  God.  The  spiritual  movement  of  believers 
proceeds  in  two  directions,  in  the  specifically  re- 
ligious function  of  the  consciousness  of  reconcilia- 
tion with  God,  and  in  the  moral  fimction  of  activ- 
ity for  the  kingdom  of  God.  This  kingdom  Ritschl 
understood  after  the  analogy  of  a  people  that  heart- 
ily obeys  its  ruler;  the  will  of  God,  however,  he  re- 
garded not  as  a  siun  of  norms,  but  as  a  uniform 
purpose.  For  both  Schleiemoacher  and  Ritschl, 
the  kingdom  of  God  is  the  highest  good,  not  only 
as  a  problem  to  be  solved  progressively  by  the  ac- 
tivity of  all  mankind,  but  also  as  a  religious  good, 
as  a  gift  and  work  of  God,  and  as  something  that 
makes  life  and  blessedness.  Although  Ritschl  was 
rightly  led  by  Kaftan  to  emphasize  not  only  the 
divinely  fixed  purpose  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  but 
also  the  divine  blessings  to  be  enjoyed,  he  justly 
refused  to  speak  with  Kaftan  of  two  sides  of  the 
kingdom  of  God,  of  an  ethical  side  by  which  man 
faces  the  world,  and  a  mystical  side  by  which  he 
retires  from  the  world;  for  not  only  does  the  supei^ 
mundane  kingdom  of  God  in  the  New  Testament 
include  the  ethical  side,  but  Kaftan's  idea  leads  to 
quietism. 

The  ethical  results  of  Schleiermacher's  concept 
of  the  kingdom  of  God  were  fully  accepted  by 
Ritschl,  and  he  was  thus  enabled  to  obviate  a  dual- 
ism between  the  moral  requirements  of  holiness 
and  justice  on  the  one  hand,  and  love  on  the  other, 
by  recognizing  love,  as  directed  toward  the  ends 
of  the  kingdom  of  God,  to  be  itself  the  moral  will. 
He  likewise  removed  Luther's  and  Schleiermacher's 
lack  of  clearness  in  defining  the  relation  of  the  king- 
dom of  God  to  the  Church  by  distin- 
14.  The    guishing  between  the  religious,  ethical, 
Kkigdom    and  legal  concepts  of  the  Church.    In 
of  God      so  far  as  both  are  regarded  as  the  work- 
and  the     ing  of  God,  the  Chiirch  and  the  king- 
ChurdL     dom  of  God  coincide;    they  are  both 
the  siun  total  of  persons  who  have 
been  transposed  by  the  Gospel  of  Christ  into  the 
life  of  an  ethically  active  faith,  independently  of 


any  legal  organization.  The  Church  has  the  special 
duty  of  worship,  acknowledgment,  and  education; 
the  kingdom  of  God  that  of  the  organization  of  hu- 
manity through  love.  The  legal  organization  of 
the  Church  is  only  a  means  for  the  solution  of  her 
ethical  problems.  If  systematic  theology  retains 
the  concept  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  it  must  always 
be  in  objective  continuity  not  only  with  theology 
since  Origen,  but  also  with  primitive  Christianity 
although  its  formulas  must  be  amended  by  modern 
historical  knowledge.  (J.  GoTTScHicKt.) 

Bibuoorapht:  A  review  of  the  subject  is  given  in  J.  Weiss, 
Die  Idee  dee  Reiehee  Oattee  in  der  Theologie,  Giessen,  1901. 
Much  of  the  literature  under  Mebbiah;  Parables;  and 
BiBUCAL  Theoloot  treats  the  subject  (especially  the 
discuBflions  by  Weias,  Holtsmann,  and  Beyschlac)  as  do 
many  of  the  treatises  on  the  life  of  Christ.  Consult  fur- 
ther: Sohilrer.  Geechichte,  u.  496-556,  En«.  transl.,  II., 
ii  126  sqq.;  F.  Theremin,  Lehre  vam  gdtUichen  Reich, 
Berlin.  1823;  K.  Wittichen.  Die  Idee  dee  Reiehee  OotUe, 
Gdttingen.  1872;  J.  S.  Candlish,  The  Kingdom  of  God 
BiblieaUy  and  HietonoaUy  Conaidered,  Edinburgh,  1884; 
G.  Wilson,  The  Kingdom  of  Ood  .  .  .  According  io  the 
Inepired  Recorde,  Bloomington,  111.,  1888;  A.  B.  Bruce. 
The  Kingdom  of  God;  or  Chriat'e  Teachinge  according  to 
the  Synoptical  GoepeU,  Edinburgh,  1889;  E.  Issel.  Die 
Lehre  vom  Reith  Gottee,  Leyden,  1891;  O.  SchmoUer.  Die 
Lehre  vom  Reidi  Gottee,  ib.  1891;  E.  Haupt,  in  TSK,  Ixv 
(1892);  Bering,  in  ZeiUchrift  fUr  Theologie  und  Kirche. 
1892;  O.  Holtimann,  Neuteetamentliche  ZeitgeechichU, 
new  ed.,  TQbingen.  1906;  G.  Schnedermann,  Jeeu  Ver- 
kUndigung  und  Lehre  vom  Reich  Gottee,  2  parts,  Leipsic, 
1893-95;  H.  Holland,  God'e  City  and  the  Coming  of  the 
Kingdom,  London,  1894;  L.  Tolstoi,  The  Kingdom  of  God 
ie  within  you.  New  York,  1894,  and  often;  L.  Paul,  Die 
Voretellunget:  vom  Meeeiae  und  vom  Gotieereich  bei  den 
SynopHkem,  Bonn,  1895;  A.  Titius,  Jeeu  Lehre  vom  Reiche 
Gottee,  Freiburg,  1895;  R.  Belaney.  Kingdom  of  God  on 
Earth.  London,  1896;  Kldpper,  in  ZWT,  1897;  F.  Krop, 
La  Peneie  de  Jleue  eur  le  royaume  de  Dieu,  Paris,  1897; 
J.  Soh&fer,  Dae  Reich  Gottee  im  Lichi  der  Parabeln,  Mainj, 
1897;  R.  Wegener,  RitedUe  Idee  dee  Reiehee  Gottee,  Leip- 
sic, 1897;  G.  Dalmann.  Die  Worte  Jeeu,  pp.  75-113. 
Leipsic,  1898;  A.  JaUcher,  Die  Gleiehniereden  Jeeu,  vol. 
ii.,  Freiburg.  1899;  W.  Baldensperger,  Dae  Selbeibewueet- 
aein  Jeeu,  Strasburg.  1900;  J.  Weiss,  Die  Predigt  Jeeu 
vom  Reich  Gottee,  GOttingen,  1900;  W.  Bousset,  Die  Re- 
ligion dee  Judenihume  im  neuteetamentlichen  ZeitaUer,  pp. 
199-276,  Berlin,  1903;  P.  Vols,  JUdieche  Eeehatologie  von 
Daniel  hie  Akiba,  ii  27,  42-48,  Tubingen,  1903;  P.  Wemie, 
Die  Reiehgotteehoffnung  in  den  dlteeten  chrieUichen  Dokun 
menien  tmd  bei  Jeeue,  ib.  1903;  W.  Bouaset,  Jeeue,  pp.  71- 
98.  New  York,  1906;  J.  BOhmer,  Der  religionegeechiehUiehe 
Rahmen  dee  Reiehee  Gottee,  Leipsic,  1909. 

KHIGO,  THOMAS  HANSEN:  Danifih  bishop 
and  hymn-writer;  b.  at  Slangerup  (15  m.  n.n.w.  of 
Copenhagen)  1634;  d.  at  Odense,  island  of  FUnen, 
Oct.  14,  1703.  He  studied  at  the  University  of 
Copenhagen,  being  graduated  in  1654,  and  for  some 
time  acted  as  tutor  in  private  families.  In  1661  he 
was  appointed  vicar  to  the  pastor  at  Kirke  Hel- 
singe  (50  m.  s.w.  of  Copenha^n),  and  in  1668  he 
was  ordained  minister  at  his  native  town,  where 
his  poetic  activity  began.  At  first  he  essayed  pa- 
triotic poems,  but  later  devoted  himself  almost  en- 
tirely to  the  writing  of  hymns,  and  in  1674  the  first 
part  of  his  Aandelige  Sjunge  Chor  ("  Spiritual  Song 
Choir  ")  appeared;  followed  in  1681  by  part  ii. 
This  work  consists  of  a  collection  of  beautiful  hymns 
several  of  which  are  still  popular  in  the  Danish 
Church.  In  1677  Kingo  was  appointed  bishop  of 
Sicaland.  Charged  by  the  government  with  the 
compilation  of  a  new  hymn-book,  he  edited  (1699) 
the    so-called    Kingo'a  Paalmdwg  which  contains 


KlnvS]  Books  of 
Sinffuiip  in  Israel 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


840 


eighty-five  of  his  own  oompositioDs,  and  which  is 
still  used  in  various  parts  of  Dennutfk  and  Norway. 
Kingo  was  especially  renowned  for  his  beautiful 
Easter  hymns,  in  one  of  which  he  symbolises  the 
resurrection  of  Jesus  by  the  ''golden  sun  which 
breaks  through  the  dark  douds."  He  was  influ- 
ential also  in  causing  light  and  tuneful  melodies  to 
be  adapted  to  the  requirements  of  the  Church. 

(F.  Nni^BNt.) 
BnuoGBAPHT:   There  is  a  bLocimpliy  by  R.  Petenen,  Co- 
,1887. 


KDIGS,  BOOKS  OF. 

Contents  and  View-point      Hktoridty  and  Chronology 

(I  1)  (I  8). 

Date  and  Souroee  (|  2.)  The  Text  (|  4). 

The  two  books  which  follow  Samuel  and  precede 
Chronicles  in  the  English  version  were  originally  one 
book,  but  were  divided  in  the  Septuagint  and  the 
Vulgate;  in  Daniel  Bombeig's  Hebrew  Bible  the 
division  was  adopted  for  the  Hebrew.  The  books 
divide  into  three  parts.  I  Kings  i.-xi.  contains  the 
account  of  David's  death  with  Solomon's  accession 
and  the  story  of  his  reign,  including  the  account  of 
the  building  of  the  temple  and  of  the  internal  and 
external  policies  inaugurated   by  him;    I   Kings 

ziL-II  Kings  xvii.  contains  the  syn- 

z.  Contents  chronistic  account  of  the  two  king- 

and  View-  doms  of  Judah  and  Israel  to  the  fall 

point       of  the  latter;    II   Kings  xviii.-xxv. 

continues  the  history  of  the  southern 
kingdom  to  the  Babylonian  exile.  The  first  two 
chapters  of  I  Kings  belong  rather  to  the  preceding 
narrative  beginning  with  II  Sam.  ix.  and  giving 
the  story  of  David's  reign,  and  chap.  iii.  begins  a 
narrative  different  from  that  which  precedes.  The 
form  is  neither  that  of  a  chronicle  of  external  events 
nor  a  political  history,  but  rather  an  account  based 
on  a  religious  conception  of  the  relation  of  the  people 
to  Yahweh  and  the  connection  between  its  unfaith- 
fulness and  the  destruction  which  befell  both  king- 
doms (II  Kings  xvii.  7  sqq.).  That  the  promise  to 
the  house  of  David  (I  Kings  xi.  32,  36,  39)  was 
not  to  fail  appears  to  have  been  confirmed  in  the 
view  of  the  author  by  the  fact  that  Jehoiachin 
in  his  exile  was  restored  to  honor,  this  being  a 
pledge  that  God  would  keep  his  promise  to  his 
people.  The  keynote  is  struck  in  the  mention  of 
Solomon's  cult  of  the  high  places  and  the  relation 
of  each  king  of  Judah  to  this  cult  is  specifically 
noted,  while  throughout  runs  the  relation  of  the 
people  to  prophetic  teachings,  this  last  especially 
characteristic  of  these  books.  The  point  of  view  of 
the  editor  of  the  sources  from  which  the  book  was 
compiled  is  unmistakably  that  of  the  Deuterono- 
mist  and  preexilic  prophecy;  vis.,  that  the  cause  of 
the  destruction  of  the  kingdoms  was  the  evei^re- 
newed  cult  of  the  high  places  and  the  idolatry  con- 
nected with  it.  Yet  it  is  not  to  be  maintained,  with 
Wellhausen,  that  the  priestly  view  is  excluded  and 
that  there  is  no  knowledge  shown  of  the  distinction 
between  Levites  and  priests  or  of  the  Mosaic  taber- 
nacle (I  King  vii.  4),  and  that  consequently  the 
chronicler's  representation  is  to  be  set  aside.  Simi- 
larly the  assertion  that  the  Aaronic  line  of  priests  has 
no  mention  either  overlooks  the  Zadokite  succession 
which  came  in  with  the  supersession  of  Abiathar 


(I  Kings  ii.-26-27)  and  continued  in  the  Zadok- 
Eleazar  line  till  the  exile,  or  attempts  to  nullify  it  by 
regarding  that  line  as  not  Aaronic  on  the  ground  that 
I  Sam.  ii.  27  sqq.  (asserted  to  be  a  prophecy  after 
the  event)  predicted  the  extinction  of  the  Aaronic 
line;  but  this  prophecy  affected  only  the  house  of  Eli 
and  not  the  entire  priesthood  (cf.  II  Sam.  xv.  24 
for  the  Zadokite-Levite  conception).  The  dis- 
tinction between  priest  and  Levite  as  made  in 
Deut.  xviii.  3, 6,  is  certainly  preexilic. 

The  terminus  a  quo  for  the  final  redaction  of  the 
book  is  set  by  the  mention  of  the  restoration  of 
Jehoiachin  to  honor  (II  Kings  xxv.  27sqq.)  in  561  B.C. 
But  the  original  author  must  have  worked  before 
the  exile  about  600  b.c.  under  Jehoiakim,  who  is 
the  latest  king  in  connection  with  whom  occurs  the 
usual  Deuteronomic  formula  closing 
2.  Date  and  the  account  of  a  reign.     A  second 

Sources,  editing  is  seen  in  the  passage  II  Kings 
xvii.  1^21,  still  before  the  exile  of 
Judah.  From  this  second  hand  proceeded  the  syn- 
chronistic data  given  for  the  two  kingdoms,— 
materials  not  found  in  the  sources  employed  by 
the  first  editors.  Reference  to  these  sources  is  very 
characteristic  of  the  whole  work.  Thus  there  is 
note  of  the  book  of  the  acts  of  Solomon  (I.,  xi.  41), 
fourteen  references  to  the  book  of  the  Chronicles  of 
the  kings  of  Judah,  and  seventeen  to  the  book  of 
the  Chronicles  of  the  kings  of  Israel.  These  have 
been  supposed  to  be  the  official  records  of  the  re- 
spective kingdoms,  but  the  frequent  changes  of 
dynasty  in  the  northern  kingdom  make  this  sup- 
position untenable.  They  must  rather  have  been 
works  which  indeed  employed  official  documents  and 
sources  but  were  freer  handling  of  the  materials 
than  were  official  records.  From  such  sources  were 
obtained  the  statistical  data  such  as  the  age  of  the 
king  at  accession,  the  length  of  his  reign  and  the 
political  situation.  It  is  also  debatable  whether 
the  editor  had  in  mind  two  works  as  sources  (for 
Israel  and  for  Judah)  or  one  in  two  parts.  Be- 
sides these  sources  others  were  employed,  such  as 
a  prophetic-historical  narrative  like  that  from  which 
the  Elijah-Elisha  portion  is  taken:  also  the  piece 
II,  xviii.  13-xx.  19,  repeated  in  Isa.  xxxvi.~xxziz., 
in  which  xviii.  14-16  is  from  a  still  different  source 
(as  is  shown  by  the  spelling  of  the  name  Hesekiah). 
This  duplicated  passage  is  probably  original  neither 
with  Kings  nor  Isaiah.  Similarly  II.,  xxiv.  IS-xxv. 
30  is  paralleled  by  Jer.  Iii.  but  is  not  original  with 
Jeremiah.  The  Septuagint  refers  in  I.,  viii.  53  to 
a  ''book  of  the  ode,"  possibly  the  book  of  Jasber 
(Josh.  X.  13),  the  word  "  ode  "  coming  in  through  a 
misreading  by  transposition  of  letters  (ahyr  in- 
stead of  yshr). 

So  far  as  the  political  relations  are  concerned,  the 
historicity  of  these  books  is  recognised.  The  es- 
pecial point  of  attack  in  this  matter  has  been  the 
Elijah-Elisha  narratives,  so  rich  in  miracles  paral- 
leled only  in  the  events  ascribed  to 

3.  Histo-    the  times  of  Moses  and  Joshua.     But 

ricity  and  it  is  to  be  noted  that  the  marvels  at 

Chronology,  the  Garmel  sacrifice,  as  in  the  desert 

at  the  giving  of  the   law     througb 

Moses,  and  again  in  Elijah's  removal  from  earthly 

life  without  passing  tl^  gates  of  death,  are  no 


341 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Kinvs,  Books  of 
Xinffshlp  in  Israel 


more  extraordinary  than  the  work  he  was  called 
to  perform,  midway  between  Moses  and  Christ,  in 
winning  a  victory  for  the  worship  of  Yahweh. 
The  circmnstances  of  the  northern  kingdom  at  the 
time  were  such  as  to  correspond  with  the  atmosphere 
of  miracle  in  which  this  prophet  lived.  Difficulties 
are  foimd  also  in  the  chronology  of  the  books.  The 
r^nal  periods  of  the  kings  are  given  in  full  years,  a 
residt  of  a  roimd  rather  than  an  exact  reckoning. 
The  Talmud  suggests  that  the  reckoning  was  from 
Nisan  to  Nisan,  after  a  method  which  appears  in 
the  New  Testament  in  the  accoimt  of  the  resur- 
rection, which  equates  the  parts  of  three  days 
with  three  full  days,  and  in  Josephus.  This  method 
of  reckoning  appears  definitely  in  II  Kings  xviii. 
9-10,  where  the  siege  of  Samaria  is  given  as  lasting 
three  years,  though  beginning  in  the  seventh  and 
ending  in  the  ninth  year  of  Hoshea.  Similarly, 
while  David's  reign  in  Hebron  is  given  in  II  Sam. 
V.  4-5  as  seven  and  a  half  years,  in  I  Kings  ii.  11  it 
is  given  as  seven  years.  Other  cases  of  disr^ard 
of  portions  of  a  year  might  be  given,  but  not  in  a 
uniform  and  consistent  manner,  the  consequence 
being  that  an  exact  chronology  can  not  be  obtained 
from  these  books.  The  totals  are  vitally  affected, 
as  when  the  reigns  of  the  kings  of  Judah  from 
Solomon  to  the  destruction  foot  up  to  260  years 
and  of  the  kings  of  Israel  to  241  years.  A  recognized 
means  of  correction  is  f oimd  in  the  Assyrian  annals, 
and  of  the  attempts  to  use  this  means  especially 
noteworthy  is  that  of  Kamphausen,  who  requires 
only  six  changes  in  the  data  of  Israelitic  succession 
to  reconcile  the  differences  in  Assyrian  and  Israelitic 
chronology.    See  Time,  Biblical  Reckoning  of. 

The  original  text  of  the  Biblical  authors  is 
no  longer  extant;  the  Masoretic  text  does  not  ex- 
actly reproduce  this,  nor  does  it  agree  with  that 
which  formed  the  base  of  the  early  versions.  If 
reference  is  made  to  the  extreme  care 
4.  The  exercised  by  the  Masoretes  in  regard 
Text  to  the  text  they  received,  it  must  also 
be  recalled  that  this  care  was  not  ex- 
ercised in  the  earliest  times,  as  is  proved  by  the 
widely  different  texts  sometimes  found  in  parallel 
passages.  Thus  in  the  parallels  II  Kings  xviii.  13- 
XX.  19  and  Isa.  xxxvi.-xxxix.  the  Isaiah  passage 
affords  fifteen  examples  of  the  scriptio  plena,  that  in 
Kings  only  three,  as  opposed  to  corresponding 
scriptio  defectiva  in  the  other.  Other  changes  are 
due  to  glosses  and  marginal  notes  which  copyists 
have  received  into  the  text.  The  testimony  of  the 
manuscripts  of  the  Septuagint  testify  to  changes 
in  the  Hebrew;  thus  the  Alexandrine  codex  is  nearer 
to  the  Masoretic  text  than  is  the  Vatican,  yet  the 
intent  of  the  translators  to  be  faithful  is  manifest 
in  that  they  reproduced  in  Greek  letters  Hebrew 
words  which  they  no  longer  imderstood.  Moreover, 
that  the  Greek  translators  had  access  to  some  of  the 
sources  of  the  Hebrew  is  shown  by  additions  not 
found  in  the  present  Hebrew  text.  Care  must  be 
exercised,  however,  not  to  overestimate  the  value  of 
the  Septuagint  for  textual  criticism,  since  the  dif- 
ferences between  extant  representatives  of  this  text 
differ  so  widely.  Of  the  fragments  preserved  in  the 
Hexapla  of  Origen  the  version  of  Aquila  is  a  dose 
reproduction  of  the  Palestinian  text,  that  of  Sym- 


machus  is  clear  and  elegant,  that  of  Theodotion 
partakes  of  the  character  of  a  recension  of  the 
Septuagint  on  the  basis  of  a  text  approximating 
the  Masoretic.  The  Targum  of  the  prophets  af- 
fords little  textual  help,  partaking  as  it  does  of 
the  paraphrastic  rather  than  of  the  literal  and 
containing  additions  to  the  text.  Where  it  can  be 
used,  however,  it  is  the  earliest  witness  to  the 
Palestinian  text  on  its  mother  soU.  The  Vulgate  of 
Jerome  has  also  considerable  value  since  it  testifies 
to  the  text  of  the  end  of  the  fourth  Christian  century. 

(W.  VOLCKt.) 
BiBUoaRAPHT:  The  leading  oonmientarieB  are:  O.  TbeniuB, 
Leipoio,  1873;  K.  C.  W.  F.  Bfthr,  in  Lange,  Eng.  trand.. 
New  York,  1874;  G.  Rawlinson,  in  BihU  Commentary, 
London.  1874;  C.  F.  Keil,  Leipdo,  1876.  Eng.  transl. 
Edinburgh,  1877;  G.  Hammond  and  G.  Rawlinson,  in 
PulpU  Commentary,  2  voIb..  London,  1881-89;  A.  Klos- 
teimann,  Munich,  1887;  J.  R.  Lumby,  in  Cambridge 
Bible,  Cambridge.  1888;  F.  W.  Fairar.  in  Bxpoeiior'B 
Bible,  2  voIb.,  London,  1893-94;  R.  Kittel,  Gdttingen, 
1900;  W.  E.  Barnes,  in  Cambridge  Bible,  1908.  Special 
topics  are  treated  in:  A.  Clemen,  Die  Wundeiberiehte  Uber 
Elia  und  Bliea,  Grimma,  1877;  J.  Meinhold,  Die  Jeaaierer- 
tOhlungen  xxxvi-xxxiz,  Qfittingen,  1897.  On  text-criticism, 
B.  Stade,  in  ZATW,  iii.-vi  (1883-^6),  passim;  A.  Morgen- 
stern.  Die  Seholien  dee  Oregoriue  Abulfarag  .  .  .  sum  Buck 
der  K&nige,  Berlin,  1895;  J.  Berlinger,  Die  Peadkitta  nun  I. 
Budi  der  Kdnige,  Berlin,  1897;  F.  C.  Burkitt,  Fragmenta  of 
the  Booh  of  Kinge  according  to  ,  .  ,  Aquila,  Cambridge, 
1897;  C.  F.  Kent,  Student*a  Old  Teatament,  vol.  ii.,  New 
York,  1906  (valuable);  W.  D.  Crockett,  A  Harmony  of  the 
Booka  cf  Samuel,  Kinga  .  ,  .  inthe  Text  of  the  Veraion  of 
1884,  London,  1906.  Consult  also  the  principal  works  on 
Old  Testament  Introduction  under  Biblical  Introduo 
TiON,  and  for  chronology  the  works  cited  under  Era;  Time, 
Biblical  Reckoning  or. 

KINGSHIP  IN  ISRAEL:  The  Israelitic  king- 
dom was  later  in  origin  than  Israelitic  nationality. 
The  latter  began  as  a  theocracy  at  Sinai  under  an 
eldership  which  appeared  sufficient  for  the  demands 
both  of  peace  and  war.  The  astonishment  that 
Moses  ''founded  no  state"  (Vatke) 
Hebrew  and  the  conclusion  therefrom  that  the 
Ideals  of  Pentateuchal  legislation  must  have 
Kingship,  arisen  later  in  a  state  already  in  ex- 
istence proceed  from  a  false  view  of 
the  Hebrew  state.  The  bond  of  Hebrew  nationality 
was  the  covenant  with  Yahweh,  which  based  legal 
relations  upon  prophetic  authority.  A  human 
kingdom  was  superfluous  since  Yahweh  was  king 
and  leader  in  war  (Ex.  xv.  18,  xiv.  14;  Num.  xxi. 
14),  with  that  leadership  incarnated  in  Moses.  But 
the  time  came  when  no  mighty  and  prophetically  in- 
spired man  like  Moses  or  Joshua  stood  at  the  head  of 
the  people,  when  the  spiritual  bond  was  not  strong 
enough  to  hold  the  scattered  tribes  together,  when 
even  the  Yahweh  worship  was  endangered  by  the 
disintegrating  influences  of  Canaanitic  heathenism. 
In  the  days  of  the  Judges  the  need  was  felt  of  a 
central  power  to  unify  action,  and  this  tendency 
was  exemplified  in  the  history  of  Gideon  (q.v.)  and 
Abimelech  (Judges  viii.-iz.),  though  the  results  of 
this  premature  attempt  postponed  for  a  long  time 
definite  establishment  of  the  kingdom.  When  Sam- 
uel became  too  old  for  the  performance  of  his  duties 
and  his  sons  proved  unworthy,  while  the  Philistines 
were  aggressive,  the  demand  became  clamorous 
and  Samuel  yielded  to  the  request  of  the  people 
to  anoint  a  king.  Wellhausen  mistakenly  regards 
I  Sam.  ix.  1-x.  16,  xi.  as  the  early  account  of  the 


Klnsol 


liipin 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


842 


founding  of  the  kingdom  and  chap.  viii.  as  the  poet- 
exilic  view.  But  chap.  viii.  is  entirely  consonant 
with  the  person  and  character  of  Samuel  (see  Sam- 
ubl;  Saul).  It  was  not  by  chance  that  a  man  from 
the  smallest  tribe  was  chosen  king;  the  will  of  Yah- 
weh  determined  the  selection  and  chap.  viii.  supplies 
the  account,  basing  the  selection  on  Saul's  worth. 
A  similar  reason  imderlay  the  choice  of  David.  In 
both  cases  consecration  to  the  kingly  office  was  by 
anointing  (I  Sam.  x.  1,  xvi.  13),  as  was  customary 
among  the  neighboring  peoples.  This  anointing 
was  connected  with  religious  usage  and  implied 
divine  sanction.  In  David's  case  it  was  repeated 
when  he  was  made  king  over  Judah  and  again  when 
he  became  king  of  Israel  (II  Sam.  ii.  4,  v.  3).  Pro- 
phetic anointing  is  often  mentioned,  as  in  the  cases 
of  Absalom,  Solomon,  Jehoahaz,  and  Jehu  (II  Sam. 
xix.  10;  I  Kings  i.  39;  II  Kings  xi.  12,  xxiii.  30). 
The  rabbis  regarded  anointing  as  necessary  only  to 
the  establishment  of  a  new  dynasty  and  thus  ex- 
plain omissions  of  anointing  in  other  cases.  A 
symbol  of  kingly  power  was  the  scepter,  in  place  of 
which  Saul  appears  to  have  used  the  spear.  From 
early  times  the  crown  also  is  in  evidence  (I  Sam. 
i.  10),  and  the  throne  appears  with  Solomon  (I 
Kings  X.  18). 

The  position  of  the  king  was  from  the  first  not 
that  of  an  Oriental  despot  with  unlimited  power. 
The  law  of  the  kingdom  (I  Sam.  x.  25;  cf .  Deut.  xvii. 
14-20)  was  naturally  not  a  mere  embodiment  of 
popular  law  and  custom,  but  arose  out  of  the  relig- 
ious situation  of  the  Hebrews.  The  king  was  to  be 
an  Israelite,  was  not  to  multiply  wives  or  wealth  or 
horses  (as  evidences  of  his  glory). 
Kingly      Further  he  was  to  regard  the  torah, 

Duties  and  written  and  prophetic,  as  his  guide. 

Privileges.  In  war  he  was  the  leader,  and  in  peace 
the  chief  authority  in  justice.  As 
judge  he  was  to  be  hiunble  in  mind,  giving  access 
to  those  who  sought  relief;  his  responsibility  to 
Yahweh  was  urged  by  the  prophets.  As  Yahweh 
had  made  free  choice  of  the  king,  so  he  might  re- 
ject and  displace  him  (I  Sam.  xiii.  13-14;  I  Kings 
xi.  29  sqq.).  The  succession  was  hereditary,  but  the 
power  of  appointment  of  a  successor  was  in  the  reign- 
ing king,  with  the  mothers  of  the  various  princes 
exercising  influence  behind  the  throne.  Often  the 
succession  was  otherwise  determined — by  the 
nobility,  the  priesthood,  and  indeed  the  people.  The 
queen  mother  had  a  high  and  influential  position 
from  which,  however,  she  might  be  deposed  (I 
Kings  XV.  13).  In  the  northern  kingdom  also  pro- 
phetic sanction  was  given  to  the  kingship,  as  in  the 
case  of  Jeroboam  I.  and  Jehu  (qq.v.).  But  in  gen- 
eral other  forces,  including  that  of  usurpation,  were 
at  work  in  Israel  (Hoe.  viii.  4).  In  the  cult  the  king 
took  a  commanding  position,  offering  sacrifices, 
praying,  and  blessing  the  people.  But  in  sacrificing, 
it  might  be  that  the  priest  was  the  actual  officiant; 
indeed  in  later  times  it  may  be  said  that  the  king 
yielded  to  the  priest  his  priestly  functions.  A  limitsr 
tion  of  the  kingly  privileges  doubtless  came  into 
play  and  is  in  view  in  the  legislation  of  Ezekiel.  It 
was  his  duty  (according  to  Ezekiel)  to  care  for  the 
ordinary  and  festival  offerings,  and  in  preexilic 
times  he  might  appoint  and  dismiss  priests  (I  Kings 


ii.  35),  though  he  was  in  these  matters  not  left  to 
the  exercise  of  arbitrary  power. 

The  king  was  surrounded  with  coimcilors  and 
ministers  who  came  to  bear  the  name  of  princes  as 
inmates  of  the  royal  palace;  in  addition  to  these 
he  had  personal  servants  about  him,  who  often  mis- 
used their  power.  The  nmnber  of  the  officers  was 
not  set  by  law,  but  varied  with  the 
The  Royal  needs  of  the  times;  thus  under  David 
Court  and  there  were  the  general  of  the  army,  the 
Revenues,  captain  of  the  guard,  the  recorder, 
the  chancellor,  and  the  overseer  of 
labor;  under  Solomon  appeared  an  upper  officer 
over  the  twelve  prefects  of  the  districts,  and  an  oflicer 
in  charge  of  the  household  (I  Kings  iv.  5-6);  with 
these  went  a  laxge  nmnber  of  lesser  officials  of  various 
grades  and  service,  while  later  there  came  in  eu- 
nuchs (perhaps  the  name  of  an  office,  I  Kings  Z3di. 
9,  margin).  The  royal  revenues  were  not  at  all 
times  on  the  same  basis,  and  I  Sam.  viii.  11  sqq.  in- 
dicates possibilities  of  arbitrariness  in  the  king's 
demands.  Yet  only  profligate  kings  would  over- 
ride the  rights  of  their  subjects,  as  in  the  instance  of 
Naboth,  and  in  cases  of  aggression  would  asually 
have  at  least  the  semblance  of  right  of  action.  Cus- 
tom developed  the  perquisites  of  the  king.  Thus 
Amos  vii.  1  indicates  that  to  the  king  belonged  the 
first  cutting  of  the  grass.  The  custom  of  making 
presents  to  the  king  is  very  early,  and  regular- 
ity developed  it  into  tribute.  Conquered  peoples 
brought  tribute  (II  Sam.  viii.  2),  as  did  those  who 
placed  themselves  imder  the  royal  protection  or  did 
homage  (II  Sam.  viii.  10;  I  Kings  x.  25).  Solomon 
put  the  Canaanites  and  even  Israelites  to  forced 
labor.  Of  booty  taken  in  war  a  considerable  part 
was  appropriated  by  the  king,  and  the  kings  had  usu- 
ally their  private  estates.  For  the  idealistic  and 
prophetic  development  of  the  idea  of  the  kingdom 
see  Messiah^  Messianism.  C.  von  Orelli. 

Bxblioorapht:  S.  Oettli,  ZXm  Kdnigndealdea  Alien  Testament, 
Greifswald.  1899;  R.  Smend,  AlUetUxmefUliche  Rdioioiu- 
a€8duchte,  TQbinjsen,  1899;  the  literature  on  the  Histoo't^ 
krael  under  Ahab;  later  works  cited  under  Akcbeoxx>gt, 
Biblical;  and  for  the  idealUtie  view  of  the  monarchy  the 
works  under  Mbbbiah. 

KIUGSLEY,  CHARLES:  English  clergyman  and 
author;  b.  at  Holne  (20  m.  s.w.  of  Exeter),  Devon- 
shire, June  12,  1819;  d.  at  Eversley  (26  m.  n.e.  of 
of  Winchester),  Hampshire,  Jan.  23,  1875.  He  was 
a  precocious  child,  fond  of  athletics  and  romantic 
in  disposition;  the  scenery  with  which  he  was  sur- 
rounded made  a  profound  unpression  on  his  charac- 
ter. He  received  his  education  at  Clifton,  Helston, 
King's  College,  London,  and  Magdalene  College. 
Cambridge,  where  he  studied  fitfully  and  allowed 
himself  to  be  distracted  by  manifold  interests. 
He  had  at  this  time  little  taste  for  theology,  but 
finally  decided  to  take  orders,  and  was  ordained  in 
July,  1842,  to  the  curacy  of  Eversley.  There  his 
duties  were  practical  nither  than  theoretical,  for 
the  parish  was  in  a  state  of  utter  decay.  In  1845  he 
received  the  honorary  appointment  of  canon  of  Mid- 
dleham.  His  literary  activities  had  already  begtin, 
and  at  London  in  1848  appeared  his  drama  The 
Saint's  Tragedy,  a  play  based  on  St.  Elisabeth  of 
Hungary,  in  which  he  voiced  his  disapproval  of 
medieval  asceticism,  which,  in  his  opinion,  detracted 


348 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Kinsol^ 


^ip  in 


from  the  sanctity  of  marriage.  He  became  intei^ 
ested,  on  the  other  hand,  in  "  Christian  socialism/' 
and  contributed  numerous  papers  to  aid  the  cause. 
To  this  same  influence  were  due  his  first  two  novels, 
Alton  Locke  (1850)  and  Yeast  (1851),  the  latter 
originally  contributed  to  Fraeer's  Magazine.  In 
1851  he  caused  considerable  excitement  by  his 
defense  of  **  Christian  socialism  ''  in  a  sermon  in  a 
London  church,  and  was  forbidden  to  preach  in  the 
diocese,  although  the  prohibition  was  soon  with- 
drawn, especially  as  the  working  classes  warmly 
championed  him.  He  was  by  no  means  a  revolution- 
ist, however,  but  in  later  life  inclined  to  the  Tory 
side,  the  explanation  of  his  interest  in  "  Christian 
socialism  "  being  his  desire  to  mold  popular  trends 
by  practical  Christianity.  His  position  naturally 
exposed  him  to  frequent  attack,  and  in  1851,  after 
refuting  the  criticisms  aimed  at  the  alleged  immo- 
rality of  his  Yeastf  he  sought  to  gain  much-needed 
rest  by  his  first  trip  abroad,  in  which  he  visited  the 
Rhine,  thus  laying  the  foundations  for  his  Ttoo  Years 
Ago  (1857).  Meanwhile  his  pen  had  not  been  idle, 
and  in  1853  appeared  his  Hypatia,  a  novel  in  which 
he  attempted  a  covert  attack  on  the  asceticism  of 
the  High-church  party.  The  novel  had  an  immense 
vogue,  although  it  did  not  escape  criticism  and  is  not 
without  serious  faults  of  construction. 

His  wife's  health  now  obliged  Kingsley  to  spend 
the  winter  and  spring  at  Torquay  and  Bideford,  his 
studies  of  natural  history  at  the  former  place  giving 
him  the  foimdation  for  his  Glaucus  (1855)  and  the 
latter  for  his  great  historical  novel  Westward  Ho! 
(1855).  At  Bideford,  moreover,  he  formed  a  draw- 
ing class  for  yoimg  men  in  the  same  spirit  of  prac- 
ticality with  which  he  had  lectured  for  a  year  on 
English  literature  at  Queen's  College  in  1848.  The 
unpopularity  and  prejudice  against  which  Kingsley 
had  thus  far  struggled  were  now  ending.  In  1859  he 
was  appointed  one  of  the  queen's  chaplains  and  in 
the  following  year  received  the  professorship  of 
modem  history  at  Cambridge.  Yet  his  tenure  of 
ofi&ce,  which  ended  in  his  retirement  in  1869,  can 
scarcely  be  termed  successful,  for  his  mind  was  too 
versatile  and  too  superficial  for  him  to  be  a  reliable 
historian.  In  1864,  moreover,  he  became  involved 
in  a  controversy  with  John  Henry  Newman.  In  a 
review  of  a  work  by  James  Anthony  Froude  he 
accused  the  Roman  Catholic  clergy  in  general  and 
Newman  in  particular  of  having  but  faint  regard 
for  truth  for  its  own  sake.  Newman  retorted,  and 
upon  Kingsley's  replying  with  a  pamphlet  What, 
then,  does  Dr.  Newman  mean  t  his  antagonist  com- 
pletely routed  him  with  his  famous  Apologia  pro 
vita  sua  (1864).  About  this  time  he  wrote  his 
Water  Babies  (1863)  and  a  few  years  later  his  histor- 
ical novel  Hereward  the  Wake  (1866),  but  his  health 
was  beginning  to  fail,  and  in  1864  he  was  obliged  to 
make  a  trip  to  France,  while  in  the  following  year 
he  was  likewise  forced  to  take  a  vacation  of  three 
months  on  the  Norfolk  coast.  After  resigning  his 
professorship  at  Cambridge  he  was  for  a  time  promi- 
nent in  the  E^ducational  League  and  also  acted  as 
president  of  the  section  for  education  at  the  So- 
cial Science  Congress  at  Bristol  in  Oct.,  1869.  In 
the  same  year  he  made  a  visit  to  the  West  Indies, 
embodying  the  result  of  his  observations  in  his  At 


Lost  (1870).  He  now  took  up  his  residence  at  Ches- 
ter, where  he  had  been  appointed  canon,  and  founded 
a  class  in  botany,  his  interests  in  science  becoming 
more  and  more  pronoimoed,  so  that  he  finally 
r^arded  Darwinism  as  in  harmony  with  theology. 
He  remained  at  Chester  only  three  years,  however, 
for  in  1873  he  was  appointed  canon  of  Westminister. 
His  enfeebled  health  again  forced  him  to  seek  a 
change  of  scene,  and  in  1874  he  made  a  tour  of 
America,  but  returned  to  England  with  little  benefit 
from  his  trip,  dying  on  a  visit  to  his  old  parish. 

Charles  Kingsley  was  an  earnest  and  consistent 
advocate  of  what  was  somewhat  derisively  called 
"  muscular  Christianity,"  and  his  enthusiasm  for 
practical  work  among  the  poor,  like  his  interest  in 
science,  especially  in  its  popular  aspects,  was  un- 
feigned. He  can  scarcely  be  regarded,  on  the  other 
hand,  as  a  theologian,  although  he  was  throughout 
his  life  a  firm  adherent  of  the  Broad-church  party, 
his  opposition  to  the  Tractarian  movement  being  so 
pronoimced  as  to  lead  Pusey  and  his  colleagues  in  the 
Highrchurch  wing  to  nudce  a  successful  protest 
against  conferring  an  Oxford  degree  on  him.  The 
inscription  on  his  tomb  in  the  churchyard  at  Evers- 
ley  strikingly  attests  the  affection  of  his  parish- 
ioners: AmammuSfamamus,amabimits,  ''We  loved, 
love,  and  shall  love  (him)."  His  chief  theological 
works  were  his  Twenty-five  Village  Sermons  (Lon- 
don, 1849);  Sermons  on  National  Subjects  (2  vols., 
1852-54);  Sermons  for  the  Times  (1S55);  The  Good 
News  of  God  (1859);  Town  and  Country  Sermons 
(1861);  Sermons  on  the  Pentateuch  (1863);  David 
(four  University  sermons,  1867);  The  Water  of 
Life  and  Other  Sermons  (1867);  Discipline  and  other 
Sermons  (1868);  Westminster  Sermons  (1874);  and 
the  posthumous  All  Saints*  Day  and  Other  Sermons 
(1878). 

Bibuogbapht:  The  chief  source  is  CharUt  KingtUy,  His 
Letters  and  Memorisa  of  his  Life,  edited  by  Ms  Wife,  Lon- 
don, 1877.  Consult  further:  J.  H.  Rigg,  Modem  Ar^ 
glican  Theology,  with  a  Memoir  of  Canon  Kingsley,  ib. 
1880;  A  Memoir  is  prefixed  by  T.  Hughes  to  Alton  Locke, 
ib.  1881;  M.  Kaufmann,  Charles  Kingsley,  Christian  So- 
cialist and  Social  Reformer,  ib.  1892;  J.  A.  R.  Marriott. 
Charles  Kingsley,  Novelist,  ib.  1892;  E.  Groth.  Charles 
Kingsley  als  Dichter  und  Sosialreformer,  Leipsic,  1893; 
C.  W.  Stubbs,  Charles  Kingsley  and  the  Christian  Social 
Movement,  London,  1899;  DNB,  xzzi.  175-181. 

KINSHIP,  PRIMITIVE.  See  Comparative  Rk- 
uaioN,  VI.,  1,  b,  §  1. 

KmSMAN,  FREDERICK  JOSEPH:  Protestant 
Episcopal  bishop  of  Delaware;  b.  at  Warren,  O., 
Sept.  27,  1868.  He  was  educated  at  Keble  Col- 
lege, Oxford  (B.A.,  1894);  master  at  St.  Paul's 
School,  Concord,  N.  H.  (1895-97);  rector  of  St. 
Martin's,  New  Bedford,  Mass.  (1897-1900);  pro- 
fessor of  ecclesiastical  history  in  Berkeley  Divinity 
School,  Middletown,  Conn.  (1900-03) ;  and  in  the 
General  Theological  Seminary,  New  York  City 
(1903-08).  In  1908  he  was  consecrated  bishop  of 
Delaware. 

KnfSOLVHVG,  GEORGE  HERBERT:  Protes- 
tant Episcopal  bishop  of  Texas;  b.  at  Liberty,  Va., 
Apr.  28,  1849.  He  was  educated  at  the  University 
of  Virginia  and  received  his  theological  training  at 
the  Virginia  Theological  Seminary,  from  which  he 
was  graduated  in  1873.    He  was  ordered  deacon  in 


l^s 


■olylng 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


844 


1874  and  priested  in  the  following  year.  After  being 
aasifltant  at  Christ  Church,  Baltimore,  in  1874-75, 
he  was  rector  of  St.  Mark's,  Baltimore  (1875-79), 
St.  John's,  Cincinnati,  O.  (187&-01),  and  the  Church 
of  the  Epiphany,  Philadelphia  (1891-92).  In 
1892  he  was  consecrated  bishop  coadjutor  of  Texas, 
and  in  the  following  year,  on  the  death  of  Bishop 
Alexander  Gregg,  became  his  successor. 

KUVSOLVSVG,  LUCIBN  LEE:  Protestant  Epis- 
copal bishop  of  Southern  Brazil;  b.  at  Middleburg, 
Va.,  May  14,  1862.  He  studied  at  the  University 
of  Virginia  and  was  graduated  from  the  theological 
seminary  at  Alexandria,  Va.,  in  1889.  He  was 
ordered  deacon  and  ordained  priest  in  the  same 
year,  and  from  1889  to  1898  was  a  missionary  of  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  state  of  Rio 
Grande  do  Sul,  Brazil,  while  in  1899  he  was  con- 
secrated missionary  bishop  of  Southern  Brazil. 

KIP,  WILLIAM  nVGRAHAM:  Protestant  Epis- 
copal bishop  of  California;  b.  in  New  York  City 
Oct.  3,  1811;  d.  in  San  Francisco  Apr.  7,  1893. 
He  was  educated  at  Rutgers  and  Yale  (B.A.,  1831), 
the  Protestant  Episcopal  Theological  Seminary  of 
Virginia  (1832-33),  and  the  General  Theological 
Seminary,  from  which  he  was  graduated  in  1835. 
He  was  ordered  deacon  in  1835  and  priested  in  the 
same  year.  He  was  successively  rector  of  St.  Peter's, 
Morristown,  N.  J.  (1835-^),  curate  of  Grace 
Church,  New  York  aty  (1836-37),  and  rector  of  St. 
Paul's,  Albany,  N.  Y.  (1837-53).  In  1853  he  was 
consecrated  fint  missionary  bishop  of  California, 
and  four  years  later,  when  California  was  made  a 
full  bishopric,  became  diocesan.  He  wrote:  The 
HitAory,  Object,  and  Proper  ObeervaUon  of  the  Holy 
Seaean  qf  Lent  (New  York,  1843);  The  Double 
Wiineea  of  the  Church  (1884);  Chrietmaa  HoLvdaye 
at  Rome  (1845);  Early  Jemjuii  Miasione  in  North 
America  (1846);  The  Early  Conflicts  of  Christianity 
(1850);  The  Catacombs  cf  Rome  (1854);  The  Unr 
noticed  Things  of  Scriplvre  (1868);  New  York  in 
the  Olden  Time  (1872);  Historical  Scenes  in  the  old 
Jesuit  Missions  (1875);  The  Church  of  the  Apostles 
(1877);  and  The  Early  Days  of  my  Episcopate 
(1892);  besides  many  addresses  and  episcopal 
ohaiges. 

KIPPIS,  ANDREW:  English  non-conformist;  b. 
at  Nottingham  Mar.  28,  1725;  d.  in  London  Oct. 
8,  1795.  He  was  prepared  for  the  Presbyterian 
ministry  at  Philip  Doddridge's  academy  at  North- 
ampton, where  he  spent  the  years  1741-46.  He 
was  pastor  of  dissenting  congregations  at  Boston, 
Lincolnshire,  1746-50;  at  Dorking,  Surrey,  1750-53; 
and  at  Westminster,  London,  1753-95.  From  1767 
till  1784  he  was  classical  and  philological  tutor  in  the 
Coward  Academy  at  Hoxton,  and  was  afterward 
a  tutor  in  the  dissenting  academy  at  Hackney. 
He  early  abandoned  Calvinism  for  Sodnianism, 
was  associated  with  many  charities,  and  was  a  volu- 
minous writer.  His  reputation  rests  upon  his  im- 
finished  edition  of  the  Biographia  Britannica'  (5  vols, 
and  part  of  vol.  vi.,  London,  1778-95).  Other  works 
are:  A  Vindication  of  the  Protestant  Dissenting 
Ministers  (1772);  Sermons  on  PracUcal  Subjects 
(1791);  and  lives  of  Nathaniel  Lardner  and  Philip 
Doddridge  for  editions  of  their  works. 


Bibuoorapht:  Walter  WUion.  Hial.  and  AfOiquiHet  <4 
Di-erUino  ChvrchM,  iv.  103-117.  402,  London,  1814; 
DNB,  xxi.  195-197  (wfaera  references  to  other  literature 
may  be  found);  Julian,  Hymnologyt  P.  026. 

KiRy  ker:  A  place-name  mentioned  II  Kings 
xvi.  9;  Isa.  xxii.  6;  and  Amos  i.  5,  iz.  7  as  within  the 
Assyrian  r^ion  and  as  the  dwelling-plaoe  of  an 
Aramaic  people.  Even  the  early  translators  did 
not  know  its  location;  the  later  translators  followed 
J.  D.  Michaelis  in  placing  it  on  the  river  stiU  known 
as  Kur  and  flowing  into  the  Caspian.  But  the  As- 
S3rrian  kingdom  never  included  tUs  region.  Schroder 
sought  it  in  South  Babylonia.  The  correct  position 
is  given  by  Winckler  as  the  plain  of  Jatbur,  between 
the  Tigris  and  the  mountains,  and  bordering  on 
Elam,  the  land  of  the  Karians  mentioned  by  Arrian 
(III.,  viii.  5)  near  Sittakene.  Winckler  re^uxls  the 
Kir  as  a  mistake  for  Kor,  That  Aramaic  peoples 
were  inhabitants  of  the  region  appears  both  from 
the  Bible  (II  Kings  xvi.  9),  and  from  the  inscrip- 
tions, since  Tiglath-Pileser  transp)orted  Damascans 
thither.  It  seems  probable  that  this  was  the  original 
home  of  the  Arameans,  whither  they  were  deported 
after  the  manner  of  Isa.  xxxvii.  29.  In  Amos  i.  5 
and  iz.  7  the  word  seems  to  be  a  later  intrusion. 

(A.  Jeremiab.) 
BxBUOORAnrr:    H.  Winckler,   AlUettamenUieke   UntenuA- 

unoen,    iL   253  aqq.,    Nachtrag.   p.   378.    Leipno,   1882; 

idem,  AUcrierUaluche  Fandiunoen,  pp.  178-170.  ib.  18M. 

KIRCHBR,  kir'Her,  ATHANASIUS:  German  Jes- 
uit; b.  at  Geisa  (30  m.  n.e.  of  Fulda)  May  2, 
1602;  d.  in  Rome  Nov.  28,  1680.  He  joined  the 
Society  of  Jesus  at  Mains  in  1618,  and  afterward 
became  teacher  of  philosophy  and  mathematics  at 
WUrzburg.  On  the  invasion  of  the  Swedes  in  1631 
he  fled  to  Avignon,  whence  he  repaired  to  Rome  in 
1635.  For  eight  years  he  taught  mathematics  at 
the  Collegium  Romanum  and  f oimded  in  the  college 
a  museum  that  has  preserved  his  name.  He  was  a 
scholar  of  varied  attainments  and  wrote  numerous 
books  on  mathematics,  physics,  natural  history, 
philosophy,  philology,  history,  and  archeology. 
While  his  writings  are  now  antiquated,  Kircher  is 
important  for  his  work  as  a  pioneer,  particularly 
in  the  field  of  Egyptian  hieroglyphics.  To  be  men- 
tioned are:  Prodromfus  Coptus  sive  JEgyptiacm 
(Rome,  1636);  (Edipus  /Egyptiacus  (3  vols.,  1652- 
1655);  China  .  .  .  illustrata  (Amsterdam,  1667); 
and  Latium  (1671). 

Biblxoobapht:  His  autobiography  is  in  A.  Langenmantel, 
Fa»eieulu9  epiatolarum,  A.  Kircheri,  pp.  65  aqq.,  Aug»- 
burg.  1684;  A.  and  A.  de  Backer,  BiUiotKiqu€  dea  im- 
vaina  de  la  toeitU  de  Jieue,  Li^,  1863-61;  KL,  vii  716- 
717. 

KIRCHHOFER,  kirHOidf-er,  HELCHIOR:  Swiss 
church  historian;  b.  at  Schaffhausen  Jan.  3,  1775; 
d.  at  Stein  (11  m.  e.s.e.  of  Schaffhausen)  Feb.  13, 
1853.  He  studied  theology  and  philosophy  at 
Marburg  1794-96,  took  orders  in  1797,  and  held 
various  country  pastorates  till  1808,  when  he  be- 
came pastor  at  Stein,  in  the  canton  of  Schaffhausen, 
and  remained  there  till  his  death.  In  his  works 
Kirchhofer  combined  a  calm  and  objective  manner 
of  presentation  with  thoroughness  and  soundness  of 
investigation.  He  wrote  monographs  on  Sebastian 
Hofmeister  (Zurich,  1808),  Oswald  Myconius  (1813). 
Werner  Steiner   (1818),   Berthold  HaUer   (1828), 


345 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Xinsolvinff 
Kirk 


and  Guillaume  Farel  (2  vols.,  1831-33;  Eng.  transl. 
London,  1837),  and  continued  Hottinger's  Hd- 
veHsche  Kirchengeschichte  (ed.  L.  Wirz,  5  parts, 
1808-19).  He  also  published  the  Schaffhauseriache 
JahrbOcher  (Schaffhausen,  1819-29),  and  Neu- 
jahrMUter  far  die  schaffhauterische  Jugend  (1822- 
1843),  which  contain  a  history  of  Schaffhausen  until 
the  incorporation  of  the  city  into  the  Swiss  Confed- 
eracy in  1501,  besides  some  smaller  pamphlets, 
tracts,  and  criticisms.  (C.  A.  Baechtolo.) 

Bxbuoobaprt:    Biographical  material  is  contained  in  the 
funeral  addreas  of  J.  BAsohenstein,  Schaffhausen,  1863. 

KIRCHMETER,  kirH'mai''er,  THOMAS  (NAO- 
GE0R6US):  Protestant  theologian  and  religious 
dramatist;  b.  at  Hubelschmeiss  near  Straubing  (25 
m.  s.e.  of  Regensburg)  c.  1508;  d.  probably  at 
Wiesloch  (8  m.  s.  of  Heidelberg)  Dec.  24,  1563. 
He  was  educated  at  TQbingen,  though  his  name  does 
not  appear  in  the  university  lists,  and  received  an 
excellent  training  in  the  humanities  and  took  the 
master's  degree.  He  embraced  with  passionate 
zeal  the  cause  of  the  Reformation  but  at  the  same 
time  was  bold  in  maintaining  his  individual  beliefs 
against  the  authority  of  the  great  Protestant  the- 
ologians. He  first  appears  as  pastor  of  Suiza,  in 
present  Saze- Weimar,  1535.  In  1537  he  is  described 
by  Nicholas  Medler  of  Naumburg  as  a  thoughtful 
man,  who  did  not  hesitate  to  express  his  dissent  from 
the  authorities  at  Wittenberg,  and  was  therefore 
"  prone  to  all  heresies  and  seditions."  In  1541  he 
became  pastor  at  Kahla.  Before  this,  however,  he 
had  written  his  trilogy  of  dramas  against  the  Roman 
church  upon  which  his  fame  is  founded:  Pam- 
machiua  (Wittenberg,  1538),  MerccUor  (1540), 
and  Incendia  (1541).  At  Kahla  the  Wittenberg 
theologians  refused  to  allow  his  commentary  on  the 
first  epistle  of  John  to  be  printed  because  in  it  he 
taught  that  the  elect,  even  when  they  sin  against 
their  own  conscience,  remain  in  a  state  of  grace  and 
in  possession  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Melanchthon 
sought  to  gain  him  over  from  this  opinion;  and 
in  1544  Luther,  Melanchthon,  and  Bugenhagen 
justified  their  condemnation  of  his  work  in  a  com- 
mimication  to  the  elector  with  whom  Kirchmeyer 
stood  in  great  favor.  He  accompanied  the  court  to 
the  diet  of  Speyer  in  1544  and  in  the  same  year 
published  the  prohibited  book  with  a  dedication  to 
Johann  Ernst  of  Saxony.  The  followers  of  Luther 
thenceforward  regarded  Kirchmeyer  as  an  op- 
ponent and  after  the  death  of  the  great  Reformer 
new  controversies  arose  as  to  his  orthodoxy.  In 
addition  to  the  chai^  already  brought  against  him 
he  was  accused  of  preaching  the  Zwinglian  con- 
ception of  the  Lord's  Supper.  Impeached  by 
Kasper  Aquila  of  Saalfeld  he  was  tried  before  the 
consistory  of  Weimar  under  the  presidency  of  Duke 
Johann  Wilhelm,  and  acquitted  of  the  charge,  but 
being  ordered  to  explain  himself  on  some  points  to 
his  congregation  he  left  Kahla  and  spent  many 
years  in  wandering  through  Switzerland  and  South 
Germany. 

Kirchmeyer's  dramas  contain  little  action  and 
deal  with  personifications  instead  of  real  persons, 
after  the  fashion  of  the  old  Moralities,  but  they  are 
marked  by  a  spirit  of  bitter  criticism  of  Roman 


Catholic  teachings  and  practises  which  naturally 
made  them  popular  in  Protestant  circles.    Besides 
the  three  plays  already  mentioned  he  wrote  also 
three  Biblical  dramas,  Hamanua  (1543),  Hietemiaa 
(1551)  and  Judaa  lacariotes  (1553),  all  translated  into 
German.    Of  polemical  works,  the  most  celebrated 
is  the  Regnum  papMeum  (Basil  ?  1553),  an  unre- 
strained denunciation  in  verse  of  the  Roman  church 
[Eng.  trans..  The  Popish  Kingdome,  London,  1570, 
rep.  1880].    Minor  works  are  the  AgrieuUwrcB  aaera 
libri  V.   (1550),  and  the  Saiyrarum  libri  guinque 
(1555).    He  was  also  the  author  of  many  transla- 
tions from  Greek  into  Latin,  including  Sophocles, 
Isocrates,   Epictetus,   Dio   C^hrysostom,   Plutarch, 
and  Synesius.    In  1551  he  published  a  siunmary  of 
canon  law  which  attained  great  popularity,  owing 
to  its  impartial  treatment  of  many  controverted 
subjects;  yet  strangely  enough  it  is  this  work  that  ' 
led  the  way  to  the  Regnum  papiaticum.    His  in- 
dependent spirit  finds  repeated  expression  in  his 
Latin  verse  wherein  he  does  not  Imitate  to  sing 
the  praises  of  men  of  the  old  faith,  among  them 
Erasmus,  to  whom  he  concedes  much  merit  as  a 
pioneer  of  the  Reformation.        (G.  Kawerau.) 
Biblioobaphy:  L.  Theobald,  in  NKZ,  1906,  pp.  764  aqq.; 
id«m,  Dtu  Leben  und  Wirken  <2e«  .  .  .  Thonuu  Naoffeorgua 
....  Leipoic,  1008;   O.  T.  Strobel,  Miscellaneen  littertar- 
iaehen  In/ialU,  iii.  107-154.  NuremberK.  1780;   J.  J.  I.  von 
DOllinger,  Die  Reformation,  ii.  134  sqq..  RegeiiBbuis.  1848; 
H.  HolBtain,  Die  Reformation  im  SpiegeUriUie  der  drama- 
tiechen  Litteratur  dee  16.  Jahrhunderte,  pp.  108  sqq.,  Halle, 
1886;   J.  Janasen,  Hxel.  of  fhe  German  People,  zii.  75-02, 
London,  1007;  ADB,  xxuL  246  sqq. 

KIRK,  EDWARD  HORRIS:  American  Con- 
gregationalist;  b.  in  New  York  Aug.  14,  1802;  d.  in 
Boston  Mar.  27,  1874.  He  was  graduated  at  the 
College  of  New  Jersey  (Princeton)  in  1820  and  at  the 
Princeton  Theological  Seminary  in  1825,  and  trav- 
eled in  the  southern  States  as  agent  of  the  American 
Board  1826-28.  He  was  pastor  of  a  Presbyterian 
church  in  Albany  1828^37,  secretary  of  the  Foreign 
Evangelical  Society  1839-42,  and  pastor  of  the 
Moimt  Vernon  Congregational  Church  in  Boston 
1842-71.  During  the  years  1837^9  he  traveled  in 
Europe  and  preached  for  several  months  in  Paris. 
He  was  a  successful  evangelist,  one  of  the  first  mem- 
bers of  the  Evangelical  Alliance,  and  a  vigorous  ad- 
vocate of  the  evangelization  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
countries  of  Europe.  His  writings  include:  Afeim>- 
rial  of  Rev.  John  Chester  (Albany,  1829);  Semuma 
(New  York,  1840);  Lectwrea  on  Chriat'a  ParabUa 
(1856);  a  second  volume  of  Sermons  (Boston,  1860); 
and  Lectwrea  on  Revivala  (ed.  D.  O.  Mears,  1874). 
Biblxgobapht:   D.  O.  Meara,  Life  ef  Edtoard  Norria  Kirk, 

Boaton.  1877. 

KIRK,  HARRIS  BLUOTT:  Presbyterian;  b. 
at  Pulaski,  Giles  Co.,  Tenn.,  Oct.  12,  1872.  He  is 
a  graduate  of  the  academic  and  theological  depart- 
ments of  the  Southwestern  University,  Clarksville, 
Tenn.;  was  pastor  of  Cottage  Presbyterian  Church, 
Nashville,  Tenn.,  1897-99,  of  the  First  Presbyterian 
Church,  Florence,  Ala.,  1899-1901,  and  of  Franklin 
Street  Presbyterian  Chiut^h,  Baltimore,  1901-09. 
In  1909  he  was  called  to  the  chair  of  polemics  in 
Princeton  Theological  Seminary.  He  is  a  "  pro- 
gressive conservative,  believing  in  the  adaptation  of 
the  essential  views  of  the  conservative  theology  to 


Kirklaad 
Siaa  of  Pmm6 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


846 


modem  oonditioiui  in  a  sympathetic  and  ooofltruc- 
tive  way."  He  has  written  a  number  of  essays,  and 
The  Lost  Book  (Richmond,  1905). 

KIRKLAin),  JOHN  THORNTON:  American  Con- 
gregationalist,  son  of  Samuel  Kirkland  (q.v.);  b. 
at  Herkimer,  N.  Y.,  Aug.  17,  1770;  d.  in  Boston 
Apr.  26,  1840.  He  studied  at  Phillips  Academy 
(Andover),  and  at  Harvard  College  (B.A.,  1789), 
where,  whOe  preparing  for  the  ministry,  he  was  tutor 
in  Iqgic  and  metaphysics  1792-94.  He  was  pastor  of 
the  New  South  Church,  Boston,  1794-1810,  and 
president  of  Harvard  College  1810-28.  Under  his 
vigorous  administration  three  new  buildings  were 
erected  and  the  course  of  study  was  greatly  ex- 
tended. He  published  several  sermons,  and  a  Life 
of  Fishtr  Ames,  printed  in  Ames'  Works  (Boston, 
1809). 
Bibuooraprt:  A.  E.  Dunning,  CongnffaHonaliaU  in  Amtr- 

iM,  pp.  293,  296.  New  York,  1894;    Nalumal  Cydopadia 

qfAmtriean  Biography,  vi.  417,  ib.  1896. 

KIRKLAND,  SAMUEL:  American  missionary 
to  the  Iroquois  Indians;  b.  at  Norwich,  Conn.,  Dec. 
1,  1741;  d.  at  Clinton,  N.  Y.,  Feb.  28,  1808.  He 
was  graduated  at  the  College  of  New  Jersey  (Prince- 
ton) in  1765,  and  on  his  return  from  a  visit  to  the 
Senecas  in  1766  was  ordained  into  the  Congrega- 
tional ministry  and  sent  as  missionary  to  the  Six 
Nations.  During  the  Revolution  he  served  as  a 
chaplain  in  the  army.  For  persuading  the  Oneidas 
and  Tuscaroras  to  remain  neutral  he  was  rewarded 
by  Congress  with  a  large  grant  of  land  in  1785. 
At  the  dose  of  the  war  he  resimied  his  missionary 
work.  In  1791  he  conducted  a  del^;ation  of  some 
forty  warriors  to  Philadelphia  to  meet  Congress 
and  discuss  methods  of  introdudng  civilisation 
among  the  tribes;  and  in  1793  he  founded  the  Ham- 
ilton Oneida  Academy  (now  Hamilton  College) 
for  the  education  of  American  and  Indian  youth. 
Bibuoobapht:    8.  K.  Lothrop,  in    J.    Spark,  Library  of 

American  Biography,  10  voIb.,  New  York,  1848-61;    W. 

B.  SpracuB,  Annaia  «/  the  American  PtUpU,  I  623-630,  ib. 

1869. 

KIRKPATRICK,  ALEXANDER  FRANCIS:  Church 
of  England;  b.  at  Lewes  (50  m.  s.  of  London), 
Sussex,  June  25,  1849.  He  studied  at  Trinity 
College,  Cambridge  (B.A.,  1871),  where  he  was 
elected  fellow  in  1871.  He  was  ordered  deacon  in 
1874  and  ordained  priest  in  1875.  He  was  assist- 
ant tutor  in  Trinity  College  1871-82  and  junior  proc- 
tor 1881-82,  and  from  the  latter  year  until  1903 
was  regius  professor  of  Hebrew  and  canon  of  Ely. 
Since  1903  he  has  been  Lady  Margaret  professor  of 
divinity  and  honorary  canon  of  Ely.  He  was  uni- 
versity preacher  in  1875,  1878,  1882,  1889,  1897, 
and  1903,  Cambridge  Whitehall  preacher  in  1878- 
1880,  Lady  Margaret  preacher  in  1882  and  1893, 
and  Warburtonian  lecturer  at  Lincohi's  Inn  in  1886- 
1890.  He  was  ftxumining  chaplain  to  the  bishop 
of  Winchester  1878-90,  the  bishop  of  Rochester 
1891-95,  and  again  to  the  bishop  of  Winchester 
1895-1903,  and  since  1903  has  been  examining 
chaplain  to  the  archbishop  of  Canterbiuy.  He  has 
also  been  master  of  Selwyn  College,  Cambridge, 
since  1898,  and  besides  being  the  general  editor  of  the 
Old  Testament  and  Apocrypha  for  the  Cambridge 
BMe  for  Schools  and  Colleges,  for  which  series  he 


has  prepared  the  volumes  on  I  and  II  Samuel  (2 
vols.,  London,  1880-81)  and  the  PSalms  (3  vols., 
1890-1901),  has  written  The  Divine  Library  of  the 
Old  Testament  (1891)  and  The  Doctrine  (/  the 
Prophets  (Warburtonian  lectures;  1892). 

KIRKUS,  WILLIAM:  Protestant  Episcopalian; 
b.  at  Hull,  England,  May  9,  1830;  d.  in  Brooklyn, 
July  10,  1907.  He  was  educated  at  Lancashire 
Independent  College,  Manchester,  and  at  the 
University  of  London  (B.A.,  1849).  He  then 
entered  the  Congregational  ministry,  and  was 
assistant  minister  of  Craven  Chapel,  London, 
1850-52,  minister  of  St.  Thomas  Square  Chapel, 
Hackney,  London,  1852-68,  and  of  Longsight 
Chapel,  Manchester,  1868-70.  From  1870  until 
1872  he  was  headmaster  of  Broughton  High 
School,  Manchester.  In  1872  he  was  admitted  to 
deacon's  orders  in  the  Church  of  England  and 
became  curate  at  Cheatham  Hill,  Manchester. 
In  the  same  year  he  came  to  the  United  States,  and, 
being  ordained  to  the  priesthood,  was  curate  of 
Grace  Church,  New  York  aty,  from  1873  to  1875. 
He  was  then  rector  of  Christ  Church,  Baltimore, 
Md.,  1875-76,  and  rector  of  St.  Michael  and  All 
Angels  in  the  same  city  1876-92.  In  1892  he  re- 
tired from  active  parochial  work  to  devote  himself 
to  literature.  Besides  editing  The  American  Lit- 
erary  Churchman  (Baltimore)  from  1881  to  1885  and 
writing  two  novels  under  the  pseudonym  of  Florence 
Williimison,  he  published  Christianity,  Theoretical 
and  Practical  (London,  1854);  Miscellaneous  Esaayt 
(2  vols.,  1833-69);  Orthodoxy,  Scripture,  and 
Reason  (1865);  and  Rdigion,  a  Reixlation  and 
RuU  of  Life  (New  York,  1886). 

KIRN,  OTTO:  German  Protestant;  b.  at  Hes- 
lach  (a  suburb  of  Stuttgart)  Jan.  23,  1857.  He 
studied  at  the  theological  seminaries  of  Maulbronn 
and  Blaubeuren  and  at  the  University  of  Tubingen 
(1875-80;  Uc.  theol.,  1886;  Ph.D.,  1889),  and  after 
being  lecturer  at  the  theological  seminary  at  Tu- 
bingen 1881-84,  was  deacon  at  Besigheim,  WQrttem- 
beig,  until  1889.  In  1889  he  became  privat-docent 
at  the  University  of  Basel,  where  he  was  appointed 
associate  professor  in  1890  and  full  professor  in 
1894.  Since  1895  he  has  been  professor  of  dogmatic 
theology  at  the  University  of  Leipsic.  He  has 
written  Ud>er  Wesen  und  Begrandung  der  rdigiosen 
Gewissheit  (Basil,  1889);  Schleiermacher  und  die 
Ramantik  (1895);  Olaube  und  GeschichU  (Leipsic, 
1900);  Grundriss  der  evangdischen  Dogmatik  (1905); 
Grundriss  der  the(dogischen  Ethik  (1906);  and  many 
addresses  and  sermons. 

KIRWAN,  WALTER  BLAKE:  Church  of  Ire- 
Und;  b.  of  Roman  Catholic  parents  at  Gort  (18  m. 
s.e.  of  Galway),  CV)unty  GiJway,  Ireland,  in  the 
year  1754;  d.  at  Mount  Pleasant,  near  Dublin,  Oct. 
27,  1805.  He  studied  in  the  Jesuit  College  of  Saint 
Omer,  France;  lived  at  Saint  Croix  (or  Santa  Crux). 
Lesser  Antilles,  with  a  relative  who  was  a  large 
landed  proprietor,  but  iU  health  caused  his  return  to 
Europe.  He  entered  the  Franciscan  order,  studied 
in  Uie  College  of  St.  Anthony  of  Padua,  at  Lou^-ain, 
where  he  became  instructor  in  natural  and  moral 
philosophy,  and  in  that  city  was  admitted  to  the 
priesthood.    From  1778  to  1785  he  was  chaplain 


847 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Kirkland 
KlM  of  Pmm6 


to  the  Neapolitan  ambassador  at  the  British  court. 
His  eloquent  sermons  attracted  attention,  but, 
shaken  in  his  allegiance  to  the  Roman  Church  in 
1785,  he  went  into  retirement  and  two  years  later 
declared  himself  a  Protestant.  On  June  27  he 
preached  his  first  sermon  as  such  in  St.  Peter's 
Church,  Dublin,  and  was  henceforth  identified  with 
the  Church  of  Ireland.  He  never  would,  however, 
say  anything  against  his  former  coreligionists.  In 
1788  he  became  rector  of  St.  Nicholas-Without, 
Dublin,  and  held  this  place  till  his  death,  from  1800 
in  connection  with  the  deanship  of  Killala,  Coimty 
Mayo.  In  1798  he  married  and  was  survived  by 
his  wife  and  four  children.  He  had  great  pulpit 
power,  but  is  chiefly  remembered  for  his  sermons  in 
behalf  of  charities,  as  he  had  remarkable  ability 
in  inducing  persons  to  give.  Of  the  thirteen  ser- 
mons which  were  published  by  his  widow  (London, 
.  1814,  2d  ed.,  1816,  reprinted  Philadelphia,  1816) 
eleven  are  charity  sermons,  and  although  the  pres- 
ent reader  can  not  give  them  their  pristine  attrac- 
tiveness, they  are  interesting  and  moving  discourses 
(one  of  them  is  reprinted  in  H.  C.  Fish's  Maater- 
pieces  of  Pulpit  Eloquence,  i.  681-692).  In  the 
British  Museum  are  two  volumes  of  his  Latin  theses, 
one  on  Biblical  chronology  and  the  other  on  the 
Decalogue  (Louvain,  1776  and  1776). 
Bibuoobapht:  A  sketch  of  his  life,  probably  by  his  widow, 

is  prefaoed  to  his  Sermon*  as  above.    Consult  also  DNB, 

xxxii.  230. 

KIS,  STEPHANUS  (called  Szegedinus  from  his 
birthplace):  Hungarian  Reformer;  b.  at  Szeged 
(96  m.  s.e.  of  Budapest)  1616;  d.  at  lUczkeve 
(22  m.  8.S.W.  of  Budapest)  1672.  He  studied  at 
Vienna  and  Cracow,  and  under  Melanchthon  at 
Wittenberg  1643-46.  He  served  as  school-teacher 
in  his  native  land,  suffering  persecution  for  his  faith 
until  Peter  Petrovics,  conmiander  of  Temesvar 
under  Queen  Isabella  and  a  Calvinist,  took  him 
into  favor  and  made  him  rector  of  his  school  (1648). 
Political  changes  brought  Temesvar  imder  Ferdi- 
nand of  Hapsbuig,  Petrovics  was  succeeded  by  a 
Roman  Catholic  in  1662,  and  all  Protestant  pastors 
and  teachers  were  driven  from  the  town.  Kis 
foimd  refuge  under  Turkish  dominion,  but  the  ill 
will  of  the  Romanists  followed  him  and,  on  their 
complaint,  he  was  kept  imprisoned  in  chains  for  a 
year  and  a  half  by  a  Turkish  pasha  until  his  friends 
released  him  by  a  heavy  ransom  in  1663.  Hence- 
forth he  lived  in  quiet  at  Riczkeve,  acting  as  super- 
intendent of  thirty-five  congregations  under  Turk- 
ish rule.  He  was  the  greatest  scholar  among  the 
Hungarian  Reformers  and  his  works  made  him 
known  in  aU  Europe.  They  are:  (1)  Theohgiae 
sincerae  loci  communes  (Basel,  1686),  preceded  by 
a  sketch  of  his  life  by  his  scholar  and  successor  at 
RiLczkeve,  Matthsus  Skaricza,  which  is  also  an 
important  source  for  the  history  of  the  Reformation 
in  Himgary  and  contains  a  couplet  by  Paulus  Turi, 
another  of  the  pupils  of  Kis,  on  Calvin's  "  Insti- 
tutes": 

Praeter  apostoUoas  post  Christi  tempora  ohartaa 
Huie  peperere  libro  saeeula  nulla  param. 

(cf.  The  Presbyterian  and  Reformed  Review,  Apr., 
1899,  p.  194).  (2)  Speculum  pontifieum  Rornor 
norum  (Basel,  1684;  6th  ed.,  1624;  Germ,  transl., 


1686);  (3)  Aaaertio  vera  de  trinitate  (Geneva,  1673, 
edited  by  Beza);  (4)  Tabulae  analyticae  (Schaff- 
hausen,    1692).  F.  Balooh. 

Biblxoorapht:  The  Life  by  Matthsus  Skariesa  was  re- 
publishfld,  Basel,  1008,  cf.  MiMoManea  Oroeningana  vi. 
1,  pp.  506-569.  1762.  A  life  in  Huncarian.  by  Ladislaua 
Fdldvari,  appeared  at  Budapest,  1890. 

KISS  OF  PEACE:  (Gk.  phiUma  hagion,  phiUma 
agapie,  aapaamoSf  eirini;  Lat.  osculum  sanctum, 
08culum  pads,  salutatio,  pax) :  An  expression  which 
occurs  five  times  in  the  New  Testament  at  the  close 
of  an  apostolic  message  (Rom.  xvi.  16;  I  Cor.  xvi. 
20;  II  Ck>r.  xiii.  12;  I  Thess.  v.  26;  I  Pet.  v.  14) 
in  the  exhortation  "  Salute  one  another  with  an 
holy  kiss  "  or  an  equivalent  expression.  A  con- 
gregational assembly  before  which  the  letters  were 
read  aloud  is  assiuned,  and  a  custom  of  the  synan 
gogue  may  be  involved  (cf.  The  Expoeitor,  ix.  1894, 
p.  461).  The  import  of  the  holy  kiss  is  a  general 
attestation  of  brotherly  love  on  the  ground  of  re- 
ligious fellowship,  and  it  is  not  to  be  considered  an 
independent  lituigical  ceremony. 

After  the  middle  of  the  second  century  the  kiss 
of  peace  has  an  established  place  in  public  worship 
and  a  definite  connection  with  the  Eucharist,  in 
the  transition  from  the  prayers  preceding  and  in- 
troducing that  solenmity  to  the  act  of  consecration. 
This  place  is  assigned  to  it  in  Tertullian,  and 
Clement  of  Alexandria  terms  it  ''a  mystery." 
The  lituigical  sources  and  lituigies  of  the  Eastem 
Church  attest  the  subsequent  continuance  of  the 
practise  in  the  same  context.  At  the  outset, 
moreover,  this  ordinance  appears  to  have  been 
frequently  in  force  in  the  West.  Only  in  Rome  and 
North  Africa,  the  kiss  of  peace  occumd  not  before 
the  consecration,  but  between  consecration  and  com- 
munion, an  arrangement,  which,  in  course  of  time, 
became  the  prevailing  one  in  the  Latin  Church 
(see  Mass,  II.).  The  modification  is  doubtless  to  be 
explained  by  an  endeavor  to  associate  the  practise 
immediately  with  the  eucharistie  solemnity,  to- 
ward which  it  is  directed.  For  in  this  context  the 
kiss  of  peace  has  its  basis  and  significance  under  the 
words  of  the  Lord,  "  First  be  reconciled  with  thy 
brother,  etc."  (llatt.  v.  23  sqq.),  wherein  agree- 
ment or  unity  is  accentuated.  The  ceremony  was 
begun  by  the  deigy  among  themselves,  and  the 
congregation  followed.  It  is  to  be  assumed  that 
originally  the  separation  of  the  sexes  was  duly  ob- 
served; and  to  prevent  disorder,  this  point  was 
repeatedly  and  insistently  emphasised  in  later 
times. 

In  Western  Christendom  the  kiss  of  peace  con- 
tinued to  be  observed  until  the  waning  period  of  the 
Middle  Ages,  though  it  is  an  open  question  to  what 
extent  and  in  what  particular  forms.  The  East  ap- 
pears to  have  given  up  the  general  kiss  of  peace  still 
earlier.  In  both  divisions  of  Christendom  there  was 
substituted  in  its  place  the  practise  of  kissing  the 
altar,  the  sacred  elements,  or  the  stole  by  the  deigy, 
and  kissing  the  hand  by  both  clergy  and  laity.  It 
was  only  transiently  that  they  followed,  in  the  West, 
the  precedent  purporting  to  have  been  adopted  by 
Bishop  Walter  of  York  (1250),  of  usmg  the  '*  kiss 
tablet "  (oeculatorium,  pax),  a  metal,  or,  in  some 
cases,  marble  disc  exhibiting  the  cross  or  sacred 


KiBt       ^      ^ 

XlArenbMh 


THE  NEW  SCHAFP-HERZOG 


848 


figures.  Relics  or  even  the  book  of  the  Gospels  were 
sometimes  employed  in  the  practise.  At  a  later 
period  the  oscukUorium  was  withheld  from  the  laity 
and  reserved  exclusively  for  the  clergy. 

If  not  quite  unrelated,  still  in  only  a  very  general 
relation  to  the  holy  kin,  is  the  kiss  bestowed  on 
neophytes,  after  the  sacrament  of  baptism;  on 
penitents  when  reinstated  in  full  communion;  on 
the  dead;  and  on  candidates  for  ordination. 

Victor  ScHUiyrsE. 

Bibuooraprt:  DB,  iii.  5-6;  EB,  iv.  4252-M;  Bincham, 
Ori^nst,  II.,  xl  10.  xix.  17.  IV.,  vl  16,  XIL.  It.  6,  XV.. 
iii.  3;  E.  Mart^ne.  De  aniiquit  wrtotintf  rUUna,  L.  iii.  4- 
6,  Antwerp,  1736;  A.  J.  Binterim,  Denkwiirdi4fk0Uen, 
1 1,  pp.  103.  492.  iv.  3.  p.  485,  Mains.  1825-27;  W.  PtOmer. 
AniiquiiiM  <^  the  BfHfluh  RihuU^  vol.  ii.,  London,  1845; 
DCA,  u.  902-W6, 

KIST,  NICOLAAS  CHRISTIAN:  I^utch  theo- 
logian; b.  at  Bommel  (25  m.  e.  of  Dort)  Apr.  11, 
1793;  d.  at  Leyden  Dec.  21,  1859.  After  com- 
pleting his  theological  education  at  Utrecht,  he 
served  for  five  years  as  pastor  at  Zoelen,  but  in  1823 
was  appointed  professor  of  historical  theology  at 
Leyden,  where  he  spent  the  remainder  of  his  life. 
His  chief  works  were  De  ChritUiijke  Kerk  op 
aarde  (Haarlem,  1830);  NederlandB  bededagen  en 
biddagabrieven  (2  vols.,  Leyden,  1848-49);  and 
Orationea  quae  ecdeeiae  reique  CkrisHanae  spedard 
historiam  quattuor  (1853).  He  likewise  collaborated 
with  H.  J.  Roijaards  in  establishing  and  editing  the 
Archie/ voor  kerkdijke  geackiedenia  and  its  immediate 
continuations  under  similar  names  (22  vols.,  Ley- 
den, and  Schiedam,  1829-54),  and  with  W.  Moll 
in  founding  and  editing  the  KerkkUtorisch  archie/ 
(4  vols.,  Amsterdam,  1855-66).  (C.  SBPPf.) 

KITCHIK,  GEORGE  WILLIAM:  Church  of 
England;  b.  at  Naughton  Rectory,  Ipswich  (23  m. 
s.e.  of  Bury  St.  Edmunds),  Suffolk,  Dec.  7,  1827. 
He  studied  at  Christ  Church,  Oxford  (B.A.,  1850; 
M.A.,  1852),  and  was  ordered  deacon  in  1852  and 
ordained  priest  in  1859.  He  was  classical  tutor  of 
his  college,  censor  and  junior  proctor,  chaplain  to  the 
bishop  of  Chester  (1871-72),  tutor  of  the  crown 
prince  of  Denmark,  censor  of  non-collegiate  students 
in  the  University  of  Oxford  (1868-83),  and  lecturer 
and  tutor  in  history  in  Christ  Church  (1870-83). 
In  1883  he  became  dean  of  Winchester,  and  in  1894 
dean  of  Durham  and  warden  of  the  University  of 
Durham.  He  was  select  preacher  at  Oxford  1863- 
1864,  Whitehall  preacher  1866-67,  commissary  to  the 
bishop  of  Gibraltar  1874-1904,  and  is  an  honorary 
fellow  of  King's  College,  London,  and  an  honorary 
student  of  Christ  Church.  In  theology  he  is  a 
moderate  liberal.  His  publications  include:  Bar 
con's  Novum  Organum  (2  vols.,  Oxford,  1855); 
Bacon's  Advancement  of  Learning  (London,  ISQO); 
Catalogue  of  Manuscripts  in  the  Library  o/  Chnst 
Church,  Ox/ord  (Oxford,  1867);  A  History  o/ France 
(3  vols.,  1873-77);  U/e  o/  Pope  Pius  11,  (1881); 
Winchester  Cathedral  Records  (2  vols.,  Winchester, 
1886);  Documents  Relating  to  the  Foundation  o/  the 
Chapter  of  Winchester,  A.D.  1541-1647  (London, 
1889);  Winchester  (1890);  Rolls  o/  the  Obedient 
taries  of  St  Swithin*s  Priory,  A.D.  1309-1534 
(Winchester,  1895);  The  Manor  qf  Marydoum, 
Hampshire  (1895);   Edward  Harold  Browne,  Bishop 


o/  Wint^iester:    A  Memoir  (London,  1895);    and 
Ruskin  in  Ox/ord,  and  other  Studies  (1904). 

KITTEL,  RUDOLF:  German  Protestant;  b.  at 
Ehningen  (15  m.  s.w.  of  Stuttgart),  WOrttemberg. 
Mar.  28,  1853.  He  studied  at  TObingen  1871-76 
(Ph.D.,  1879),  and,  after  being  a  pastor  1876-79, 
was  lecturer  at  TObingen  1879-81.  He  was  then 
professor  in  a  gymnasium  at  Stuttgart  until  1888, 
when  he  was  appointed  professor  of  Old-Testament 
exegesis  at  the  University  of  Breslau,  where  he  was 
rector  in  1896-97.  Since  1898  he  has  been  professor 
of  the  same  subject  at  Leipsic.  He  has  translated 
Judges  and  Samuel  for  E.  F.  Kautzsch's  Heilige 
Schri/t  des  AUen  Testaments  (Freiburg,  1892); 
and  the  Psalms  of  Solomon  for  the  same  scholar's 
Apokryphen  und  Pseudepigraphen  des  AUen  Testa- 
ments (Tubingen,  1898);  edited  Chronicles  for  SBOT 
(New  York,  1895);  C.  F.  A.  DiUmann's  Handbuch 
der  alttestamerUlichen  Theologie  (Leipsic,  1895);  the 
sixth  edition  of  the  same  scholar's  Kommentar  zu 
Jesaja  (1898);  and  Biblia  Hebraioa  (in  collabora- 
tion with  various  other  scholars;  Leipsic,  1905-07). 
He  is  likewise  the  editor  of  Saat  au/  Hoffnung,  and 
has  written:  iSMtc^  Frozen  (Stuttgart,  1883);  Ge- 
schichie  der  Hdntler  (2  vols.,  Gotha,  1888-92;  Eng. 
transl.  by  J.  Taylor,  H.  W.  Hogg,  and  E.  B.  Spiers, 
2  vols.,  London,  1895);  Aus  dem  Leben  des  Prophe- 
ten  Jesaia  (Gotha,  1894);  Die  Arrange  der  hetroi- 
schen  OeschichtsschreHmng  im  AUen  Testament  (Leip- 
sic, 1896);  commentaries  on  Kings  and  Chronicles 
(in  W.  Nowack's  Hdndkommentar  rum  AUen  Testa- 
ment; GOttingen,  1900-02);  Die  orientalischen  Aus- 
grabungen  und  die  dUere  biblische  Oeschichte  (Leipsic, 
1903);  Der  BabelrBibelstreit  und  die  Offenbarungs- 
/rage  (Leipsic,  1903);  and  Studien  eur  hebr&iachen 
Archdologie  und  Rdigionsgeschichie  (1908),  in  Bei- 
trdge  eur  Wissenscha/t  vom  AUen  Testament,  which 
he  edits. 

KilTltf.    See  Tabus  op  thb  Natiomb. 

KITTO,  JOHN:  English  Biblical  scholar;  b.  at 
Plymouth  Dec.  4,  1804;  d.  at  Cannstadt,  Germany, 
Nov.  25,  1854.  In  his  eleventh  year  he  had  to  leave 
school  to  assist  his  father,  a  stonemason,  and  in 
1817,  while  carrying  slates  up  a  high  ladder,  he 
suffered  a  fall  that  rendered  him  completely  deaf 
for  the  rest  of  his  life.  Cut  off  from  ordinary  society 
by  this  infirmity  he  now  devoted  himself  to  study 
and  resorted  to  various  expedients  for  earning  pen- 
nies to  procure  books.  With  the  exception  of  a  few 
months  spent  as  apprentice  to  an  ill-natured  Plym- 
outh shoemaker,  he  was  in  the  workhouse  from 
Nov.,  1819,  till  July,  1823.  Friends  then  provided 
for  hJs  support  and  secured  permission  for  him  to 
use  the  public  library^  and  in  1824  A.  N.  Groves 
(q.v.),  a  dentist  at  Exeter^  took  him  as  a  pupil 
In  July,  1825,  he  entered  the  Missionary  CoUege 
at  Islington  to  learn  printing,  and  in  June,  1827, 
he  went  to  Malta  as  a  printer  in  the  employ  of  the 
Church  Missionary  Society.  In  Jan.,  1829,  he  re- 
turned to  England,  and  the  following  June  he 
joined  Groves'  private  mission  party  as  tutor  to 
Groves'  children.  The  party  reached  Bagdad  in 
December.  In  1833  he  returned  to  Ekigland,  ob- 
tained employment  with  Charles  ICnight,  then 
editor  of  the  publications  of  the  Society  for  the 


849 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Klarenbaoh 


Diffusion  of  Useful  Knowledge,  and  wrote  indus- 
triously for  Knights'  Penny  Magazine  and  Penny 
CydopcBdia.  Through  connections  formed  with  Lon- 
don and  Edinburgh  publishers  he  was  now  enabled 
to  follow  his  literary  bent  and  make  for  himself  an 
enviable  reputation  as  a  popular  writer  on  Eastern 
and  Biblical  subjects.  In  1844,  though  a  layman, 
he  was  created  D.D.  by  the  University  of  Giessen; 
in  1845  he  was  elected  a  fellow  of  the  Society  of  An> 
tiquaries;  and  in  1850,  in  recognition  of  his  ''  use- 
ful and  meritorious  literary  works,"  a  civil  list 
pension  of  £100  per  annum  was  conferred  upon  him. 
His  last  years  were  saddened  by  ill  health  and  finan- 
cial difficulties.  When,  in  Feb.,  1854,  he  was  forced 
to  stop  work,  generous  friends  contributed  to  his 
support  and  enabled  him  to  spend  the  last  three 
months  of  his  life  in  Germany.  The  works  for  which 
Kitto  is  particularly  remembered  are:  The  PidorUd 
Bible  (3  vols.,  London,  1835-38);  CydopcBdia  of 
Biblical  Literature  (2  vols.,  Edinbuigh,  1843-45), 
which  he  edited  and  largely  wrote;  and  Daily  Bible 
lUuBtraiume  (8  vols.,  1849-53).  Other  works 
deserving  mention  are:  Pictorial  History  of  Palea- 
tine  (2  vols.,  London,  1841);  and  The  Lost  Senees 
(2  parts,  1845).  He  also  founded  and  edited  the 
Journal  of  Sacred  Literature  (London,  1848-53). 
BiBUocntAPBY:  Biographical  matter  is  contained  in  The 
Lost  Senses,  ut  sup.  Con«\iIt:  J.  E.  Ryland,  Memoire  of 
John  KiUo.  .  .  .  wUh  a  criHcal  EsHmaie  of  Dr.  Kitto'e 
Life  and  WriiinQe  by  Professor  Sadie,  Edinburgh,  1856; 
J.  Eadie.  Life  of  J.  Kitto,  ib.  1882;  W.  M.  Thayer.  From 
Poor-House  io  Ptdpit;  the  Triumphs  of  .  ,  .  John  Kitto, 
Boston,  1859;   DNB,  xzzi.  233-235. 

KLARENBACH,  kldr'en-bdcH,  ADOLF:  German 
Reformer;  b.  at  Lilttringhausen  (17  m.  s.e.  of 
DQsseldorf),  in  the  latter  part  of  the  fifteenth 
century;  executed  at  Cologne  Sept.  28,  1529*.  He 
was  educated  at  Lennep,  at  Mtlnster  (where  he 
came  under  the  influence  both  of  the  Brethren  of  ihe 
Conmion  Life  sec  Common  Life,  Brethren  of 
THE— and  of  the  humanists),  and  at  the  Lau- 
rentian  seminary  in  Cologne,  over  which  pre- 
sided Arnold  of  Tongem,  later  one  of  his  judges. 
For  a  time  after  receiving  his  degree  in  1517  nothing 
is  known  of  him,  but  within  a  few  years  he  was  a 
teacher  in  a  Latin  school  at  Mtlnster.  He  had  al- 
ready come  to  sympathize  with  the  principles  of  the 
Reformation,  perhaps  through  the  influence  of  his 
mother,  and  he  was  obliged  to  leave  the  city  on  a 
charge  of  insulting  the  cross.  In  1524  Klarenbach 
was  associate  rector  at  the  municipal  school  of  Wesel, 
a  town  strongly  in  favor  of  the  new  faith.  There, 
though  he  had  never  taken  orders,  he  seems  to 
have  assumed  ecclesiastical  functions,  aided  by  a 
number  of  others  who  had  become  disaffected  with 
Roman  Catholic  tenets.  The  hostility  of  the  monks 
obliged  him  to  leave  Wesel  for  Osnabrtick  after 
two  years,  and  in  his  new  home  he  taught  Latin, 
in  addition  to  giving  Protestant  lectures  on  certain 
books  of  the  New  Testament  and  the  dialectics  of 
Melanchthon.  His  activity  roused  the  opposition  of 
the  cathedral  chapter  of  CSsnabrtlck,  but  he  declined 
a  call  to  Meldorp,  feeling  that  his  duty  summoned 
him  rather  to  Lennep,  where  he  settled  shortly  after 
Easter,  1527.  The  attacks  there  made  upon  him 
evoked  his  chief  literary  work  in  1527,  in  which  he 
assailed  the  doctrines  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 


and  defended  Protestant  tenets.  Expelled  from 
Leimep,  Klarenbach  turned  to  his  old  friend  Johann 
Klopreis,  the  ex-parish  priest  of  Bflderich,  who 
had  already  been  cited  before  the  spiritual  court  at 
Cologne.  Under  Klarenbach's  inspiration,  however, 
EHopreis  became  so  outspoken  in  his  sentiments  that 
he  was  again  summoned  to  appear  before  the  court 
and  was  imprisoned,  while  Klarenbach,  who  had 
accompanied  him  to  the  trial  to  give  him  encourage- 
ment, was  likewise  placed  in  confinement  on  Apr. 
3,  1528.  EHopreis  succeeded  in  making  his  escape 
Jan.  1, 1529,  but  his  comrade  was  denied  all  hope  of 
freedom. 

The  problem  before  the  Roman  Catholics  of 
Cologne  was  a  serious  one,  for  Protestantism  was 
begiiming  to  work  its  way  insidiously  into  this 
stronghold  of  Roman  Catholicism  in  Germany;  the 
citizens  were  distrustful  of  the  clergy,  and  the  uni- 
versity was  declining  under  Luther's  influence.  In 
view  of  the  importance  of  Klarenbach  in  the  Protes- 
tant movement  and  his  audacity  in  invading  the 
center  of  archiepisoopal  power,  it  became  doubly 
necessary  to  make  a  terrible  example  of  him.  His 
trial  was  a  long  one,  since  not  only  the  ecclesiastical 
court,  but  also  the  civil  court  of  Cologne  and  even 
the  imperial  supreme  court  at  Speyer  were  con- 
cerned. The  latter  wished  Klarenbach  to  be  re- 
leased on  condition  that  he  would  bring  no  claim 
for  damages,  but  the  court  of  the  Inquisition  refiised 
to  agree,  and  on  Mar.  4,  the  sentence  of  death  was 
imposed.  The  execution  took  place  on  Sept.  28, 
the  delay  being  due  to  the  fact  that  the  populace  was 
dLspleased  at  the  verdict  and  must  first  be  pacified. 
During  the  course  of  the  summer,  however,  the  city 
was  visited  by  a  plague,  so  that  the  conviction 
spread  that  this  was  a  divine  retribution  for  mercy 
to  heretics,  and  the  execution  accordingly  became 
feasible,  especially  in  view  of  the  repeated  failures 
of  the  efforts  made  to  induce  him  to  retract  his 
teachings.  The  German  Protestants  regarded 
Klarenbach  and  Peter  Fliesteden,  a  somewhat  fa- 
natical character  of  whom  little  is  known,  but  who 
was  imprisoned  with  Klarenbach  and  died  with 
him,  as  the  martyrs  of  the  Lower  Rhine,  and  in 
1829  the  third  centennial  of  the  execution  was 
publicly  celebrated  and  a  monument  was  erected 
in  his  honor. 

The  exact  relation  of  Klarenbach  to  the  Reforma- 
tion is  somewhat  imcertain,  but  it  seems  probable, 
on  the  whole,  that  he  was  Biblical  rather  than 
professedly  Lutheran,  although  he  had  read  the 
works  of  the  Wittenberg  reformer,  approving  por- 
tions of  them  and  rejecting  others.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  circumstances  of  his  trial  led  him  to  em- 
phasize certain  aspects  of  his  beliefs  and  to  pass 
over  others  more  lightly.  Noteworthy  features  of 
his  defense  were  his  frequent  use  of  the  term  **  breth- 
ren," an  appellation  rare  with  Luther,  and  his  rigid 
avoidance  of  taking  an  oath,  apparently  due  to  the 
influence  of  the  old  Evangelical  thought  as  exem- 
plified by  the  Waldenses,  Moravian  Brethren,  and 
the  Anabaptists.  [While  he  held  that  "  there  is 
no  satisfaction  for  sin  save  the  death  of  Christ 
alone,"  he  yet  insisted  that  "  our  good  works  are 
signs,  witnesses  and  pledges  of  such  faith  in  Christ." 
He  rejected  transubstantiation  and  consubstantia- 


Xlopst 


.opstook 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


860 


tion  alike,  innsting  that  the  elements  in  commu- 
nion are  ''  only  external  signs  and  nothing  more." 
He  defines  baptism  as  '*  dipping  into  the  water  and 
drawing  out  again  "  and  as  inviting  death  to  all 
fleshly  lust  and  a  putting  on  of  a  new  man  and  the 
leading  henceforth  of  a  spiritual  life.  Cf.  extracts 
in  Rembert,  pp.  134  sqq.    a.  h.  n.] 

(E.  BRATKSt.) 
Bibuoobapht:  Spialola  Jahanni*  Rowibmth  ...  in  qua 
nanaiwr  .  .  .  inoo^dia  .  .  .  Addphi  Clarmibaeh,  Co- 
locne.  1630.  ed.  E.  Bratke  and  A.  GantMl  in  Thsolo- 
0%9ehf§  ArbtUen  aua  dem  rhtinudtmi  .  .  .  iVurfigwixigm, 
Freibufs,  1806;  C.  Knfft.  Oe^diidtU  .  .  .  Add/  Claren- 
both  und  Pdtr  Flistteden,  Elberfeld,  1886:  E.  DensnMr, 
G^MCsUcMt  dtr  R4formation  am  Niaderrhain,  DOsMldorf, 
1800;  K.  Rambert  Dm  **Wied€r1AMfer*'  in  Henoohtm 
jmieK  pp.  114-137  et  pMnm,  Beriin.  1800. 

KLARBR,  klOr'er,  WALTER:  Swiss  Reformer; 
b.  at  Hundwil,  canton  of  Appenisell,  1490;  d.  there 
1666.  He  attended  the  schools  in  St.  Gall,  Schaff- 
hausen,  and  Bern,  and  then  spent  four  years  in  the 
Stipendium  regium  at  Paris,  where  he  studied  canon 
law.  He  joined  the  Reformation  at  its  very  start, 
and  in  1522  became  pastor  in  his  native  town.  In 
1531  he  officiated  at  Herisau,  in  1532  at  Gossau. 
During  the  following  ten  years  he  was  preacher  of 
Um&sch,  in  the  canton  of  Appensell,  and  from 
1543  to  1566  again  in  Hundwil.  He  took  part  in  a 
number  of  important  conferences  and  disputations, 
including  the  Disputation  of  Bern  in  1528.  In  1565 
he  wrote,  from  memory,  a  brief  history  of  the  Ref- 
ormation in  Appensell  from  1521  to  1531  (ed.  J.  J. 
Simler,  from  a  German  copy,  the  original  being  lost, 
in  Sammlung  alter  und  neuer  Urkunden^  pp.  803-840, 
Zurich,  1759;  reprinted  by  Heim  from  another 
German  copy  in  the  Appensell  Year  Book  for 
1873,   pp.  86-106).  (Emil  Eouf.) 

Bibuographt:  Some  djiU  from  autobiographio  ■ourora  ap- 
peared, ed.  WalMT.  in  AppanatUmr  Chronik,  1740,  pp.  300- 
301;  other  material  ia  scattered  through  the  souroee  of 
the  history  of  the  Swiss  Reformation. 

KLAUS,  BROTHER.  See  Plus,  Nixolaus  von 
(dbb). 

KLEINBRT,  kloin'ert,  HUGO  WILHBLM 
PAUL:  German  Protestant;  b.  at  Vielguth  (near 
Bematadt,  22  m.  e.  of  Breslau),  Silesia,  Sept.  25, 
1837.  He  studied  at  Breslau  and  Halle  (Ph.D., 
1857;  lie.  theol.,  Breslau,  1860),  and  was  deacon 
and  teacher  of  religion  at  the  gjrmnasium  of  Oppeln 
1861-63,  and  teacher  in  the  Friedrich-Wilhelm 
gymnasium  in  Berlin  1863-65.  He  was  then  in- 
spector at  the  Domkandidatenstift,  Berlin,  1865- 
1867,  and  preacher  at  St.  Gertrude's  in  the  same  city 
1867-77.  Meanwhile,  in  1864,  he  had  become  privat- 
dooent  for  Old-Testament  exegesis  at  the  University 
of  Berlin,  where  he  was  appointed  associate  professor 
of  the  same  subject  in  1868.  Since  1877  he  has  been 
professor  of  Old-Testament  exegesis  and  practical 
theology.  He  was  made  a  consistorial  counselor  in 
1873  and  in  1894  was  created  a  supreme  consistorial 
counselor.  In  theology  he  is  Evangelical,  although 
he  belongs  to  the  critical  school.  He  has  written 
UAer  doB  Buck  KoheUth  (Berlin,  1864);  Augusiin 
und  OoeUie'a  Faud  (1866);  SchiUera  rdigidse  Bedeur 
tung  (1866);  the  commentary  on  Obadiah,  Jonah, 
and  Micah  in  J.  P.  Lange's  BUbdwerk  (Bielefeld, 
1860;  Eng.  transl.,  New  York,  1874);    UrUersuch- 


ungen  tur  aUieslafnenUichen  Rechtt-  und  LUeratuT- 
ffuchiehis  (1872);  Abriss  der  Einleitung  turn  Alien 
TettamenU  in  TabeUer^orm  (Berlin,  1878);  Die 
remdierte  Lutherbibel  (Heidelberg,  1883);  Zur 
ekrisUiehen  KuUur  und  KuUvrgeschichte  (Berlin, 
1889);  Der  preuBsUcke  Agenden^ErUwurf  (Gotha, 
1894);  SdbBtgesprdche  am  Kranken-  und  Sierbdager 
(Berlin,  1896);  Die  Pro/eten  leraele  in  sociaUr 
Betiehung  (Leipsic,  1905);  Homileiik  (1907);  and 
Mueik  und  Rdigion,  OaUeedienet  und  VoUcafeier 
(1908). 

KLBUKER,  klei'ker,  JOHAHN  FRIEDRICH: 
German  Protestant  apologete;  b.  at  Osterode 
(41  m.  8.8.e.  of  Hanover)  Oct.  24, 1749;  d.  at  Kiel 
May  31,  1827.  He  studied  philosophy  and  theology 
at  Gdttingen,  where  he  distinguished  himself  by 
his  restless  energy  and  capacity  for  work.  As  pri- 
vate tutor  at  BQckebuig  he  formed  a  friendship 
with  Herder,  through  whose  influence  he  was  ap- 
pointed prorector  at  Lemgo.  This  post  he  ex- 
changed for  a  gymnasial  rectorship  at  OsnabrOck 
in  1778.  During  the  last  twenty-eight  years  of  his 
life  he  was  professor  of  theology  at  Kiel.  He  was  a 
stanch  adversary  of  the  rationalism  of  the  time  and 
a  prominent  representative  of  a  theosophical- 
Biblical  supematuralism  on  a  historical  basis. 
His  theology  was  distinctly  Christooentric.  He 
regarded  Christianity  as  the  highest  revelation  of 
God,  to  teach  man  the  nature  of  the  highest  good, 
the  kingdom  of  God,  and  to  enable  him  to  partici- 
pate in  its  realisation.  His  numerous  works  attest 
not  only  his  industry,  but  also  his  sound  scholai^ 
ship,  especially  in  Oriental  languages,  patristic,  and 
classical  literature.  They  include:  Menschlicher 
Venudi  Hber  den  Sohn  GoUee  und  der  Menschen 
(Leipsic,  1776);  JohanneB,  Petrue  und  Paulua 
aU  Chrietologen  betrachtet  (Riga,  1785);  Salomonisehe 
Denkwurdigkeiten  (1785);  Neue  PrUfung  uni 
Erkldrung  der  vorzOglicheten  Beweiee  fUr  die 
Wahrkeit  dee  ChrieterUhume  (3  parts,  1787-94); 
Auefukrliche  Untereuchung  der  Grunde  fur  die 
Aechtheit  und  GlaubwUrdigkeit  der  ackri/ilichen 
Urkunden  dee  Chrietenthume  (5  parts,  Leipsic, 
1793-99);  and  Grundries  einer  Encydopddie  der 
Theoiogie  (2  parts,  Hamburg,  180(M)1). 

(F.  Arnold.) 

Bibuookaprt:  H.  Ratjen.  Johann  Friadrieh  Kleuker  und 
Briefe  an  §einB  Freunds,  QOttingen.  1882;  C.  E.  Cauvten:!, 
(h$chiehl0  der  lhaolooiMektn  FakuUAt  tu  Kiel,  1875;  Vo)- 
behr,  PrqfMBoren  und  DoenUtn  der  Chrieiian-AlbreefUt 
Univereitdt  xu  Kiel,  Kiel.  1887. 

KLIBFOTH,    kU'fOth,   THEODOR   FRIEDRICH 
DETHLOF:    German  Lutheran;    b.   at  K6rchow 
near  Wittenbuig  (17  m.  s.w.  of  Schwerin),  Meckleo- 
burg-Schwerin,  Jan.  18,  1810;  d.  at  Schwerin  Jan. 
26,  1895.    He  was  educated  at  the  gymnasium  of 
Schwerin,  and  at  the  Universities  of  Berlin  and  Ros- 
tock.    In  1833  he  was  appointed  in- 
Life,        structor  of  Duke  WiUiam  of  Mecklen- 
burg, and  in  1837  accompanied  Grand 
Duke  Frederick  Francis  as  tutor  to  Dresden.    He 
became  pastor  at  Ludwigslust  in  1840,  and  super- 
intendent of  Schwerin  in  1844.    Since  1835  he  had 
been  the  leading  spirit  in  the  ecclesiastical  and 
theological  affaire  of  his  state.     With  the  abolish- 
ment of  the  old  constitution  of  the  estates  in  1848 


851 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Xlarer 
Xlopstook 


and  the  oiiganization  of  a  parliamentary  government, 
the  rule  of  the  Church  by  the  State  had  become  an 
impoesibility.  Thus  there  originated  in  1850  a 
superior  ecclesiastical  court  with  Kliefoth  as  chief 
ecclesiastical  councilor.  In  1886  he  became  its 
president.  During  the  decades  1850-70,  he  was 
actively  engaged  in  ecclesiastical  reforms.  Being 
convinced  that  the  prosperity  of  the  Church  is  prin- 
cipally dependent  upon  the  efficiency  of  the  admin- 
istrators of  the  means  of  grace,  he  was  intent  upon 
filling  the  deigy  with  the  spirit  and  doctrines  of 
the  Lutheran  Church.  To  this  end  the  faculty  of 
Rostock  was  reorganized  with  teachers  of  strictly 
Lutheran  tendency,  the  institution  of  church  in- 
spections by  superintendents  was  again  called  into 
life,  abuses  in  the  church  service  and  in  the  admin- 
istration of  ecclesiastical  acts  were  abolished,  and 
the  rationalistic  spirit  was  removed  from  the  pulpit. 
New  formularies  of  liturgy  on  the  basis  of  the  old 
church  orders  were  made,  and  the  old  treasiires  of 
Lutheran  church  music  were  embodied  in  a  new  book 
of  melodies. 

Elliefoth  laid  down  his  conception  of  the  Church 
and  church  polity  in  his  A  cA/  Bucher  von  der 
Kirche  (vol.  i.,  Schwerin,  1854).  The  first  four 
books  treat  of  the  kingdom  of  God  founding  of 
the  Church,  of  the  means  of  grace,  of  the  con- 
gregation and  its  service,  and  of  the 
His  Views  Church  and  its  order  and  government. 
of  the  The  last  four  books,  which  were  to 
Church  and  treat  of  the  development  and  comple- 
Church  tion  of  the  Church  never  appeared. 
Polity.  Kliefoth's  peculiar  conception  was  due 
chiefly  to  his  occupation  with  the  old 
Lutheran  chiu*ch  orders.  With  great  eneigy  he 
emphasises  the  divine  foundation  of  the  Church 
through  the  acts  of  salvation  of  the  triune  God; 
its  divine  basis  in  the  means  of  grace,  which  mediate 
and  vouchsafe  the  continuous  effect  of  Christ  and 
his  spirit;  the  divine  institution  of  the  office  of 
the  means  of  grace;  and  the  necessity  of  the  or- 
ganization and  incorporation  of  the  Church  in 
church  order  and  church  government.  The  Church 
is  for  him  the  empirical  congregation  of  the  called, 
and  not  merely  the  congregation  of  true  believers; 
and  for  him  Lutheranism  is  not  merely  a  doctrine  or 
dogmatical  tendency,  but  a  distinctive  church  body 
whose  peculiar  historical  development  is  to  be  peiv 
petuated.  He  opposed  the  territorialism  of  state 
onmipotence,  which  denied  the  independence  of 
the  Church,  the  ooUegialism  of  modem  represent- 
ative church  government,  which  originated  in  the 
Reformed  Church  and  seemed  to  him  to  endanger 
the  privilege  and  authority  of  the  office  of  the  means 
of  grace;  unionism,  which  threatened  to  absorb 
the  Lutheran  Church  as  such,  or  at  least  its  confes- 
sion; and  the  amalgamation  of  Church  and  politics, 
with  its  tendency  toward  the  establishment  of  a 
national  German  Evangelical  Church.  On  the  other 
hand  he  aimed  at  the  restoration  of  the  Lutheran 
state  churches  and  the  strengthening  of  Lutheran- 
ism through  a  closer  union.  In  this  sense  he  repre- 
sented the  government  of  the  Mecklenbuig  church 
at  the  Eisenach  Conference  after  1852;  and  in  1868 
he  founded  with  others  the  AU^emeine  evangeUach- 
hUherische  Kofiferenz. 


Kliefoth  was  one  of  the  strongest  men  among  the 
churchmen  and  theologians  of  his  day,  and  one  of 
the  most  effective  preachers  of  the  nineteenth 
century.  The  political  and  ecclesiastical  liberals 
decried  him  as  a  dangerous  reactionist,  the  unionists 
hated  his  strict  Lutheranism,  the  representatives 
of  pietistic  subjectivism  were  offended  by  his  ec- 
clesiasticism,  and  popular  sentiment  disliked  his 
hierarchical  tendencies.  He  was  also  the  most  no- 
table authority  of  his  time  on  lituigics  and  the 
old  Lutheran  church  orders.  His  LvturgiMke  Ah- 
handlungen  (8  vols.,  Schwerin,  1854-61,  2d.  ed., 
1858-69)  is  his  most  prominent  work,  the  most  pecu- 
liar expression  of  his  spirit.  Other  important  works 
are:  EinleUung  in  die  DogmengeachiMe  (Lud wigs- 
lust,  1839);  Theorie  des  KuUiu  der  evangeliechen 
Kirche  (1844);  Ueher  Predigt  und  Kalechese  in  der 
Vergangenheit  und  in  der  Oegenwart  (in  Meck- 
lenburgieches  KirchenblaUf  ii.  1-55,  169-245, 
Rostock,  1846);  Die  urepningliche  GoUesdienet- 
ordnung  in  den  deutechen  Kirchen  ItUherischen 
Bekenntnieeea  (Rostock,  1847);  Dae  VerhdUnia  der 
Landeeherren  ale  Inhaber  der  KirchengewaU  zu 
ihren  Kirchenbehdrden  (Schwerin,  1861);  Der  preue- 
eieche  Stoat  und  die  Kirchen  (1873);  and  Chrietliche 
Eschatologie  (Leipsic,  1886).  He  also  wrote  com- 
mentaries on  Zechariah  (Schwerin,  1859),  Ezekiel 
(2  parts,  Rostock,  1864-65),  Daniel  (Schwerin,  1868), 
and  Revelation  (Leipsic,  1874).  With  Prof.  O. 
Mejer  of  Rostock  he  edited  the  Kirchliche  ZeUechrift 
(Schwerin,  1854-59),  which,  with  A.  W.  Dieckhoff, 
he  continued  as  Theologiache  ZeUechrift  (1860-64). 
He  published  several  collections  of  sermons,  and 
a  great  niunber  of  single  and  occasional  sermons. 

(Ernst  Haack.) 

BiBLiooaAPHT:  Attgemeine  evangelitchriuthenBcke  Kircken- 
teittmo,  1883.  no.  19.  1805,  nos.  10-16;  L.  von  Hirsch- 
feld«  Friedridi  Fntu  II.  .  .  .  und  teine  VorgAnger,  2 
vols.,  Leipsic.  1801;  C.  Meuael.  KirdUiehet  Handlexikon, 
iv.  11-13.  ib.  1804. 

KLIN6,  CHRISTIAN  FRIEDRICH:  German 
Protestant;  b.at  Altdorf  (11  m.  s.w.  of  Stuttgart), 
WOrttemberg,  Nov.  4,  1800;  d.  at  Marbach  (15  m. 
s.  of  Heilbronn),  Wttrttemberg,  Mar.  8,  1862.  He 
studied  at  Tubingen  and  Berlin,  became  pastor  at 
Waiblingen  in  1826,  professor  of  theology  at  Mar- 
burg in  1832,  at  Bonn  in  1842,  pastor  at  Ebers- 
bach  in  1849,  and  dean  of  Marbach  in  1851.  He 
was  a  pupil  of  Schleiermacher  and  Neander.  In  his 
writings,  as  in  his  lectures,  he  was  instructive,  sound, 
and  winning,  and  showed  himself  a  man  of  fine  dis- 
crimination and  independent  judgment.  He  edited 
the  sermons  of  the  Frandscan  Bertholdt  (Ber- 
(holdi  dee  Frandecanere  Predigten,  Berlin,  1824), 
prepared  for  J.  P.  Lange's  Bibdwerk  the  commen- 
tary on  the  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians  (Eng.  transl., 
in  Schaff's  edition  of  Lange's  Commentary  (N.  T., 
vol.  vi.,  New  York,  1868).  He  also  published  a 
number  of  treatises  in  TSK, 
KLOPSTOCK,  klep'stek,  FRIEDRICH  GOTTLIEB. 

Early  Life  and  Studies  (S  1). 

Studies  at  Leipsic.     Earlier  Poetic  Work  (|  2). 

Life  and  Works  after  1748  (|  3). 

His  Influence  and  Importance  (|  4). 

Friedrich  Gottlieb  Elopstock,  the  great  German 
religious  poet,  was  bom  at  Quedlinburg  (31  m.  s.w. 
of  Magdeburg),  Prussia,  July  2,  1724;  d.  at  Ham- 


Xlopatook 
Xloatemuuin 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


858 


bui^  Mar.  14,  1803.  He  was  descended  from  a 
fandly  which  for  three  generations  had  attained  a 
fair  measure  of  distinction  in  the  law  and  the  govern- 
ment service.  When  Friedrich  was  nine  years  old 
his  father  removed  to  Friedeburg  in 
I.  Early  the  county  of  Mansfeld  where  the 
Life  and  boy  revealed  even  then  that  profound 
Studies,  love  for  nature  which  was  to  find  ex- 
pression in  his  poetry.  At  the  age  of 
thirteen  he  returned  to  Quedlinburg  and  began 
his  studies  at  the  gymnasium,  with  little  en- 
thusiasm and  success,  however.  A  free  scholarship 
enabled  him  to  enter,  in  1739,  the  Schulpforte,  the 
ancient  Schola  Portensis  founded  by  the  Elector 
Maurice  of  Saxony  for  the  education  of  Protestant 
youth.  This  was  the  time  of  the  great  struggle 
between  the  classicists  and  the  romanticists, 
between  Gottsched  and  Bodmer,  and  young 
Klopstock  fell  easily  under  the  sway  of  the 
"revolutionary"  ideas  of  the  Swiss  school.  It 
was  in  1737  that  Gottsched  opened  the  conflict 
by  his  attack  on  Milton's  Paradue  Lost  and  Bodmer 
replied  in  the  celebrated  Vom  Wunderbaren  in  der 
Poesie  (1740)  which  Klopstock  took  as  his  guide  in 
the  study  of  the  epic,  going  at  the  same  time  to 
Homer  and  Veigil  for  his  models.  For  a  time  he  was 
possessed  with  the  desire  of  celebrating  in  epic  form, 
the  deeds  of  Henry  the  Fowler,  liberator  of  Germany 
from  the  Himgarians,  but  it  came  to  him  after 
many  sleepless  nights  that  the  Messiah  was  the 
worthiest  subject  for  the  pen  of  an  epic  writer,  and 
the  youthful  poet  then  entered  upon  his  life's  task 
which  was  to  take  twenty-five  years  in  the  comple- 
tion. He  graduated  from  the  Schulpforte  in  1745, 
delivering  a  valedictory  address  which  must  be  re- 
garded as  marking,  with  the  work  of  Bodmer  already 
mentioned,  the  opening  of  a  new  era  in  the  history 
of  German  literature.  Abandoning  the  standards 
of  the  spiritless  verse-literature  of  the  modem  clas- 
sicists, Klopstock  sounded  an  appeal  for  a  national 
epic  in  the  spirit  of  the  great  epics  of  the  ancient 
world.  He  called  for  a  German  epic  literature  with- 
out knowing  that  such  a  treasure  of  national 
lore  was  in  existence.  At  a  time  when  Vei^ 
was  generally  set  above  Homer  because  the  one 
was  '*  refined  "  and  the  other  "  rude  "  the  youthful 
Klopstock  dared  to  reverse  the  order  and  to  proclaim 
the  Greek  singer  as  the  prince  of  poets. 

In  the  autumn  of  1745  Klopstock  began  the  study 
of  theology  at  Jena;  but  his  disgust  was  speedily 
aroused  by  the  rudeness  of  student  life  there,  and  in 
the  spring  of  the  following  year  he  removed  to 
Leipsic.     Before  his  departure,  however,  he  had 
written  the  first  three  cantos  of  the 
2.  Studies  MessicLB,  in  prose  form.    At  Leipsic  he 
at  Leipsic  came  into  intimate  association  with 
Earlier      Gftrtner,  Andreas  Cramer,  A.  Schlegel, 
Poetic      Rabener,  Zacharift,  Giseke,  and  Ebert, 
Work,      who,    with   others,   formed   a   poetic 
circle   whose  productions   were   pub- 
lished in  the  Bremer  Beiirdge  edited  by  G&rtner. 
Here  in  an  atmosphere  of  culture  and  personal  affec- 
tion, Klopstock  began  the  composition  of  odes  on 
the  Horatian  mode!.    From  the  year  1747  date  the 
Lehrling  der  Oriechen,  Wxngdlf  Die  KUnfHg  Gdiibte, 
and  from  the  following  year,  Selmar  und  Selma,  An 


Ebert,  An  Gieeke,  Petrarca  und  Laura,  and  othere. 
In  1746  he  had  selected  the  hexameter  as  the  most 
suitable  form  for  his  epic,  and  after  laboring  for 
nearly  two  years  on  the  recasting  of  his  prose  ma- 
terial into  verse  published  the  first  thz^  cantos 
of  the  Measiae  in  the  Bremer  Beitrdge  in  1748. 
The  effect  produced  on  the  popular  mind  was 
tremendous;  in  the  national  literature  they  opened 
a  new  line  of  development.  Above  the  musical 
and  empty  verse  jingle  of  the  time  the  opening 
songs  of  the  Afeniaa  towered  incomparable,  with 
their  fervid  religiosity  and  poetic  fire  cast  in  noble 
Homeric  phrase  forms.  As  Kleist  said,  so  lofty 
and  rich  a  style  had  been  deemed  impossible  in 
Germany.  Lbbb  enthusiastic  natures  were  carried 
away  by  the  exalted  piety  which  now  found  ex- 
pression in  such  full-mouthed  utterance.  In  spite 
of  much  that  was  personal  in  the  Af  essios,  much 
that  was  historically  and  critically  unwarranted,  no 
one  could  deny  its  author  the  gift  of  poetic,  soul- 
stirring,  Christian  inspiration. 

In  1748  Klopstock  left  Leipsic  and  took  up  the 
post  of  tutor  in  the  house  of  a  relative  at  Langen- 
salza,  where  his  duties  gave  him  ample  leisure  for 
the  pursuit  of  his  poetic  works.  At  the  same  time 
he  was  at  work  on  the  fourth  and  fifth  cantos  of 
the  Meaeiae;  happy,  it  may  be  presumed,  in  the 
enjojnnent  of  a  vast  popularity.  Hos- 
3.  Life  and  tile  critics,  however,  were  not  wanting; 
Works  the  orthodox  deigy  assailed  his  "  bold 
after  1748.  fictions,"  while  the  followers  of  Gott- 
sched found  fault  with  the  technique 
of  the  poem  and  the  excessive  sentimentality  that 
characterises  it  in  parts.  In  the  spring  of  1750 
Klopstock  returned  to  Quedlinburg,  but  went  soon 
after  to  Switzerland,  where  his  Messias  had  achieved 
its  greatest  triumph.  He  remained  in  Zurich  till 
the  spring  of  1751  when  he  went  to  Copenhagen 
at  the  invitation  of  Frederick  V.  whose  minister, 
Bemstorff,  was  one  of  his  warmest  admirers. 
The  recipient  of  a  liberal  pension,  he  could 
now  devote  himself  to  the  completion  of  his  great 
poem.  In  1754  he  married  Biai^areta  Moller, 
whom,  three  years  earlier,  he  had  met  in  Ham- 
burg, and  had  subsequently  sung  under  the  nsjne 
of  Cidli,  and  with  whom  he  lived  happily  till  ber 
death  in  1758.  From  this  period  date  many  odes 
and  the  plays,  Der  Tod  Adame  (1757),  SaJamo  (1764), 
and  Die  Hermannsechlacht  (1769),  the  latter  reveal- 
ing his  complete  lack  of  the  dramatic  sense  and  all 
contributing,  by  their  unrestrained  sentimentality, 
to  the  deterioration  of  dramatic  standards  in  Ges^ 
many.  Frederick  V.  died  in  1766;  Gount  Bemstorff 
soon  after  fell  from  power,  and,  retiring  in  1770  to 
Hamburg,  was  followed  by  Klopstock  who  passed 
the  remainder  of  his  life  in  that  city  with  the  excep- 
tion of  the  years  1774  and  1775,  when  the  Margrave 
Charles  Frederick  of  Baden  summoned  him  to  Garb* 
ruhe.  There,  in  spite  of  honors  conferred  upon  him, 
the  poet  found  conditions  little  to  his  taste.  It  was 
on  his  return  to  Hamburg  that  he  met  Goethe,  but 
the  acquaintance  then  formed  soon  came  to  an  end. 
In  1774  there  appeared  Die  GelehrtenrepubUk  con- 
taining Klopstock 's  opinion  on  literary  questions, 
conditions,  and  personalities  of  the  times  as  well  as 
his  investigations  in  the  history  of  the  Gemian 


858 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Klopstook 
Bloatermaiin 


language.  This  work  fell  far  below  expectatiooB,  as 
Goethe  tells  in  the  twelfth  book  of  his  Dichtung  und 
WahrheU,  In  1779  there  appeared  the  FragmerUe 
uber  Sprache  und  Dichtkunst  and  in  the  following 
year  the  definitive  edition  of  the  Messias,  Klop- 
stock's  last  years  were  passed  in  a  leisurely  activity, 
devoted  to  the  composition  of  odes  and  the  prepara- 
tion of  an  edition  of  his  collected  works.  The  out- 
break of  the  French  Revolution  aroused  his  enthu- 
siasm and  he  was  honored  with  the  citizenship  of 
the  French  Republic,  but  the  excesses  of,  the  later 
revolutionists  were  learned  with  horror  and 
anger.  In  1791  he  married  Frau  von  Winthem 
(n^  Dimpfri),  a  niece  of  his  first  wife.  He 
had  no  children.  Among  his  last  productions 
are  several  epigrams  directed  against  the  Kantian 
philosophy. 

It  was  Klopstock  who,  to  quote  Platen,  gave 
new  life  to  the  German  language  and  liberated  it 
from  the  thraldom  of  the  French.    Poesy  became 
the  beautiful  and  noble  expression  of 
4.  His  In-  the  artist's  soul  finding  full  satisfaction 
fluence  and  in  the  sincere  formulation  of  the  prob- 
Importance,  lems  that  beset  it.    This  has  been  the 
main  characteristic  of  German  poetry 
since  the  time  of  Klopstock  and   only  they  have 
achieved  and  retained  primacy  who  have  remained 
faithful  to  it.     Klopstock's  joyous  and  enthusiastic 
nature  found  its  most  grateful  expression  in  the 
national  and  sacred  song.    Whenever  he  wanders 
outside  of  these  realms  he  falls  beneath  his  own 
level.    If  the  great  period  in  German  literature  that 
followed  him  may  be  characterized  as  being  marked 
by  a  successful  assimilation  of  national  poetic  ele- 
ments with  foreign  elements  of  ancient  and  modem 
times,  Klopstock  must  be  regarded  as  the  one  who 
ushered  in  this  new  era.     The  one  quality  that  he 
possessed  above  his  contemporaries  was   the  ele- 
ment of  Germanic  patriotism  which  evinced  itself 
in  his  life  and  thought.    He  is  Germanic  in  the 
delight  he  takes  in  tales  of  heroic  deeds  and  in  nature, 
home,  and  love ;  Germanic  above  all  in  that  passionate 
longing  for  salvation  which  is  the  great  inheritance 
of  the  German  people.    His  admiration  of  the  heroic 
finds  utterance  in  odes  like  Kaiser  Heinrich,  Mein 
VcUerland,  Hermann  und   Thusndda^  Heinrich  der 
Vogter^  Die  heiden  Muaen,  Die  K&nigin  Luise,    His 
love  of  nature  speaks  in  the  Bardale,  Zuncherseey 
Friedentbwrg,  Rheinweinf  Dae  Rosenband,  Die  tote 
Clarissa,    A  mighty  current  of  faith  pulsates  in  such 
odes  as  An  Gott,  Dem  Erl&ser,  Der  Erbarmer,  Das 
grosse  Hallelujah,  as  well  as  in  his  magnificent  hjrmn 
of  the  Resurrection.    This  confidence  in  the  Savior 
reveals  itself  in  the  certain  hope  of  a  rising  from  the 
dead  and  of  an  eternal  life,  and  Klopstock  is  the 
poet  of  the  future  life  primarily.    When  Gervinus  in 
his  life  characterises  the  Messias  as  "  &n  imbroken 
succession  of  monstrous  errors  "  he  has  overlooked 
this  great  fact.    At  the  same  time  he  has  failed  to 
recognize  the  essential  weakness  of  the  poem  which 
coDBists  in  this,  that  an  individual  here  attempts  to 
create  an  epic  where  the  necessary  conditions  and 
presuppositions  are  absent.    A  national  epic  can 
arise  only  on  the  basis  of  a  common  national  life 
and  the  poet  in  this  case  becomes  only  the  mouth- 
piece as  is  the  case  with  the  Heliand.     A  "  poetic 
VI.— 23 


invention  "  such  as  Klopstock  resorts  to  in  his  cre- 
ation of  a  Christian  mythology  is  fatal  to  the  epic 
story  from  the  very  beginning,  since  the  true  epic 
poet  finds  his  activity  not  in  creation  but  in  narra- 
tion of  traditional  facts;  as  far  as  diction  is  con- 
cerned it  must  be  the  simple  language  of  the  people. 
Judged  by  these  standards,  the  Messias  as  an  epic 
is  a  failure.  But  on  the  other  hand  it  must  not  be 
denied  the  merit  of  having  disseminated  through- 
out the  European  world,  this  joyous  message  of  sal- 
vation free  from  all  dogmatic  and  credal  restrictions. 
Klopstock's  most  unsuccessful  attempt  was  his  re- 
casting of  the  old  hymns  of  the  Church  which,  in 
their  utter  lack  of  sympathy  for  an  objective  world 
and  a  consciousness  of  nationality,  proved  ungrate- 
ful material  for  his  talents.  On  the  other  hand 
what  he  excelled  in  was  his  knowledge  of  classi- 
cal antiquity  and  especially  of  the  poetiy  of  the 
Greeks. 

His  works  first  appeared  in  Leipsic,  7  vols.,  1798- 

1810,  but  not  in  complete  form  till   1844^45,  11 

vols.;    his  correspondence  appeared  in  3  vols,  at 

Stuttgart,  1839-40.    There  are  numerous  editions  of 

all  or  part  of  his  works;  e.g.  Oden  (Stuttgart,  1889; 

Eng.  transl.,  London,  1848).    Of  Messias,  on  which 

his  fame  rests,  an  Eng.  transl.  appeared  in  4  vols. 

at  Hamburg,  1821-22.  (A.  Fbetbb.) 

Biblioobapht:  C.  F..Gnuiier,  Klop$toek,  2  vda.,  Hamburg, 

1777-78;  idem,  Klopatock,  Er;  und  Uber  thn,  5  vols.,  ib., 

1780H>2;    J.  M.  H.  Ddring,  KlopUoeks  Leben,  Weimar. 

1825;   J.  W.  L6beU,  Die  ErUwickeluno  der  deutachsn  PoeHe 

vor  Klopatoek'B  erttem  Auftreten  hU  su  OoetKet  Tod,  3  Tola.. 

Brunswick,  1850-65;  R.  Hamel.  Klop&tockMtudien,  Rostock, 

1870-^80;    K.  Heinemami,  KloputoekB  Leben  und  Werke, 

Bielefeld,  1890;    F.  Mu^cker,  Klopetock,  QeaehidUe  seifiss 

Uhena  und  9einer  Sduriften,  2  vols.,  Stuttgart,  1900;  Julian, 

Hvmnoiogy,  pp.  625-626. 

KLOSTERMAllff,  AUGUST  HEINRICH:  Ger- 
man Protestant;  b.  at  Steinhude  (15  m.  w.n.w.  of 
Hanover)  May  16,  1837.  He  studied  in  Erlangen 
and  Berlin  1855-58,  and  was  assistant  pastor  in 
Backeburg  until  1864.  From  1864  to  1868  he  was 
tutor  and  privat-docent  at  Gdttingen,  and  since 
1868  has  been  professor  of  Old-Testament  exegesis  in 
Kiel.  He  has  written:  VindioB  Luoana  (Gdttingen, 
1866);  Das  Markusevangdium  nach  seinem  Quellen- 
werie/Qr  die  evangeliache  Geschichte  (1867);  Unier- 
suchung  zur  dUtestamenUichen  Theahgie  (Gotha, 
1868);  Korrektvren  gur  bisherigen  Erkldrung  des 
Rdmerbriefes  (1881);  Die  GemHtsHimmungen  der 
Christen  in  R&mer  v.  1-11  (Kiel,  1881);  Ud>er 
deutsche  AH  bei  Martin  Luther  (1884);  Die  Got- 
tesfurchl  als  HauptetUck  der  WeisheU  (1885); 
Die  Bucher  Samudis  und  der  K&nige  ausgdegt 
(NOrdlmgen,  1887);  Zur  Thearie  der  biblischen 
Weissagufig  und  zur  Charakteristik  des  Hebrder- 
briefes  (1889);  Der  Fentaieiuh,  Beitrdge  tu  seinem 
Verstdndnis  und  seiner  Entstehungsgeschichte  (Leipsic, 
1893);  Deuterajesaia,  hebr&isch  und  deutsch  (Mu- 
nich, 1893);  Geschichte  des  Volkes  Israd  bis  zur  Res- 
tauratian  unter  Esra  und  Ndiemia  (1896);  Ein 
diploTnaiischer  Brieftvechsd  aus  dem  zweiien  Jahr- 
tausend  vor  Christo  (Kiel,  1898);  Deuteronomium 
und  Grdgds  (1900) ;  and  Schuhoesen  im  alien  Israd, 
(Leipsic,  1908). 

KLOSTERMAIfN,  kles'ter-mon,  ERICH:  Ger- 
man Protestant;    b.  at  Kiel  Feb.  14,  1870.     He 


Knapp 
Knoaokor 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


854 


studied  at  the  academy  of  NeuchAtel  and  the  univer- 
sities of  Leipsic,  Kiel,  Berlin,  and  Erlangen  (Ph.D., 
Kiel,  1892).  In  1901  he  became  privat-dooent  for 
New-Testament  exegesis  and  early  Christian  litersr 
ture  in  Kiel,  where  he  was  appointed  full  professor  in 
1905.  He  has  written  De  libri  Cohdeth  versione  Alex- 
andrina  (Kiel,  1892);  Orieehiaehe  Ezzerpte  atta  Ho- 
milien  dea  Origenea  (Leipsic,  1894);  Analekta  zur 
SeptiuigirUa,  Hexapla  und  PatriaUk  (1895);  Die 
Sckrifien  dea  Origenea  und  Hieronymua  Brief  an 
Paula  (Berlin,  1897);  Utherlieferung  der  JeremioB- 
homilie  dea  Origenea  (Leipsic,  1897);  Euaebiua' 
Schrift  irepl  tuv  roiriKav  bvofidruv  tuv  kv  ry  Stlg,  ypa/^ 
(1902);  Reaie  dea  Petruaevangeliuma,  der  Petruaapo- 
kalypae  und  dea  Kerugma  Petri  (Bonn,  1903);  Ud>er 
dea  Didymua  von  Alexandrien  In  epiatolaa  canonicaa 
enarratio  (Leipsic,  1905) ;  and  commentary  on  Mark 
(Tubingen,  1907 ;  in  collaboration  with  H.  Grea»- 
mann). 

KNAPP,  ALBERT:  The  most  distinguished  Ger- 
man writer  of  spiritual  songs  in  the  first  half  of  the 
nineteenth  century;  b.  at  Tubingen  July  25,  1798; 
d.  at  Stuttgart  June  18,  1864.  He  was  the  son  of  a 
councilor  of  the  superior  court  in  Tubingen,  and 
his  boyhood  was  spent  in  the  poetic  and  inspiring 
atmosphere  of  the  Black  Forest.  He  entered  the 
seminary  of  Maulbronn  in  1814,  and  from  1816  to 
1820  studied  at  the  Evangelical  theological  seminary 
in  Tubingen,  where  he  imbibed  more  poetry  than 
theology  and  found  the  pranks  of  student  life  more 
to  his  taste  than  the  supematuralism  of  the  time.  In 
1820  he  was  sent  to  Feuerbach  aa  vicar,  and  later 
to  Gaisberg,  both  villages  near  Stuttgart.  In 
Gaisbeig  he  met  Ludwig  Hofacker  (q.v.)  and  under 
his  influence  Knapp's  life  became  more  serious  and 
his  convictions  more  Evangelical.  In  1825  he  was 
appointed  deacon  in  Sulz-on-the-Neckar  and  in  1831 
in  Kirchheim,  at  the  special  request  of  Duchess 
Henrietta  of  WUrttembeig.  In  1836  he  became 
deacon  at  the  Hospitalkirche  in  Stuttgart,  then 
archdeacon  at  the  Stiftskirche,  and  in  1845  pastor 
of  St.  Leonardskirche.  He  declined  the  office  of 
rural  dean  and  was  not  active  in  the  Christian 
and  charitable  associations  of  the  town,  preferring 
to  confine  himself  to  parochial  duties,  by  which 
he  won  many  personal  friends  and  the  love  of  his 
congregation. 

Knapp's  character  was  eminently  broad,  strong, 
and  natural,  his  motto  being  Homo  aum,  nil  hu- 
mam  a  ms  alienum  puio.  His  mind  was  open  to 
everything  noble  and  sublime  in  art  and  nature. 
But  this  susceptibility  was  kept  within  the  limits 
of  a  spiritual  orthodoxy,  and  he  attacked  every 
philosophy  and  theology  which  attempted  to  shake 
or  undermine  the  fundamentals  of  Christian  truth, 
which  was  for  him  also  the  absolutely  beautiful.  He 
was  averse  to  all  extremes,  to  those  of  orthodoxy  as 
much  as  to  the  negative  tendencies  of  the  theolo- 
gians, nor  had  he  any  sympathy  with  the  one- 
sided views  of  sect.  His  standpoint  was  that  of  -a 
pure  Evangelical  Christianity  and  a  moderate  con- 
fessionalism.  He  was  not  as  powerful  a  preacher 
as  Ludwig  Hofacker,  but  his  sermons  are  distin- 
guished by  a  varied  wealth  and  depth  of  thought 
expressed  in  vigorous  language.    His  addresses  to 


his  fellow  preachers  at  ministerial  conferences  were 
no  less  remarkable. 

Knapp  was  an  original  poet  and  hymn-writer 
and  his  claim  to  permanent  fame  rests  upon  his 
gift  for  spiritual  poetry.  His  collections  of  poems— 
ChriaOiche  Gedichie  (2  vols.,  Basel,  1829);  Ntiure 
GedichU  (2  vols.,  1834);  Ckriatenlieder  (Stutt©irt, 
1841),  a  collection  of  hjmms  including  forty-eight 
original;  Neueate  Folge  (1843);  Auewahl  (1854, 
1868);  Herbatblaten  (1859)— reveal  his  fertiUty, 
though  some  of  them  lack  final  finish.  Nature  and 
its  glories  furnish  him  inexhaustible  material  and 
inspiration,  but  he  also  treats  facts  of  history  and 
powerful  personah'ties.  In  his  Ckriatoierpe,  a 
Christian  almanac  and  year-book,  which  he  edited 
from  1833  to  1853,  he  celebrates  poets  like  Goethe 
and  Schiller,  warriors  hke  Napoleon,  musicians  like 
Bach,  Handel,  Mozart,  and  Beethoven,  German 
heroes  like  the  HohenstaufiFens,  classical  antiquity, 
and  modem  history.  He  aimed  to  unite  in  his  poems 
*'  transient  nature  and  the  fleeting  life  of  man,  and, 
raising  itself  above  them  both,  the  Word  of  God  in 
its  eternal  youth."  As  far  back  as  the  twenties  be 
conceived  the  idea  of  offering  to  the  Christian  public 
an  Evangeliacher  LiederachaU  fiir  Kirche  und  Ham. 
From  more  than  80,000  hymns  he  selected  3,590  and 
published  them  at  Stuttgart  in  1837.  He  con- 
sidered some  changes  of  the  text  necessary,  especially 
the  removal  of  harsh  expressions  and  granrniatical 
faults;  but  he  went  further  and  took  the  liberty  ci 
"  putting  shallow  and  feeble  expressions  into  & 
more  vigorous.  Biblical  language  and  of  filling  up 
apparent  gaps  by  new  strophes  and  of  freely  re- 
producing whole  songs."  In  single  cases  he  suc- 
ceeded brilliantly,  but  on  the  whole  he  had  to  con- 
fess in  the  second  edition  (1850)  that  he  had  been 
freauently  guided  too  strongly  by  his  subjective 
feehngs.  Even  in  this  revised  edition  he  did  not 
properly  reproduce  the  original,  as  he  was  still 
guided  by  the  principle  that  the  old  hymns  should 
be  adapted  to  modem  taste.  The  same  may  be  said 
of  the  third  edition  (1865).  The  work  received 
bitter  criticism  from  G.  C.  H.  Stip  in  his  Htfmnolth 
giache  Reiaebriefe  (Berlin,  1852)  and  from  Philipp 
Wackemagel  in  the  Kvrchenlag  at  Bremen  in  U:^ 
same  year.  A  collection  of  Knapp's  proee  works 
appeared  under  the  title  Geaammelie  proadiache 
Sckrifien  (2  parts,  Stuttgart,  1875).  It  consists 
chiefly  of  biographies  of  men  like  Ludwig  Hofadi^er, 
Dann.  Fktt,  Eberhard  WOmer,  Hedinger,  Zinsen- 
dorf,  and  others.  Here  the  poet  perceived  many 
traits  of  character  and  motives  of  life  which  would 
be  lost  to  the  ordinary  eye. 

(Richard  LAUXMANNt-) 

Bibuoorapht:  A  Lebentbild,  hegwa.  by  himaelf  and  fin- 
iflhed  by  his  aon,  J.  Knapp,  appeared  Stattgart,  1867. 
Brief  aketohes  are  by  K.  Gerok,  ib.  1879.  and  O.  BrOssan. 
Hamburg*  1002;  Julian,  Hymnology,  pp.  627-628. 

KNAPP,  knap,  6E0R6  CHRISTIAll:  German 
Protestant;  b.  at  Glaucha,  Halle,  Sept.  17,  1753;  d. 
at  Halle  Oct.  14, 1825.  He  was  the  son  of  the  pietist 
Johann  Georg  Knapp,  and  was  one  of  the  last  ex- 
ponents of  Pietism  in  Halle.  After  studying  at  the 
universities  of  Halle  and  G6ttingen  he  became  ex- 
traordinary professor  of  theology  at  HaUe  in  1777 
and  full  professor  in  1782.    In  1785  he  assumed, 


866 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Knapp 
Kneaoker 


with  A.  H.  Niemeyer,  the  direction  of  the  Francke 
foundations,  comprising  the  orphan-house,  the 
Latin  school,  and  the  Bible  and  Missionary  Institute. 
In  spite  of  failing  health  he  administered  his  labo- 
rious offices  for  more  than  four  decades  with  great 
fidelity  and  success.  Though  diffident  and  re- 
served, Knapp  was  a  popular  teacher,  and  his  lec- 
tures on  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  as  well  as  on 
Christian  doctrine,  were  largely  attended.  When 
Tholuck  visited  him  toward  the  close  of  his  life,  he 
produced  a  bundle  of  letters  from  former  students, 
remarking,  "  Here  is  my  comfort,  in  the  letters  of 
those  in  whom  the  scattered  seed  first  began  to 
spring  up  during  their  professional  experiences." 
As  a  writer  Knapp  turned  mainly  to  exegesis.  His 
principal  works  are  a  translation  of  the  Psalms, 
with  notes  (Halle,  1776;  3d  ed.,  1789);  an  excellent 
edition  of  the  New  Testament  (1797;  6th  ed.,  1840); 
and  the  collection  of  treatises,  Scriptaj  varii  argu- 
menti  maximam  partem  exegetici  atque  historid 
(2  vols.,  1805;  2d  ed.,  1824).  Posthumous  were 
Varlesungen  iiber  die  ChrisUiche  Glaubenslehre  (ed. 
K.  Thilo,  2  parts,  1827;  En^*.  transl.,  Lectures 
on  Christian  Theology,  2  vols.,  New  York,  1831- 
1833);  and  BiblischeOlaubenslehre  vomehmlich  zum 
praktischen  Gebrauch  (ed.  E.  F.  Guerike,  Halle, 
1840);  and  BeitrOge  zur  Lebensgeschichte  August 
GotUid}  Spangenbergs  (ed.  O.  Frick,  1884).  Men- 
tion may  be  made  of  two  popular  anonymous 
tracts,  Was  soil  ich  thun,  doss  ich  sdig  werdef 
(1806);  and  Anleitung  zu  einem  goUsdigen  Leben 
(1811).  In  collaboration  with  I.  L.  Schulze  and 
A.  H.  Niemeyer  he  edited  the  review,  Frankens 
Sti/tungen  (3  vols.,  Halle,  1792-96).  In  this  he 
published,  among  other  things,  Spener^s  Ld>en, 
Verdienste  und  StreUigkeiten  (vol.  i.,  pp.  79-114); 
Speners  und  Frankens  Klagen  iiber  die  Mdngd  der 
Rdigionslehrer  (vol.  ii.,  pp.  33-84,  161-220);  and 
Johann  Anastasius  Freylinghausen  (vol.  ii.,  pp.  305- 
333).  Knapp  collaborated  in  the  Beschreibung  des 
Halleschen  Waisenhauses  (Halle,  1799),  and  also 
edited  Missionaberichte  (Halle,  1799-1824). 

(Georo  MClleb.) 

Bibuogbaphy:  P.  Tschackert.  in  ADB,  xvi.  206-267;  H. 
Holtmuum  and  R.  ZOpffel.  Lexikon  fax  TKnUtnit  und 
Kirehenweaen,  p.  600.  Brunawick,  1888;  F.  Vigouiouz, 
Dietionnairede  la  Bible,  iii.  1010-11.  Pftris.  1903. 

KNEEL  AND,  ABNER:  American  editor  and 
deistic  writer;  b.  at  Gardner,  Mass.,  Apr.  6,  1774; 
d.  at  Farmington,  la.,  Aug.  27,  1844.  He  was  first 
a  Baptist,  then  a  Universalist  minister,  but  ulti- 
mately became  a  deist.  After  editing  universalist 
periodicals  in  Philadelphia  and  New  York,  he  went 
to  Boston  and  founded  there  in  1831  the  Investigator. 
For  views  expressed  in  this  paper  he  was  tried  for 
blasphemy  before  the  supreme  court  at  Boston 
in  1836  and  sentenced  to  imprisonment  for  a  short 
time.  His  works  include:  The  New  Testament  in 
Greek  and  English  (2  vols.,  Philadelphia,  1822); 
Lectures  on  the  Doctrine  of  Universal  Salvation 
(1824);  and  A  Review  of  the  Evidences  of  Christi- 
anUy  (New  York,  1829). 

BiBXiiooBAPHT:  The  trial  v&  reviewed  in  his  own  Review  of 
the  Trial,  Convieiion  and  FiniU  Impriaonment  .  .  .  of  A. 
Knadand,  Bo«ton.  1838;  C.  G.  Greene,  Read  and  Jvdge, 
ib.    1834;    S.  D.  Parker,  Report  of  the  Arguments  of  the 


Attorney  .  .  .  at  the  Triale  of  A.  Kneeland,  ib.  1834; 
CoBmopolite,  Review  of  the  ProeeaUion  aoainei  A,  Knee' 
land.  ib.  1853. 

KNEELING.    See  Worship. 

KNEELING  CONTROVERSY  IN  BAVARIA:    An 

incident  of  Bavarian  ecclesiastical  politics  under  the 
ministry  of  Karl  von  Abel  between  1838  and  1845. 
King  Ludwig  I.  (1825-48),  an  arbitrary  ruler,  pa> 
ticularly  in  the  later  years  of  his  reign,  longed  for 
the  restoration  of  the  old  glory  of  the  Roman  Church, 
and  appointed  Abel,  an  outspoken  Roman  Catholic 
reactionary,  minister  for  the  interior.  As  such  he 
aimed  blow  after  blow  at  the  Protestants.  On 
Aug.  14,  1838,  an  order  of  the  war  department  re- 
quired all  soldiers,  regardless  of  confession,  to  kneel 
in  the  mass  and  likewise  if  they  happened  to  be 
on  guard  duty  when  the  host  was  carried  by  in  the 
Corpus  Christi  procession.  Numerous  petitions 
for  the  revocation  of  the  order  were  sent  to  the  su- 
preme consistory  and  the  coimcil  of  state,  but  proved 
fruitless,  Abel  persuading  the  king  that  plots  of  the 
liberal  opposition  were  concealed  in  all  Protestant 
complaints.  The  consistory  remained  silent  till  1843, 
but  then,  incited  by  the  increasing  arrogance  of 
Abel  and  the  determined  resistance  of  the  Protes- 
tants, they  represented  that  the  act  required  of  the 
latter  was  for  them  a  sin.  An  attempt  was  made  to 
annul  the  order  by  legislative  action  but  failed. 
Even  J.  J.  I.  von  Dollinger  defended  it,  claiming  that 
kneeling  was,  for  the  Protestant  soldier,  merely  a 
motion  of  the  body  having  nothing  to  do  with 
faith  and  conscience,  and  a  vehement  literary  con- 
troversy was  carried  on  between  G.  C.  A.  von 
Harless  (q.v.)  and  other  Protestants  and  Roman 
Catholic  theologians.  The  first  modification  of  the 
offensive  order  exempted  Protestant  soldiers  from 
attending  Roman  Catholic  services,  and  in  Dec, 
1848,  its  more  objectionable  requirements  were 
annulled  by  the  personal  intervention  of  the  king, 
who  finally  listened  to  other  counselors  than  Abel 
and  learned  the  true  import  of  the  opposition  and 
its  serious  character.  AbePs  administration  was 
overthrown  in  1847.  The  entire  movement  bene- 
fited the  Protestant  Church  more  than  it  ad- 
vanced the  Roman.  (E.  Dorn.) 

Biblioorapht:  E.  Dorn,  in  BeitrAge  zur  hayeriedyen  Kir- 
dienoeediichte,  v.,  parta  1-2.  Erlangen,  1899;  K.  Fuohs, 
Annalen  der  proteetanOechen  Rirche  in  .  .  .  Bayem, 
Munich,  1839;  G.  Eilers,  Betmchtungen  und  Urtheile  dee 
.  .  .  E.  L.  von  Aetere  liber  die  .  .  ,  Parteibetoegungen 
unaeres  Jahrhunderte,  Saarbrfloken,  1869;  G.  ThomaBius, 
Da§  Wiedererwachen  dee  evangeliechen  Lehene  in  der  lu- 
therietJten  Kirche  Bayeme,  Erlangen,  1867. 

KNEUCKER,  kneik'er,  JOHANN  JAKOB:  Ger- 
man Protestant;  b.  at  Tauberbischofsheim  (19  m. 
s.w.  of  Wurzburg)  Feb.  12,  1840.  He  studied  in 
Heidelbeig,  1861-65,  where  he  became  privat- 
docent  in  1873.  In  1880  he  was  appointed  associate 
professor  of  Old-Testament  exegesis  and  Semitic 
languages  in  Heidelberg.  He  was  also  engaged  in 
pastoral  work  from  1865  to  1904,  holding  the  pas- 
torate of  Eppelheim,  near  Heidelberg,  for  the  last 
twenty-one  years  of  this  period.  In  theology  he 
belongs  to  the  critical  school,  and  besides  editing 
F.  Hitzig's  Vorlesungen  iiber  biblische  Theologie 
und  messianische  Weissagungen  des  Alien  Testaments 
(Carlsruhe,  1880),  has  written  Siloah,  Quell,  Teich 


rht 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


856 


und  Tal  in  JeruBolem  (Heidelberg,  1873);  Lku 
Bueh  Bamch  (Leipeic,  1879);  Die  AttfAtige  det 
r&miidien  Ckriatentunu  (Karbinihe,  1881);  Un- 
glavbe  oder  Olaubef  (Heidelberg,  1805);  and  Die 
GleichberechUgung  dee  kirchlichen  LiberaUemue  mU 
der  kirchlichen  RechtglOubigkeit  im  Liehle  dee  bib' 
liechen  Chrietentume,  der  re/armaiorieehen  Qrund^ 
eOlxe  und  dee  hadiedten  Bekenntnieeiandee  (1898). 

KHIGHT,  ALBION  WILLIAMSON:  Protestant 
Epiiioopal  bishop;  b.  at  White  Springs,  Fla.,  Aug. 
24, 1869.  He  studied  at  the  University  of  the  South, 
Sewanee,  Tenn.,  but  on  account  of  illness  took  no 
degree.  In  1881  he  was  ordered  deacon,  was  ordained 
priest  in  1883,  and,  after  being  a  missionary  in  south- 
em  Florida  1881-83,  held  parishes  at  Palatka, 
Fla.,  1884-^,  and  Jacksonville,  Fla.,  1886-93.  He 
was  dean  of  the  cathedral  at  Atlanta,  Ga.,  1893- 
1904,  and  was  consecrated  bishop  of  Cuba  in  1904. 

KNIGHT,  GEORGE  THOMSON:  Universalist; 
b.  at  Windham,  Me.,  Oct.  29,  1850.  He  was  edu- 
cated at  Tufts  College  (B.A.,  1872;  M.A.,  1875) 
and  at  the  Tufts  Divinity  School  (B.D.,  1875),  and 
has  taught  in  the  latter  institution  since  1875,  as 
instructor  in  rhetoric  and  church  history  1875-83, 
as  professor  of  church  history  1883-1901,  and  as 
professor  of  Christian  theology  since  1901.  He  is 
also  secretary  and  librarian  of  the  Universalist 
Historical  Society.  He  has  published:  The  Oood- 
neee  <^  Ood  (Boston,  1904);  and  The  Praiee  qf 
Hypoeriey  (Chicago,  1906). 

KNIGHT,  WILLIAM  ALLEN:  Congregational- 
ist;  b.  at  Milton,  Miss.,  Oct.  20,  1863.  He  studied 
at  Adalbert  College,  Western  Reserve  University, 
Hiram  College,  Hiram,  O.  (B.A.,  1889),  Oberiin 
Theological  Seminary,  from  which  he  was  graduated 
in  1900,  and  Harvard  University  (1903-05).  He 
was  associate  pastor  of  the  First  Presbyterian 
Church,  Cleveland,  O.,  1891-94,  and  became  pas- 
tor of  the  First  Congregational  Church,  Saginaw, 
Mich.,  in  1894,  of  the  Central  Congregational 
Church,  Fall  River,  Mass.,  in  1897,  and  of  the 
Brighton  Congregational  Church,  Boston,  in  1902. 
In  theology  he  belongs  to  the  liberal  school,  and 
has  written:  The  Song  ef  our  Syrian  Oueet  (Boston, 
1903);  The  Love  Watch  (1904);  Saint  Abigail  qf  the 
Pinee  (1905);  The  Tryel  by  the  Sea  (1905);  and 
Signe  in  the  Chrietmae  Fire  (1908). 

KNIPPERDOLLING  (KNIPPERDOLLINCK), 
BERNT:  German  Anabaptist;  bom  in  MOnster; 
executed  there  Jan.  23,  1536.  He  came  of  a  re- 
spected family  and  was  himself  a  merchant;  he 
became  involved  in  the  riot  of  1527  at  MQnster  and 
was  imprisoned  by  the  bishop,  but  by  a  fine  secured 
his  release.  He  adopted  the  faith  of  the  Anabap- 
tists, sheltered  some  of  the  leaders  in  his  house,  and 
was  after  the  victory  of  the  faction  made  bOiger- 
ueister.  He  aided  in  the  placing  of  John  of  Ley- 
den  at  the  head  of  affairs  at  MUnster  (see  MCnster, 
Anabaptibtb  in),  and  became  sword-bearer  and  then 
governor;  but  when  the  city  was  retaken,  he  was 
captured  and  put  to  death. 
Bxbuoobaprt:  Consult  the  literature  under  MOnstbr,  Ana- 

>  IN. 


KNIPSTRO,  knip'stro,  JOHANNES:  German  the- 
ologian and  one  of  the   founders   of  the   Protes- 


tant church  in  Pomerania;  b.  at  Sandau  (49  m. 
n.n.e.  of  Magdeburg)  May  1,  1497;  d.  at  Wolgast 
(33  m.  s.e.  of  Stralsund)  Oct.  4,  1556.  Little  is 
known  regarding  his  early  life,  but  in  1516  he  went 
from  a  Franciscan  cloister  in  Silesia  to  a  Minorite 
convent  at  Frankfort-on-the-Oder,  probably  for  the 
prosecution  of  his  studies  there.  A  legend  dating 
from  the  end  of  the  seventeenth  century  describes 
Knipstro  as  meeting  and  overcoming  the  celebrated 
Tetzel  in  a  public  debate  on  indulgences  in  Jan., 
1518,  but  earlier  sources  contain  nothing  to  support 
this  tradition.  It  is  more  correct  to  say  that  Knip- 
stro embraced  the  teachings  of  Luther  at  an  early 
age,  and  that  about  the  year  1521  he  began  to 
preach  the  new  doctrines  publicly  at  Pyritz,  whither 
he  had  been  transferred  in  the  hope  of  counteractr 
ing  his  heretical  tendencies.  Erasmus  of  Man- 
teuffel,  bishop  of  Cammin,  ordered  the  arrest  of 
Knipstro,  who  succeeded  in  making  his  escape  to 
Stettin  and  was  a  preacher  in  Stralsund  in  Nov., 
1525.  There  he  remained  till  1531,  taking  an 
important  part  in  the  organisation  of  the  church  sys- 
tem and  acting  as  a  snidous  supporter  of  the  Lu- 
theran doctrine  against  the  principles  of  Zwinglian- 
ism  which  found  favor  among  some  of  his  colleagues. 
After  two  years'  sojourn  in  Greifswald  Knipstro 
returned  to  StnUsund,  where  he  rose  to  a  position 
of  eminence, .  and  continually  endeavored  to  im- 
press conservative  Lutheranism  on  the  religious 
life  of  the  city.  He  represented  Stralsund  in  the 
important  religious  assembly  of  the  Hansa  towns 
which  met  at  Hamburg  in  1535,  and  subsequently 
became  court  preacher  to  Duke  Philip  of  Pomerania- 
Wolgast.  When  the  country  was  divided  into  the 
three  sees  of  Wolgast,  Stettin,  and  Stolp,  Knipstro 
was  appointed  general  superintendent  of  the  first 
diocese,  displaying  in  the  performance  of  his  office 
an  active  zeal  for  the  improvement  of  discipline  and 
the  moral  uplifting  of  the  clergy.  From  1539  to  1541 
he  was  professor  of  theology  at  the  new  University  of 
Greifswald,  and  though  he  held  no  academic  de- 
gree, he  continued  uninterruptedly  to  fill  this  posi- 
tion after  1543,  resigning  his  pastorate  in  Wolgast. 
In  1552,  however,  he  left  Greifswald  and  returned  to 
his  parish.  Together  with  Paul  von  Rode,  he  drew 
up,  in  1542,  a  new  constitution  for  the  church 
which  was  adopted  by  the  provincial  synods.  To- 
ward the  Interim  Knipstro  maintained  an  attitude 
of  politic  compromise  in  deference  to  the  wishes  of 
Diike  Philip,  who  nominally  accepted  it  for  his 
dominions  and  made  his  peace  with  the  emperor. 
In  the  Osiandrian  controversy  which  broke  out  soon 
after,  Knipstro,  as  an  opponent  of  Osiander,  entered 
into  controversy  with  Petrus  ArtopOus  of  Stettin. 
and  published,  in  accordance  with  the  instructions 
of  the  synod,  his  Anttoort  der  Theologen  und  Paetcren 
in  Pommem  avfdie  Confeetxon  A.  Oeiandri  (Witten- 
berg, 1552).  The  dispute  lasted  several  years  and 
resulted  in  the  deposition  of  ArtopOus. 

Of  far  greater  importance  was  the  contest  which 
Knipstro  carried  on  against  Johann  Freder  over  the 
question  of  ordination,  a  controversy  in  which 
political  and  doctrinal  interests  were  closely  in- 
termingled. Freder,  who  was  a  brother-in-law  of 
Justus  Jonas,  had  been  summoned  from  a  tutorial 
position  to  the  post  of  preacher  in  the  Hamburg 


857 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Xniffhl 
Knoke 


ht 


cathedral  in  1540,  but  had  not  been  inducted  with 
the  laying  on  of  hands  on  account  of  the  opposition 
of  the  Roman  Catholic  canons.  In  1547  he  be- 
came superintendent  at  Stralsimd  and  accordingly 
exercised  the  powers  of  examination  and  ordination 
over  the  city  cleigy.  Knipstro  now  demanded  that 
Freder  should  receive  ordination  at  his  hands,  an  act 
which  would  have  been  an  official  recognition  of  the 
authority  of  the  general  superintendency  of  Wol- 
gast  over  Stralsund.  The  authorities  of  Stralsimd 
forbade  Freder  to  submit  to  such  ordination,  and 
in  1549  the  dispute  was  interrupted  for  a  time  by 
the  dismissal  of  Freder  on  account  of  his  opposi- 
tion to  the  Interim.  In  1549  Freder  became  pro- 
fessor of  theology  at  Greifswald,  and  in  1550  super- 
intendent at  Rtlgen,  then  part  of  the  ecclesiastical 
province  of  the  Danish  bishop  of  Roeskilde,  who 
had  the  power  of  confirmation.  To  nullify  this 
authority  Knipstro  introduced  Freder  into  office  at 
ROgen  without  waiting  for  the  confirmation  of 
Bishop  Palladius  of  Roeskilde,  who  now  required 
Freder  to  appear  in  Copenhagen.  Philip,  however, 
forbade  him  to  make  the  journey,  whereupon  Knip- 
stro entered  into  a  sharp  controversy  with  Freder, 
denying  the  power  of  ordination  to  one  who  had 
not  himself  been  ordained.  Freder  in  reply  denied 
that  the  imposition  of  hands  constituted  an  essential 
part  of  ordination,  and  appealed  to  the  Wittenberg 
theologians,  who  declared,  through  Melanchthon 
and  Bugenhagen,  that  the  custom  of  imposition  as  a 
praiseworthy  practise  was  derived  from  old  apos- 
tolic times  and  that  it  should  not  be  abandoned, 
although  one  might  be  considered  duly  ordained 
who  had  not  observed  it.  In  1551  Freder  was  or- 
dained by  Palladius  in  Denmark,  and  though  he 
was  deprived  of  his  professorship  at  Greifswald  he 
still  remained  superintendent  at  Rtigen  and  in  1553 
came  to  an  agreement  with  Knipstro.  The  contest, 
however,  was  speedily  renewed,  and  as  Freder  as- 
sumed a  radical  position  in  defiance  of  a  decision  of 
the  synod  of  Greifswald,  he  was  compelled  to  leave 
Rttgen  and  became  superintendent  at  Wismar. 
Knipstro,  who  had  thus  vindicated  the  authority 
of  the  ruling  powers  against  that  of  a  foreign  bishop, 
continued  in  the  active  exercise  of  his  duties  for 
the  remainder  of  his  life.  (G.  Kawerau.) 

Biblxoorapht:  J.  Runge  (d.  1695),  BreviM  duignaHo, 
IMutly  printed  in  J.  G.  L.  Kosogarten,  De  aeademia  Pom- 
erana,  pp.  26  sqq..  Greifswald,  1830;  J.  F.  Mayer,  Syno- 
dologia  Pomeranica,  ib.  1703;  F.  Bahlow,  JdhannM 
Knipstro,  Halle.  1808.  Conault  also:  O.  Foek,  RUQeMch- 
Parnmersehe  OudiicKUn,  ▼.  217  sqq.,  Leipaic,  1868;  G. 
Rietoohel,  Luther  und  die  Ordination,  pp.  00  sqq.,  Witten- 
berg. 1880. 

KNOBEL,  AUGUST  WILHELM :  German  Prot- 
estant ezegete;  b.  at  Tzschecheln  near  Sorau  (55 
m.  s.s.e.  of  Frankfort-on-the-Oder),  Lower  Lusatia, 
Aug.  7,  1807;  d.  at  Giessen  May  25,  1863.  He 
studied  at  the  gsrmnasiimi  of  Sorau  and  at  the  Uni- 
versity of  Breslau  (Ph.D.,  1831;  Th.D.,  1838),  where 
he  became  privatrdocent  in  1831  and  professor  ex- 
traordinary of  theology  in  1835.  His  Propheti&- 
mu8  der  Hebrder  (2  vols.,  Breslau,  1837)  secured  him 
a  professorship  in  theology  at  Giessen  in  1839. 
At  Giessen  he  lectured  exclusively  on  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. His  lectures  were  of  great  value  from  the 
linguistic,  historicali  and  archeological  side,  though 


the  decidedly  rationalistic  bent  of  his  mind  pre- 
vented him  from  thoroughly  appreciating  the  poeti- 
cal and  theological  value  of  the  Old  Testament. 
His  works  are  distinguished  by  sobei^mindedness 
and  discretion,  by  sound  linguistic  and  historical 
views,  and  by  a  comprehensive  knowledge  of  Orien- 
tal antiquity.  With  the  exception  of  the  above- 
mentioned  work  and  Vdlkertafel  der  Genesis  (Gies- 
sen, 1850),  he  published  exclusively  exegetical 
works;  viz.,  conmientaries  on  Isaiah  (Leipsic, 
1843;  3d  ed.  1861),  which  involved  him  in  a  con- 
troversy with  Ewald,  and  occasioned  him  to  write 
his  Exegetiaches  Vademecum  fur  Herm  Ewald  in 
Tubingen  (Giessen,  1844);  Genesis  (Leipsic,  1852; 
2d  ed.  1860);  Exodus  and  Leviticus  (1857);  and 
Numbers,  Deuteronomy,  and  Joshua  (1861).  They 
all  appeared  in  L.  Hirzel's  Kurzgefaaetee  exege- 
Heches  Handbuch  eum  Alien  Testamentf  and  with 
the  contributions  of  Otto  Thenius  and  Ernst  Ber- 
theau,  form  the  most  valuable  part  of  that  col- 
lection. Knobel  also  wrote  a  conmientary  on 
Ecclesiastes  (Leipsic,  1836).  (O.  ZOcKLERf.) 

Biblioorapht:  H.  E.  Scriba,  BiographiacMiterdriBchee 
Lexikon,  ii.  387.  Darmstadt.  1843;  C.  Meusel.  Kirehlidtea 
Handlexikon,  iv.  23,  Leipsic,  1804;  ADB,  xvi.  300-304. 

KNOBPFLER,  knnp'fler,  ALOIS:  German  Ro- 
man Catholic;  b.  at  Schomburg  Aug.  29,  1847. 
He  studied  in  Tubingen  (Ph.  D.,  1873)  and  at  the 
theological  seminary  at  Rottenburg,  and  after  being 
a  lecturer  at  the  Wilhebnstif t,  TQbingen,  1876-80, 
was  teacher  at  the  Realschule  at  Schrambeig  and 
professor  in  the  Lyceum  of  Passau  from  1880  to  1886. 
Since  1886  he  has  been  professor  of  church  his- 
tory in  the  University  of  Munich,  of  which  he  was 
rector  in  1893-94.  Besides  editing  the  fifth  and 
sixth  volumes  of  the  second  edition  of  C.  J.  von 
Hefele's  Conciliengeschichie  (Freiburg,  1886-90)  and 
VeroffenUichungen  atis  dem  kirchengeschichtlichen 
Seminar  Mundhen  (Munich,  1899  sqq.),  to  which  he 
has  contributed  editions  of  Walafried  Strabo's  Liber 
de  exordiis  et  incrementis  rerum  ecdesiasticarum 
(Munich,  1890)  and  Rabanus  Maurus'  De  institvr 
Hone  dericorum  Hbri  tree  (1900),  he  has  written 
Kelchbewegung  in  Bayem  unter  AJbrechi  V,  (Mimich, 
1891);  Wert  und  Bedeuiung  des  Studiums  der 
Kirchengeschichte  (1893);  Lehrbuch  der  Kirchenge- 
schichte  (Freiburg,  1895);  Johann  Adam  Mdller 
(Mimich,  1896);  and  Das  Vaterunser  im  Geiste  der 
KirchenMer  in  Wort  und  Bild  (in  collaboration 
with  L.  Gl6tzle;  Freiburg,  1898). 

KNOKE,  knO'ke,  KARL:  German  Lutheran;  b. 
at  Schmedenstedt  (near  Peine,  13  m.  n.w.  of  Bruns- 
wick) Oct.  15,  1841.  He  studied  in  Gottingen  and 
Erlangen,  and  was  private  tutor  (1865-67),  prin- 
cipal of  a  school  at  Walsrode  (1867-69),  teacher  in 
the  normal  school  at  Alfeld  (1869-75),  and  prin- 
cipal of  a  similar  institution  at  Wunstorf,  near 
Hanover  (1875-^2).  Since  1882  he  has  been  pro- 
fessor of  practical  theology  in  Gdttingen.  In 
1904  he  was  made  abbot  of  Bursfelde,  and  is  also 
a  consistorial  councilor.  He  is  the  founder  of  the 
Evangelical  Lutheran  Association  in  the  province 
of  Hanover,  and  has  written:  Zur  Methodik  der 
biblischen  Geschichie,  i.  (Hanover,  1875);  Der 
Christ  und  die  poliHsche  Geprdge  der  Zeit  (1876); 
Dm   erste    Triennium  des  SckuUehrerseminars   zu 


KnoU; 


KnoUys 

Knowledge,  Theologioal 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


858 


WunsUnf  (1877);  Uiber  KaiechtsmusurUerricht 
(1886);  Prakti9di4heologi8cher  Kommentar  zu  den 
Paaioralbriefen  de$  Apostds  PatUua  (2  vols.,  GOttin- 
gen,  1887-89);  Grundns8  der  prakHschen  Theologie 
(1889);  QrufidrxBS  der  Padagogik  und  ihre  Ge- 
Bckichte  8eU  dem  ZeUaUer  dee  Humanismue  (Berlin, 
1894);  Zur  Geschichte  der  biblischen  Figur-Spruch- 
Backer  (Gotha,  1899);  and  Atugabe  dee  luUier- 
iechen  Enchiridiona  hie  zu  Luthen  Tods  (Stutt^rt, 
1903).  He  also  edited  the  fourth  edition  of  J.  J. 
van  Oosterzee's  PatioraJbriefe  und  der  Brie/ an  Phile- 
mon (Bielefeld,  1894),  and  editions  of  T.  Mancinns' 
Die  Paaeion  Chrieti  (GOttingen,  1898)  and  Luther's 
smaller  catechism  (Halle,  1904). 

KNOLLYS,  nOls,  HAlfSBRD:  English  Particu- 
lar Baptist;  b.  at  Gawkwell  (20  ta,  e.n.e.  of  Lincoln), 
Lincolnshire,  c.  1599;  d.  in  London  Sept.  19,  1691. 
He  studied  at  Cambridge,  took  orders  in  1629,  and 
became  vicar  of  Humberstone,  Lincolnshire,  but 
resigned  his  living  in  1636,  became  a  separatist 
and  renounced  his  orders.  The  same  year  he  was 
arrested  on  a  warrant  from  the  High  Gommission 
Court  and  imprisoned  at  Boston,  Lincolnshire. 
Escaping  through  the  connivance  of  his  keeper  he 
fled  to  New  England  early  in  1638,  and  later  in  that 
year  founded  a  church  at  Dover,  N.  H.,  over  which 
he  presided  till  his  return  to  England  in  1641. 
It  is  not  known  when,  or  where,  he  was  baptized 
into  the  Baptist  faith;  but  in  1645  he  was  ordained 
pastor  of  a  Baptist  congregation  that  he  had  gath- 
ered in  London.  He  held  several  offices  under 
Cromwell's  government,  and  preached  to  laige  au- 
diences without  interference  till  the  Restoration 
(1660).  After  an  enforced  absence  of  some  three 
years  in  Germany  he  resumed  his  pastorate  in  Lon- 
don and  preached  there  almost  up  to  the  day  of  his 
death.  In  1670  he  was  arrested  and  imprisoned 
imder  the  second  Conventicle  Act  (q .  v. ) ,  but  was  soon 
discharged.  In  1689  he  took  a  leiading  part  in  the 
movement  to  unite  the  Baptists.  He  wrote  several 
books,  including:  The  Shining  of  a  Flaming  Fire 
in  Zion  (London,  1646);  The  Rudiments  of  the  He- 
brew Grammar  in  English  (1648);  Grammatica 
LatincB,  GrcBccB  et  Hfkraica  Compendium  (1665); 
and  his  autobiography  to  the  year  1672  (1692), 
which  was  completed  by  W.  Kiffin.  The  Hanserd 
Knollys  Society  was  organized  in  London  in  1845 
to  republish  early  Baptist  writings;  it  was  dissolved 
after  ten  volumes  had  been  issued. 

Biblzoobapht:  DNB,  xxxi.  279-281  gives  a  liat  of  the  scat- 
ten  og  BouTGes  and  acoounta. 

KNOPKEN,  knep'ken  (KNOP,  KNOPPE),  AN- 
DREAS,   AND   THE   REFORMATION   IN   RIGA: 

Andreas  Knopken,  the  Reformer  of  Riga,  was  bom, 
probably  in  a  village  near  KUstrin  (17  m.  n.e.  of 
Frankfort),  possibly  in  1493,  and  he  died  at  Riga 
Feb.  18,  1539.  In  1511  he  was  a  student  at  Frank- 
fort-on-the-Oder,  and  shortly  afterward  went  to 
Riga.  Becoming  discontented  with  his  environment, 
he  devoted  himself  anew  to  study,  and  accordingly 
went  to  Treptow,  where,  imder  the  leadership  of 
Bugenhagen,  he  soon  acquired  such  proficiency  in 
the  Bible  that  he  was  appointed  assistant  to  his 
teacher  at  the  school  in  the  same  city.  The  teachers 
were  under  the  influence  of  Lutheranism,  and  the 


new  movement  thus  spread  among  the  monks  and 
cleigy,  and  prepared  the  way  for  the  Reformation 
among  the  laity.  The  measiuies  taken  by  Erasmus 
Manteuffel,  afterward  bishop  of  Kammin,  resulted 
in  the  closing  of  the  school,  but  Knopken  had  al- 
ready returned  to  Riga,  together  with  a  number  of 
Livonian  scholars,  in  1521. 

Even  before  his  coming,  however,  the  works  of 
Luther  were  eagerly  read  in  Livonia,  and  in  ground 
which  had  been  thus  prepared   Knopken,  intro- 
duced by  a  letter   of   Melanchthon,  actively  im- 
planted his  propaganda.    The  number  of  his  ad- 
herents increased  continually,  and  to  confirm  them 
in  their  faith  he  lectured  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Ro- 
mans (Wittenberg,  1524),  laying  Us  chief  stress  on 
the   presentation    of    Evangelical   doctrines,   and 
especially  on  the  cardinal  dogma  of  justification, 
the  position  being  that  of  the  writings  of  Luther  and 
Melanchthon  between  1519  and  1521.    He  likewise 
polemised    sharply  against    the    Roman  Catholic 
Church.     To  ch^  this  Protestant  propaganda, 
Jasper  Linde,  archbishop  of  Riga,  urged  the  grand 
master   Plettenberg  to   take   repressive   measures 
against  the  Evangelicals,  but  the  request  was  re- 
fused, and  the  grand  nuwter  advised  a  disputation 
instead.    The  debate  accordingly  took  place  in  tbe 
choir  of  St.  Peter's  on  June  19,  1522,  and  was  ad- 
judged to  be  a  victory  for  Knopken.     Under  such 
circumstances  it  became  easy  for  the  authorities  to 
declare  their  allegiance  to  the  Reformation,  and 
after  a  letter  addressed  to  the  archbishop  with  a 
request  for  a  reform  of  the  CHiurch  and  the  appoint- 
ment of  Evangelical  teachers  had  proved  fruitless, 
the  municipal  council,  aided  by  the  elders  of  both 
gilds,  elected  Knopken  archdeacon  of  St.  Peters, 
where  he  delivered  his  inaugural  sermon  Oct.  23. 
1522.    The  protection  of  the  authorities  enabled  iiim 
to  officiate  without  fear  of  molestation,  and  he  soon 
received  assistants  in  his  personal  friend  Joachim  Mai- 
ler and  in  Sylvester  Tegetmeier.   The  denunciatory 
speeches  of  the  latter,  however,  led  to  grave  excesses 
on  the  part  of  the  Protestants,  and,  though  they 
were  checked  for  a  time,  they  broke  out  again  in 
1524.    In  this  time  of  riot  Tegetmeier  had  no  part, 
for  soon  after  the  first  eonmiotion  he  had  ch^iged 
his  course,  and  had  so  won  the  confidence  of  the 
authorities  that  he  was  soon  invited  to  become  the 
pastor  of  St.  James,  entering  upon  his  duties  there 
on  the  first  Sunday  in  Advent,  1522.     The  number 
of  Evangelical  preachers  in  Riga  steadily  increased, 
while  the  efforts  of  the  archbishop  to  induce  tbe 
German  government  to  suppress  the  movement  were 
unsuccessful,  and  served  only  to  incite  the  citizens 
of  Riga  to  greater  hostility.    They  refused  allegiance 
to  Linde's  successor,  Johann  Blankenfeld,  and  tbe 
grand  master  was  obliged,  in  accordance  with  tbe 
terms  of  his  agreement  with  the  Lutherans,  to  give 
them  his  protection.     The  archbishop  was  suspected 
of  coquetting  with  the  Russians  and  was  arrested  by 
the  grand  master,  but  regained  his  freedom  by  an 
ostensible  submission  and  hastened  to  Livonia  to 
complain  to  the  emperor.     He  died  on  the  way, 
however,    and   his   successor,    Thomas   SchOning, 
desiring  to  regain  his  archiepiscopal  rights  and  es- 
tates, granted  the  Lutherans  their  privileges  and 
freedom. 


360 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Knollvs 

Knowledire,  Theoloffioal 


In  1530  Knopken  and  Johann  Briessmann  (q.  v.), 
who  had  been  called  from  KOnigsberg  three  years 
previously,  prepared  a  church  order  for  Riga,  basing 
it  primarily  on  the  KOnigsbei^  articles  of  1525  and 
closely  following  Luther's  FcnmUa  miasm.  After 
the  separation  of  the  community  from  Roman 
Catholic  control,  the  council  took  charge  of  the  ad- 
ministration of  ecclesiastical  affairs,  electing  and 
calling  pastors  in  cooperation  with  the  gilds,  and 
providing  for  the  maintenance  of  the  clergy,  the 
churches,  and  the  schools.  Two  members  of  the 
council,  with  the  mayor  as  a  ''superintendent,'' 
formed  a  sort  of  consistory  for  the  administration 
of  external  affairs  after  1532,  but  the  internal  control 
remained  in  the  hands  of  the  chief  clergy.  The 
congregations  were  represented  by  their  elders  in 
the  election  of  pastors  and  in  the  administration 
of  the  funds  for  the  church  and  the  poor.  By  the 
time  of  Knopken's  death,  the  Reformation  had  been 
carried  through  in  Riga,  and  in  1554  Evangelical 
preaching  was  officially  proclaimed  free  from 
restrictions  in  all  Livonia. 

(F.   HORSGHBLMANNt.) 

Bxblioorafht:  F.  Hdrschelinaim,  Andreaa  Knoj^:en^  der 
Reformaior  Rioaa,  Leipsic  1896;  T.  Schiemaim,  Die  Re- 
formation AU^IAvlatuU,  Hambtirgt  1886. 

KNOWLEDGE,  THEOLOGICAL,  PRINCIPLE  OF. 

Christ  the  Source  of  Theological  Knowledge  (S  1)- 
Knowledge  a  Progression  (S  2). 
The  BibUcal  Christ  (S  3). 
Summary  (f  4). 

In    the   early   Protestant   theology   the   entire 

Scripture  was  the  basis  of  theological  knowledge; 

in  modem  theology  the  historic  Christ 

X.  Christ  is  regarded  as  the  only  source  of 
the  Source  knowledge  of  God  and  things  divine. 

of  Theo-  It  is  admitted  that  God  makes  himself 
logical  known  by  inner  workings  in  the  spirit, 
Knowledge,  but  it  is  claimed  that  real,  that  is, 
clear,  certain,  and  general  knowledge 
flows  only  from  that  medium  through  which  the 
subjective  experiences  of  Christians  are  conveyed, 
from  the  Christ  of  tradition.  Nature  and  extra- 
Christian  history  are  considered  as  sources  which, 
without  Christ,  are  ambiguous  and  enigmatical. 
Even  the  practical  reason  can  give  only  a  religion 
of  morality,  and  not  a  sin-forgiving  grace. 

If  it  be  asked  what  is  there  in  Christ  that  gives 
knowledge  of  God  and  things  divine,  the  answer 
must  be,  his  faith  in  them  and  his  communion  with 
God,  his  self-consciousness  and  his  moral  character 
as  it  influences  the  world.  The  primitive  Christian 
tradition  concerning  the  words  of  Jesus  and  His 
deeds,  by  which  His  inmost  being  is  made  known, 
is  dominated  by  faith  in  the  infinite  value  of  his 
death,  in  his  resurrection  and  exaltation  to  lordship 
over  the  world,  and  in  his  return  to  earth.  More- 
over, inasmuch  as  the  inner  life  of  Jesus,  his  spirit, 
i.e.,  his  faith  and  moral  character,  became  to  a 
certain  extent  the  common  spirit  of  the  congrega- 
tion of  his  disciples  during  their  intercourse  with  him, 
the  primitive  Christian  knowledge  of  God  himself, 
of  diivine  things,  and  of  moral  relationship  must 
to  some  extent  be  regarded,  in  general,  as  the  in- 
fluence of  the  earthly  Christ.  The  Holy  Spirit, 
who  spoke  and  speaks  out  of  the  oral  and  written 


preaching  of  the  primitive  Christians,  can  not  be 
regarded  as  a  new  and  second  principle  of  the 
knowledge  of  God.  For  if  we,  like  them,  by  no 
means  conceive  our  religious  and  moral  knowledge 
as  a  mere  after-effect  of  the  earthly  Christ,  we  never- 
theless do  regard  it  as  an  effect  of  Christ  himself — 
of  the  exalted  Christ.  ''The  historic  Christ,  the 
only  principle  of  divine  knowledge,''  means  for  us 
also  the  Christ  who  manifests  himself  from  heaven 
as  the  risen  one,  thus  converting  a  Saul,  and  now 
delaying  his  return.  The  Lutheran  view,  that  in- 
spirations are  bound  to  external  media,  from  which 
the  real  knowledge  flows,  is  true  also  of  primitive 
Christianity:  the  matters  of  common  knowledge 
proceed  from  the  pneumatic  manifestations  of  the 
exalted  Christ  and  from  the  tradition  of  the  pneu- 
matic life  of  the  earthly  Christ.  We  may  abide  by 
the  interpretation  of  John  xvi.  12-15,  which  declares 
that  the  Spirit  only  glorifies  the  sole  exegete  of 
God  (John  i.  18)  by  teaching  how  he  may  be  more 
and  more  perfectly  known. 

But  did  the  human  race  have  a  finished  knowledge 
of  its  Redeemer  by  the  time  the  apostles  died? 
There  was  no  want  of  great  men  after 
2.  Knowl-  this,  who  were  able,  under  the  influence 
edge  a  of  new  historic  manifestations,  to 
Progression,  discover  here  and  there  some  unhewn 
stones  in  the  Evangelical  tradition; 
Athanasius,  Augustine,  Luther  may  be  named. 
Though  they  have  not  in  the  least  surpassed  the 
apostolic  knowledge  of  Christ,  they  none  the  less 
have  deepened  the  understanding  of  the  apostles 
and  their  knowledge  of  him.  The  effects  of  the  im- 
personal spirit  of  Jesus,  of  the  spirit,  originating 
from  him,  in  the  first  primitive  Christian  Church 
as  a  whole,  and  of  the  spiritual  factors  at  work  in  sev- 
eral individual  cases  in  the  days  of  primitive  Chris- 
tianity, unfold  themselves  in  the  whole  history  of 
the  Church.  The  progress  of  secular  science  does 
not  embarrass  Jesus  himself,  who  wished  to  be 
neither  a  naturalist  nor  a  historian.  We  ought  to 
permit  ourselves  no  doubt  concerning  the  fact, 
that  it  is  not  simply  from  a  development  within 
the  Church  that  we  have  learned  to  separate  the 
temporary  husks  from  the  divine,  infallible  spirit 
of  Christ.  If  we  believe  that  the  living  Christ 
dominates  the  whole  history  of  thought,  we  can  say 
that  he  interprets  himself,  the  earthly  Jesus,  by 
means  also  of  events  and  advances  in  knowledge 
that  take  place  out  of  the  sphere  of  church  history; 
he  spoke  not  only  through  the  destruction  of  Jeru- 
salem, but  also  through  the  destruction  of  the  an- 
cient conception  of  the  world.  The  field  in  which 
JesuB  sowed  his  word  was  time,  his  time,  the  future 
times.  His  spirit  was  not  of  time  but  of  eternity; 
his  word  a  germ  which  makes  its  full  content  and  its 
peculiar  character  known  only  in  the  course  of  the 
historical  development.  Christ  in  the  inmost  con- 
tent of  his  spiritual  being  was  more  than  he  could 
manifest  (Schleiermacher,  Der  chriatliche  Glavbe, 
i  93,  2).  It  is  only  in  the  entire  coiui9e  of  the  his- 
torical development  of  the  Church  that  he  can  be 
understood  in  his  entirety. 

That  the  apostolic  beginning  of  the  process, 
which  bore  its  fruit  in  the  establishment  of  the 
Church  and  in  the  New  Testament,  has  for  this 


Knowledge,  Thooloffioal 
KnoK 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZOG 


360 


purpose  a  unique  worth,  goes  without  saying.  The 
understanding  of  Christ  made  known  in  the  New 
Testament  bears  so  unique  a  relation  to  the 
unique  working  of  the  exalted  Christ, 
3.  The  that  it  is  well,  by  means  of  the  term, 
Biblical  the  "Biblical"  Christ,  to  express  the 
Christ  difference  in  intensity  between  his  re- 
vealing activity  in  the  apostolic  age 
and  that  of  the  later  periods.  This  term  will  differ- 
entiate the  unique  beginning  of  the  post-terrestrial 
revealing  activity  of  Christ  from  the  later  acts  of 
revelation,  and  combine  the  former  with  his  earthly 
work.  This  Biblical  Christ  is  for  us  the  historical 
Christ,  the  only  principle  for  the  knowledge  of 
God.  But  the  term  ''Biblical"  Christ  is  not  to 
denote  that  everything  in  primitive  Christianity, 
everything  apostolic,  Mongs  to  the  eternal;  not 
even  all  that  is  meant  to  ^orify  Christ.  By  this 
conception  we  merely  wish  ''  to  suggest  how  impoi^ 
tant  for  all  posterity,  provided  we  believe  at  all  in  a 
real  revelation  of  our  God  in  our  Lord,  is  the  knowl- 
edge of  Christ  which  the  first  witnesses  had  and 
which  he  himself  as  the  Lord  of  the  Spirit  called 
forth  in  them  "  (H&ring).  But  if  nevertheless  we 
differentiate  in  the  primitive  Christian  conception 
of  Christ  the  elements  taken  from  the  notions  of  the 
day  and  an  eternal  germ  which  grew  out  of  the 
spirit  of  Christ,  we  must  inquire  what  is  to  be 
recognised  as  such.  Will  the  simple  answer  suffice: 
all  taken  from  the  history  of  that  time  is  unessen- 
tial, and  only  that  which  is  unanimously  received, 
which  has  developed  from  the  spirit  of  Christ,  is 
the  essential,  that  is,  that  which  truly  reveak  the 
eternal? 

But,  just  as  the  answer,  that  the  essential  is  the 
unanimously  received,  is  for  several  reasons  unsatis- 
factory, so  idso  is  the  assertion  that  everything  taken 
from  the  history  of  the  time  is  unessential.  Does 
the  denial  of  an  independent  newness  in  the  case 
of  all  the  New-Testament  views  conditioned  by 
the  history  of  the  time  mean  also  the  sacrifice  of 
their  value  as  revelations?  For  example,  is  the 
thought  that  Jesus  had  a  personal  preexistence  con- 
demned merely  because  it  is  conditioned  by  a  Jew- 
ish formula?  Baldensperger  has  declared  that  even 
for  Jesus  himself  it  was  a  formula  that  explained 
his  own  personality,  which  he  experienced  as  a  won- 
drous mystery,  la  this,  too,  consists  his  origin- 
ality, to  speak  with  Wellhausen,  that  he  perceived 
the  true  and  eternal  in  the  mass  of  chaotic  rub- 
bish, rejected  the  incidental,  the  caricatured,  the 
dead  elements,  and  in  the  lens  of  his  individuality 
gathered  together  that  which  has  eternal  worth, 
the  human-divine.  But  may  not  such  a  gathering 
have  been  also  the  pneumatic  achievement  of  the 
spirit  of  a  Paul,  or  of  primitive  Christianity  as  a 
whole?  In  this  way,  e.g.,  the  whole  primitive 
Christian  angelology  could  be  stamped  as  revelation. 
Scientific  theology  will  no  longer  raise  question 
about  that.  But  not  only  that  which  the  earthly 
Jesus  himself  gathered  as  eternally  valid  out  of  the 
mass  of  New-Testament  factors  that  are  historically 
conditioned  is  to  be  received  as  imperishable,  but 
also  that  which,  without  contradicting  the  spirit  of 
Jesus  has,  under  the  pneumatic  manifestations  of 
the  Exalted  One,  undergone  a  new  development 


out  of  that  gathered  by  him.-  Thus,  e.g.,  we  judge 
the  thought  of  Paul's  faith  concerning  the  incarna- 
tion of  Christ  Jesus  as  an  ethical  act  of  self-deny- 
ing love,  by  virtue  of  which  he  **  entirely  emerges 
from  the  bounds  of  Jewish  speculations  about  the 
Messiah"  (Pfleiderer),  without  antagonizing  the 
humble  spirit  of  Jesus.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is 
impossible  to  construe  the  whole  angelology  com- 
mon to  primitive  Christianity  as  a  development  of 
Jesus'  belief  concerning  angels,  which  was,  compared 
with  that,  meager  and  super-Jewish. 

When  we  place  restrictions  upon  the  principle, 
"  only  that  in  the  New  Testament  has  value  as  a 
revelation  which  is  not  conditioned  by  the  his- 
tory of  the  time,"  we  have,  in  the 

4*  Sum-  last  analysis,  to  look  back  to  the 
maiy.  earthly  from  the  exalted  Christ  who 
glorified  himself  in  primitive  Chris- 
tianity. The  two  taken  together  make  the  Biblical, 
the  historical  Christ,  the  only  principle  for  the  knowl- 
edge of  God  and  things  divine.  We  conclude,  then, 
that  this  is  the  pneumatic  life  of  the  earthly  Christ 
and  that  which  has  logically  unfolded  itseUT  there- 
from in  the  primitive  Christians  under  the  influence 
of  the  pneumatic  manifestations  of  the  exalted 
Christ.  This  presupposes  that  the  pneumatic  life 
of  the  earthly  Christ  can  be  ascertained  from  the 
Evangelical  tradition,  in  order  that  by  this  touch- 
stone the  primitive  Christian  preaching  may  be 
tested  as  to  its  consistency.  In  declaring  that  such 
testing  is  necessary  one  declares,  by  this  very  fact, 
that  the  earthly  Jesus  is  the  real  foundation  of  the 
knowledge  of  God — but  his  resurrection  must  also 
be  added — this  alone,  not  also  the  proofs  of  it,  viz., 
the  appearances  of  the  risen  one,  which  belong  to  the 
exalted  Christ.  In  Rom.  i.  3-4,  we  find  that  which 
is  fimdamental  in  the  principle  of  theological  knowl- 
edge, by  which  both  the  Old  Testament,  mentioned 
in  V.  2,  as  weU  as  the  preaching  even  of  a  Paul 
(v.  1,  5)  must  be  tested;  he  \b  indeed,  by  virtue 
of  an  act  of  revelation  by  the  Risen  One,  his  greatest 
apostle,  and  yet  no  absolutely  infallible  lawgiver 
in  matters  of  faith.  Karl  Thieme. 

BxBUOOBArHT:  A.  Ritichl,  Theoloots  utid  Metaphjftik, 
Bonn.  1887;  J.  Kftftan.  in  ZeiUehrift  fitr  TheologU  und 
Kireh0,  i  (1891).  479-^649;  M.  KAhler.  DU  Wiaaenaduift 
dtr  thrUUiehen  Lehre,  pp.  11  sqq..  Leipac.  1893;  klem, 
D«r  BogMannU  kiBtori$(Ae  Jetu*  und  der  ge^ehitJiaidis 
hibliachB  Ckruhu,  ib.  1896;  M.  R«t0chks.  Dor  Olaubt  an 
Jmub  Chrittut  und  die  gemMehUiche  Erfcruhung  eeinet 
Lebena,  Leipno.  1893;  idem.  Der  Streit  liber  die  BmffrQnd- 
ung  dee  Olaubene  auf  den  "  oeeckiditlidien  "  Jeeue  Chria- 
tue,  in  ZeiteduriftfOr  Theoloffie  und  Kirdte,  rii  (1897).  171- 
264;  O.  RiUchl.  in  Zeitechrift  far  Theologie  und  Kirtkt, 
iii  (1893).  371-426;  W.  Hermann,  Der  Verkehr  dee  Chrie- 
ten  mU  OoU,  Stuttcart.  1896;  P.  Kdlbing.  Die  heai4fe 
Schrift  ale  oberete  Norm  der  ehrietlicken  Olatd)eneerkenntni», 
Gnadau.  1896;  O.  Eoke.  Die  theologieeke  Schule  AlbredU 
RiteehU  und  die  evanoeliaeke  Kirehe  der  Oeffenwart,  Berlin, 
1897. 

KNOWLEDGE,  THEORY  OF  RELIGIOUS.     See 

TbUTH,  TRUTBrULNESS,  I. 

KNOWLIKG,  nOling,  RICHARD  JOHH:  Chvath 
of  England;  b.  at  Devonport  (2  m.  w.n.w.  of  Plym- 
outh), Devonshire,  Sept.  16,  1851.  He  studied  at 
Balliol  College,  Oxford  (B.A.,  1874),  and  was  or- 
dered deacon  in  1875  and  ordained  priest  in  1876. 
He  was  classical  master  in  Abingdon  Grammar 


del 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Knowledge,  TheoloffioAi 
Knox 


School  1874-76,  and  curate  of  Wellington,  Somer- 
set, 1876-78  and  of  St.  Martin-in-the-Fields, 
London,  1878-84.  He  was  then  called  to  King's 
Course,  London,  where  he  was  successively  cen- 
sor and  lecturer  (1884-90),  vice-principal  (1890- 
1897),  and  professor  of  New-Testament  exegesis 
(1894-1905).  Since  1905  he  has  been  canon  of 
Durham  and  professor  of  divinity  in  Durham  Uni- 
versity, and  fellow  of  King's  College.  He  was 
examining  chaplain  to  the  archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury and  the  bishop  of  Exeter  1905-05  and  ex- 
aminer in  the  University  of  London  1905-06,  be- 
sides being  select  preacher  at  Cambridge  in  1895 
and  Boyle  Lecturer  in  1903-05.  His  theological 
position  is  conservative.  He  has  written  The  Wit- 
ness of  the  EpistleSf  a  Study  in  modem  Criticism 
(London,  1892);  Ads  of  the  Apostles  in  The  Ex- 
posiiar's  Greek  Testament  (1901);  Our  Lord's  Virgin 
Birth  and  the  Criticism  of  To-day  (1903);  The 
Epistle  of  St  James  (1904);  The  Testimony  of  St. 
Paul  to  Christ  (Boyle  Lectures  for  1903-05;  1905); 
and  Literary    Criticism    and  the    New    Testament 

(1907).  

KNOW-IIOTHIIIG  MOVEMENT:  A  popular 
movement  which  had  considerable  Influence  in  the 
United  States  in  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury, partly  political,  partly  inspired  by  a  not  un- 
natursd  nervousness  in  view  of  the  experience  of 
all  European  countries  with  the  meddling  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church  in  national  politics  and  the 
fact  that  there  was  no  ofllcial  deliverance  to  show 
that  it  would  not  do  the  same  in  the  United  States. 
It  was  based  on  the  theory  that  the  republic  would 
be  in  danger  unless  the  Roman  Catholic  C3iurch 
were  held  in  check  and  foreign-bom  dtiiens, 
especially  Roman  Catholics,  excluded  from  all 
share  in  the  government.  As  the  successor  of 
various  "  native  American  **  movements  which  had 
nursed  similar  beliefs  even  in  colonial  times,  the 
Know-Nothlng  party  (so  called  from  the  injunction 
laid  upon  its  members  to  profess  utter  ignorance  of 
even  the  existence  of  any  such  organization)  was 
formally  oiganized  in  1852,  when  political  condi- 
tions favored  the  launching  of  a  new  party  which 
should  attract  the  dissatisfied  elements  of  the  older 
ones.  It  was  begun  as  a  local  organization  in  New 
York  City,  and  at  first  aimed  at  local  and  munici- 
pal victories.  As  stated  in  its  ritual  after  a  na- 
tional council  had  been  formed,  its  objects  were 
among  other  things  "  to  resist  the  insidious  policy 
of  the  Church  of  Rome  and  all  other  foreign  influ- 
ence against  our  republican  institutions  in  all  law- 
ful ways  "  and  "  to  place  in  all  offices  of  honor, 
trust,  or  profit  in  the  gift  of  the  people  or  by 
appointment  none  but  native-bom  Protestant  citi- 
zens." These  and  other  uncompromising  declara- 
tions were  for  the  initiated;  a  statement  of  princi- 
ples was  drawn  up  for  the  general  public  which 
professed  to  aim  at  "no  interference  with  religious 
faith  or  worship  and  no  test  or  oaths  for  office." 
After  several  successes  in  municipal  elections,  in 
1854  the  party  sent  forty  representatives  to  Con- 
gress and  elected  a  governor  and  legislature  in 
Massachusetts.  In  the  following  year  they  carried 
the  elections  in  nine  States,  and  elected  the  gov- 
ernors of  New  Hampshire,  Connecticut,  and  Rhode 


Island,  while  in  the  next  Congress  there  were  seven- 
ty-five Know-Nothing  members  elected  as  such. 
The  inflammatory  talk  of  the  promoters  of  the 
movement  produced  its  natural  results.  Riotous 
mobs  assembled  in  various  New  England  cities, 
and  Roman  Catholic  churches  were  set  on  fire  there 
and  in  New  York,  New  Jersey,  and  Ohio.  At  least 
twenty  persons  were  killed  in  Know-Nothing  riots 
in  Louisville,  and  attempts  were  made  to  assassi- 
nate Archbishop  Bedini,  nuncio  in  Brazil,  who  had 
been  commissioned  to  examine  various  ecclesias- 
tical matters  on  his  passage  through  the  United 
States.  In  1856  the  party  held  a  national  conven- 
tion and  nominated  Millard  Fillmore  for  president. 
The  northern  delegates,  however,  seceded  from  the 
convention  on  failing  to  secure  a  definite  anti-sla- 
very declaration,  and  Fillmore  secured  only  the 
eight  electoral  votes  of  Maryland.  From  this  time 
Know-Nothingism  as  a  political  movement  may  be 
said  to  have  collapsed,  although  in  1860  Bell  and 
Everett,  candidate  of  the  "  Constitutional  Union." 
received  thirty-nine  electoral  votes  largely  through 
the  support  of  Know-Nothing  elements  which  had 
refused  to  merge  in  either  of  the  two  great  parties. 
With  the  outbreak  of  the  Civil  War  an  opportunity 
was  afforded  to  American  citizens  of  foreign  birth 
and  Roman  Catholic  religion  to  demonstrate  their 
loyalty  to  the  land  of  their  adoption;  and  the  fact 
that  no  less  than  150,000  men  of  Irish  birth  en- 
listed in  the  Union  army  proved  that  the  laity  of 
that  church  were  not  scheming  against  the  govern- 
ment. The  general  decay  of  religious  intoler- 
ance tended  in  the  same  direction — ^although  in 
comparatively  recent  years,  especially  from  1891  to 
1897,  the  •*  American  Protective  Association  "  has 
attracted  some  attention  as  representing  substan- 
tially the  same  principles. 

Bibuoorapht:  T.  B.  Whitney,  Defence  of  American  Policy, 
New  York,  1856  (by  an  advocate);  J.  Kehoe.  Life  and 
WriHnge  of  Archbiehop  Hughee,  ib.  1866;  J.  L.  Spalding, 
Life  of  Archbishop  Spalding,  Baltimore,  1872;  T.  V.  Cooper 
and  H.  T.  Fenton.  American  Polieiee,  Chicago,  1884  (con- 
taining the  ritual);  J.  B.  McMaster,  The  Riatoue  Career 
of  the  Know-Noihino9,  in  With  the  Fathers,  New  York. 
1896;  L.  F.  Schmeckebier,  Hist,  of  the  Know-Nothing 
Party  in  Maryland,  Baltimore,  1899;  J.  A.  Woodbum, 
PoliHeal  Parties,  New  York,  1903;  T.  J.  Jenkins,  in  Cath- 
olic World,  Ivii  (1893).  611-522;  and  the  works  on  the 
history  of  the  period. 

KNOX,  nex,  EDMXnVD  ARBUTHITOTT:  Church 
of  England,  bishop  of  Manchester;  b.  at  Bangalore, 
India,  Dec.  6,  1847.  He  studied  at  Christ  Church, 
Oxford  (B.A.,  1869),  and  was  ordered  deacon  in 
1870  and  ordained  priest  in  1872.  From  1868  to 
1885  he  was  fellow  of  Merton  College,  Oxford,  where 
he  was  tutor  from  1875  to  1885  and  chaplain  from 
1879  to  1885,  besides  being  curate  of  Holy  Trinity, 
Oxford,  from  1870  to  1874  and  vicar  of  St.  John  the 
Baptist,  in  the  same  city,  from  1874  to  1879.  He 
was  rector  of  Kibworth-Beauchamp  from  1884  to 

1891  and  also  of  Smeeton-Westerby,  Leicestershire, 
in  1887-88,  and  was  then  vicar  of  Aston- juxta- 
Birmingham  from  1891  to  1894,  being  likewise 
examining  chaplain  to  the  bishop  of  Worcester  from 

1892  to  1894.  In  1894  he  was  consecrated  suffragan 
bishop  of  Coventry,  being  at  the  same  time  both 
rector  of  St.  Philip's,  Birmingham,  and  archdeacon 
of  Birmingham  from  1894  to  19031     From   1892 


KnoK 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


S63 


to  1903  he  was  surrogate  of  the  diocese  of  Worcester, 
and  was  appointed  honorary  canon  of  Worcester  in 
1892.  In  1903  he  was  translated  to  the  diocese  of 
Manchester.  He  has  written  Pcalan  and  Teachen 
(London,  1902). 

KNOX,  GEORGE  WU^LIAM:  Presbyterian;  b. 
at  Rome,  N.  Y.,  Aug.  11,  1853.  He  was  graduated 
at  Hamilton  College  in  1874  and  Auburn  Theologi- 
cal Seminary  in  1877.  He  then  engaged  in  mission- 
ary work  in  Japan,  and  was  professor  of  homiletics 
in  Union  Theological  Seminary,  Tokyo,  1881-93  and 
of  philosophy  and  ethics  in  the  Imperial  University 
of  Japan  in  1886.  In  1893  he  returned  to  the  United 
States  and  was  pastor  of  the  Presbyterian  church  at 
Rye,  N.  Y.,  1894-99.  He  was  lecturer  on  apologet- 
ics in  Union  Theological  Seminary,  New  York 
City,  1897-99,  and  since  1899  has  been  professor  of 
philosophy  and  history  of  religion  in  the  same  in- 
stitution. He  was  vice-president  of  the  Asiatic 
Society  of  Japan  1891-92,  Nathaniel  Taylor  lecturer 
at  YsJe  in  1903;  also  lecturer  on  the  history  of 
religion  in  1905-06.  In  addition  to  works  in  Japa^ 
nese  he  has  written:  The  Christian  Point  of  View  (in 
collaboration  with  F.  Brown  and  A.  C.  McGiffert 
(New  York,  1902);  Direct  and  Fundamental  Proof  $ 
of  the  Christian  Rdigion  (1903);  Japanese  Life  in 
Town  and  Country  (1904);  The  Spirit  of  the  Orient 
(1906);  and  The  Development  of  Religion  in  Japan 
(1906). 

KNOXp  JOHN. 

Earlier  Life  (i  1). 

Oonveraion  to  ProteeUmtism  (f  2). 

Minietry  at  St.  Andrews  (S3). 

Confinement  in  the  Freneh  (Salleys  XI  4). 

Ministry  in  England.  1540-64  (f  6). 

On  the  Continent,  1554-50  (i  6). 

Oisaniiation  of  the  Church  in  Bootland  (f  7). 

Knox  and  Queen  Mary  (f  8). 

Ministry  in  Edinburgh  and  Private  Life  (|  0). 

Personal  Appearance  and  Manner  (|  10). 

Testimonies  to  his  Character  (|  11). 

Neither  the  place  nor  the  date  of  the  birth  of 
John  Knox,  the  great  Scotch  Reformer,  is  settled 
beyond  dispute;  but  the  weightiest  considerations 
favor  Giffordgate,  a  suburb  of  the  town  of  Hadding- 
ton (16  m.  e.  of  Edinburgh)  as  the  place  and  1513  or 
1514  as  the  year  (cf .  H.  Cowan,  John  Knox^  pp.  22- 
25,  45-48).  He  died  at  Edinburgh  Nov.  24,  1572. 
His  father  was  William  Knox,  of  fair,  though  not  dis- 
tinguished, descent,  who  fou^t  at 
z.  BarUer  Flodden,  and  had  his  home  in  the 
Life.  county  of  Haddington.  His  mother's 
name  was  Sinclair.  He  received  the  ele- 
ments of  a  liberal  education  in  Haddington,  which 
early  possessed  an  excellent  grammar-school — one 
of  those  schools  originally  monastic  and  due  to  the 
public  spirit  which,  at  least  as  regards  education, 
animated  the  Scottish  Church  even  antecedently  to 
the  Reformation.  Thence  he  proceeded  either  to  the 
University  of  Glasgow,  where  the  name  '*  John 
Knox  "  occurs  among  the  incorporati  in  1522,  or  to 
St.  Andrews,  where  he  is  stated  by  Beza  to  have 
studied  under  the  celebrated  John  Major  (q.v.),  a 
native,  like  Knox,  of  East  Lothian  and  one  of  the 
greatest  scholars  of  his  time.  Major  was  at  Glasgow 
in  1522  and  at  St.  Andrews  in  1531.  How  long 
Knox  remained  at  college  is  uncertain.    He  certainly 


never  made  any  pretense  to  be  such  a  scholar  ts  his 
contemporaries  George  Buchanan  and  Alesius;  nor 
is  there  evidence  that  he  even  graduated.    Tbit 
he  was  a  fair  Latinist,  and  accustomed  to  study,  ap- 
pears from  the  fact,  which  seems  to  be  well  attested, 
of  his  familiarity  with  the  writings  of  Augustine  and 
Jerome.    He  acquired  the  Greek  and  Hebrew  lan- 
guages at  a  later  period,  as  his  writings  indicate. 
He  was  ordained  to  the  priesthood  at  some  date 
prior    ta    1540,   when    his   status  as  a  priest  is 
first    mentioned.    It  appears    from  evidence  ad- 
duced by  Laing  (in  his  ed.  of  the  Works  of  Knox), 
that   in   1543  Knox  had   not  yet   divested  him- 
self  of  Roman  orders;  at   any   rate,  in  his  char- 
acter as  a   priest,   he   signed  a   notarial   instru- 
ment dated  Mar.  27  of  ihaX  year,  the  original  of 
which  is  still  to  be  found  in  the  charter-room  at 
Tyninghame  Castle.    Up  to  this  time,  however,  be 
seems  to  have  employed  himself  in  private  tuition, 
rather  than  in  parochial  duties;  and,  at  the  moment 
when  he  last  signed  his  name  as  a  priest,  he  was 
probably  already  engaged  in  the  office — ^which  he 
held  for  several  years — of  tutor  in  the  family  of 
Hugh  Douglas  of  Longniddry,  in  East  Lothian,  with 
the  further  charge  of  the  son  of  a  neighboring  gentle- 
man, John  Cockbum  of  Ormiston.    Both  of  these 
lairds,  like  Knox  himself,  had  even  at  this  time  a 
leaning  to  the  new  doctrines. 

Knox  first  publicly  professed  the  Protestant  faith 
about  the  end  of  1545.   His  mind  had  in  all  probabil- 
ity been  directed  to  that  faith  for  some 
2.  Conver-  time  before  the  change  was  avowed. 

skm  to  According  to  (}alderwood,  Thomas 
Protestant-  GuiUaume,  a  native  of  East  Lothian, 
ism.  of  the  order  of  Blackfriars  and  for  a 
short  time  chaplain  to  the  Regent 
Arran  in  1543,  was  the  first  "  to  give  Mr.  Knox  a 
taste  of  the  truth."  Beza  attributes  his  original 
change  of  opinion  to  the  study  in  early  manhood, 
as  already  stated,  of  Augustine  and  Jerome.  But 
the  immediate  instrument,  probably,  of  his  actual 
conversion  was  the  learned  and  amiable  Geoi^ 
Wishart  (q.v.)  who,  after  a  period  of  banishment, 
returned  to  his  native  country  in  1544,  to  perish, 
within  two  years,  at  the  stake,  as  the  last  and 
most  illustrious  of  the  victims  of  Cardinal  Bea- 
ton. Among  other  places  where  he  preached  the 
Reformed  doctrines  Wishart  had  come  to  East 
Lothian  in  Dec,  1545,  and  there  made  Knox's 
acquaintance.  Tlie  attachment  which  the  latter 
formed  for  the  person  as  well  as  for  the  doctrine  of 
Wishart,  must  be  described  as  of  the  nature  of  a 
youthful  enthusiasm.  Knox  followed  the  Reformer 
everywhere,  and  constituted  himself  his  body-guanl 
bearing,  it  is  said,  a  two-edged  sword,  that  he  might 
be  prepared  to  defend  him  against  the  cardinal  s 
emissaries,  who  were  known  to  be  seeking  Wish- 
art's  life.  And,  on  the  night  of  the  latter's  appre- 
hension, Knox  was  hardly  restrained  from  sharing 
his  captivity,  and  consequently,  in  all  probability, 
his  fate.  The  words  of  Wishart 's  remonstrance  are 
well  known:  "  Nay,  return  to  your  bairns  [pupib]. 
One  is  sufficient  for  a  sacrifice." 

Knox  was  first  called  to  the  Protestant  ministry 
at  St.  Andrews,  which  was  throughout  his  life 
intimately  associated  with  the  Reformer's   career. 


363 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Knox 


There   appears   to  have  been  no  reg^ular  ordinar- 
tion.    Of  course,  he  had  been  ak«ady  ordained 
as  a  priest  in  the  Church  of  Rome. 
3.  Ministry  But  imposition   of  hands  and  other 
at  St      forms  were  not  regarded  by  Knox  as 
Andrews,    of  more  than  secondary  importance. 
A  graphic  account  of  the  whole  pro- 
ceedings connected  with  his  call  to  the  ministry, 
together  with  a  report  of  the  first  sermon  he  de- 
livered in  St.  Andrews,  will  be  found  in  his  History 
of  the  Reformation, 

At  this  time  he  was  residing  in  the  castle  of  St. 
Andrews.  After  Beaton's  death,  this  stronghold  be- 
came a  place  of  refuge  for  many  of  the 
4*  Confine-  Protestants.  Along  with  his  pupils, 
ment  in  the  sons  of  the  lairds  of  Longniddry 
the  French  and  Ormiston,  already  mentioned, 
Galleys.  Knox  passed  there  some  comparatively 
peaceful  months.  His  repose  was 
rudely  interrupted  by  the  investiture  and  capitu- 
lation of  the  castle  in  the  end  of  July,  1547,  succeeded, 
as  regarded  Knox  and  some  of  the  rest  of  the  ref- 
ugees, by  confinement  in  the  French  galleys.  He 
spent  nineteen  months  as  a  galley-slave,  amid 
hardships  and  miseries  which  are  said  to  have  per- 
manently injured  his  health.  **  How  long  I  con- 
tinued prisoner,"  he  said  at  St.  Andrews,  in  1559, 
**  what  torments  I  sustained  in  the  galleys,  and 
what  were  the  sobs  of  my  heart,  is  now  no  time  to 
recite."  He  adds,  however,  that  he  always  con- 
tinued to  hope  for  a  return  to  his  native  coimtry. 
In  the  History  (vol.  i.,  p.  228),  the  same  confidence 
of  a  return  is  referred  to  as  never  having  forsaken 
him;  and  he  gives  a  curious  testimony  to  the  fact, 
by  mentioning  how,  on  one  occasion,  **  lying  be- 
twixt Dundee  and  St.  Andrews,  the  second  time 
that  the  galleys  returned  to  Scotland,  the  said  John 
[Knox]  being  so  extremely  sick  that  few  hoped  his 
life,  Maister  [afterwards  Sir]  James  [Balfour,  one  of 
his  fellow  prisoners]  willed  him  to  look  to  the  land, 
and  asked  if  he  knew  it.  Who  answered,  '  Yes, 
I  know  it  well;  for  I  see  the  steeple  of  that  place 
where  God  first  in  public  opened  my  mouth  to  his 
glory;  and  I  am  fully  persuaded,  how  weak  soever 
I  now  appear,  that  I  shall  not  depart  this  life,  till 
that  my  tongue  shall  glorify  his  godly  name  in  the 
same  place.' " 

On  his  release,  which  took  place  early  in  1549, 
through  the  mtervention,  apparently,  of  the  Eng- 
lish government,  Knox  found  that,  in  the  existing 
state  of  the  country,  he  could  be  of  little  use  in  his 
beloved  Scotland.     For  nearly  ten  years,  accord- 
ingly, he  submitted  to  volimtary  exile,  like  many 
of  the  worthiest  of  his  countrymen  in  those  troub- 
lous times.    All  these  years,  however,  he  devoted 
liimself  to  ministerial  labors  in  connection  with  the 
lieformed  Church.     His  first  sphere  of  duty  was 
provided  for  him  in  England,  for  the 
5.  Ministxy  space  of  about  five  years  as  a  minister 
In  England,  of  the  English  Church.     It  is  to  be 
i54!>~54-    remembered    that,  during   the  whole 
reign  of  Edward  VI.,  the  Church  of 
£]ngland  was  in  a  transition  state;    some  of  its 
most  marked  peculiarities  (to  which  Knox  himself 
and  others  in  Scotland  and  abroad   afterward  ob- 
jected) were  then  in  abeyance,  or  at  least  not 


insisted  upon  as  terms  of  communion.  Thus  the 
use  of  the  prayer-book  was  not  enforced,  neither 
was  kneeling  at  the  conununion.  Episcopal  govern- 
ment was  of  course  acknowledged;  but  Knox  held 
his  conmiission,  as  a  Reform^  preacher,  directly 
from  the  privy  council,  and  was  virtually  inde- 
pendent of  diocesan  jurisdiction.  Moreover,  he 
seems  to  have  had-  no  strong  objection  to  episcopacy 
itself,  although  he  disapproved  of  "  your  proud 
prelates'  great  dominions  and  charge,  impossible  by 
one  man  to  be  discharged;"  and  on  this,  along  with 
other  groimds,  he  declined  the  bishopric  of  Rochester 
in  1552.  The  offices  he  held  m  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land are  briefly  indicated  in  the  History ,  which  says, 
"  He  was  first  appointed  preacher  to  Berwick,  then 
to  Newcastle;  and  last  he  was  called  to  London 
and  to  the  southern  parts  of  England,  where  he 
remained  till  the  death  of  Edward  VI."  (Works, 
i.,  p.  280).  From  other  sources  it  appears  that  in 
1551  he  was  appointed  one  of  the  six  chaplains  in 
ordinary  to  the  king;  and  in  this  capacity  there  was 
submitted  to  him,  and,  after  revisal,  he  joined  the 
other  chaplains  in  sanctioning,  The  Articles  corir 
ceming  an  Uniformity  in  Religion  of  1552,  which 
became  the  basis  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles  (q.  v.) 
of  the  Church  of  England. 

From  England,  after  the  death  of  Edward,  Knox 
proceeded  to  the  contment,  traveling  for  a  time 
from  place  to  place  in  some  uncertainty.  In  Sept. 
1554,  while  living  at  Geneva,  he  accepted  in  accord- 
ance with  Calvin's  aounsel  a  call  to 

6.  On  the  the  English  Church  at  Frankfort. 
Continent,  Here  controversies  in  connection  with 

1554-59*  vestments,  ceremonies,  and  the  use  of 
the  English  prayer-book  met  him,  and, 
notwithstanding  the  great  moderation  which  he 
showed  (rom  first  to  last,  led,  in  Mar.,  1555,  to  his 
resignation  of  his  charge  (cf.  his  treatise,  A  Brief 
Narrative  of  the  Troubles  which  Arose  at  Frankfurt, 
reprinted  in  Laing's  edition  of  his  works).  He 
returned  to  Geneva,  where  he  was  invited  to  be- 
come minister  of  the  refugee  English  congregation. 
In  August,  however,  he  was  induced  to  set  out  for 
Scotland,  where  he  remained  for  nine  months, 
preaching  Evangelical  doctrine  in  various  parts  of 
the  coimtry,  and  persuading  those  who  favored  the 
Reformation  to  cease  from  attendance  at  mass,  and 
to  join  with  himself  in  the  celebration  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  according  to  a  Reformed  ritual.  In  May, 
1556,  he  was  cited  to  appear  before  the  hierarchy 
in  Edinburgh,  and  he  boldly  responded  to  the  sum- 
mons; but  the  bishops  found  it  expedient  not  to 
proceed  with  the  trial.  In  July  an  urgent  call  from 
his  congregation  at  Geneva,  along,  probably,  with 
the  desire  to  prevent  the  renewal  of  persecution  in 
Scotland,  caused  him  to  resume  lus  Genevan 
ministry.  His  marriage  to  Marjorie  Bowes,  daughter 
of  Richard  Bowes,  captain  of  Norham  Castle,  had 
meanwhile  taken  place,  and  his  wife  along  with  her 
mother  accompanied  him  to  Geneva,  where  they 
arrived  in  September.  The  church  in  which  he 
preached  there  (called  the  £glise  de  Notre  Dame  la 
Neuve)  had  been  granted,  at  Calvin's  solicitation, 
for  the  use  of  the  English  and  Italian  congregations 
by  the  mimicipal  authorities.  Knox's  life  in  Geneva 
was  no  idle  one.    To  preaching  and  clerical  work 


Knox 
Knoz-Z«ittl« 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZCX3 


364 


of  an  exacting  kind  he  added  a  large  correspond- 
ence; and  he  was  constantly  engaged  in  literary 
work.  His  publications  at  Geneva  included  hiis 
Firai  BUut  against  the  Monstrous  Regiment  [Rule] 
qf  Women;  and  his  long  and  elaborate  treatise  on 
predestination  (published  1560)  was  composed  in 
Geneva.  With  the  exception  of  some  months  spent 
at  Dieppe  (1557-^)  when  he  was  contemplating  a 
return  to  Scotland,  he  continued  to  officiate  in 
Geneva  (while  deeply  interested  in  his  native  land 
and  in  constant  communication  with  the  reform 
party  there)  till  Jan.,  1559,  when  he  finally  left 
for  home. 

He  arrived  in  Edinburgh  May  2, 1559.  The  time 
was  a  critical  one.  During  his  absence  the  reform 
party  had  become  more  numerous,  more  self-reliant 
and  aggreasive,  and  better  consolidated.  The  queen 
dowager,  Mary  of  Lorraine,  acting  as  regent  for  her 
daughter,  the  young  Mary,  queen  of 

7.  Organ-  Scots,  then  in  France,  had  become 
izatk>n  of   more  desirous  to  crush  the  Protestants 

the  Church  and  determined  to  use  force.  Civil 
in  Scotland,  war  was  imminent,  but  each  side  shrank 
from  the  first  step.  Knox  at  once 
became  the  leader  of  the  Reformers.  He  preached 
against  "  idolatry "  with  the  greatest  boldness, 
and  with  the  result  that  what  he  calls  the  **  rascal 
multitude  "  began  the  "  purging  "  of  churches  and 
the  destruction  of  monasteries.  Politics  and  religion 
were  closely  intertwined;  the  Reformers  were  strug- 
gling to  keep  Scotland  free  from  the  yoke  of  France, 
and  did  not  hesitate  to  seek  the  help  of  England. 
Knox  negotiated  with  the  English  government  to 
secure  its  support,  and  he  approved  of  the  declara- 
tion of  the  lords  of  his  party  in  Oct.,  1559,  8U»- 
pending  their  allegiance  to  the  regent.  The  death 
of  the  latter  in  Jime,  1560,  opened  the  way  to  a  cessa- 
tion of  hostilities  and  an  agreement  leaving  the 
settlement  of  ecclesiastical  questions  to  the  Scot- 
tish estates.  The  doctrine,  worship,  and  government 
of  the  Roman  Church  were  overthrown  by  the  par- 
liament of  1560  and  Protestantism  was  established 
as  the  national  religion.  Knox,  assisted  by  five 
other  ministers,  formulated  the  confession  of  faith 
adopted  at  this  time  (see  Scotch  Confession  of 
Faith)  and  drew  up  the  constitution  of  the  new 
Church — the  First  Book  of  Discipline  (see  the  sec- 
tion on  the  Chureh  of  Scotland  in  the  article  Pres- 

BTTBRIANS). 

Queen  Mary  returned  to  Scotland  in  Aug.,  1561, 
thoroughly  predisposed  against  Knox;  while  he  and 
the  other  Reformers  looked  upon  her  with  anxiety 
and  suspicion.     Fundamental  differences  of  char- 
acter and  training  made  a  keen  encoun- 

8.  Knox    ter  between  the  two  inevitable.    Five 
and  Queen  personal  interviews  between  Knox  and 

Mary.  the  queen  are  recorded  (esu^h  at  Mary's 
invitation).  He  found  her  no  mean 
opponent  in  argument,  and  had  to  acknowledge 
the  acuteness  of  her  mind,  if  he  could  not  commend 
the  qualities  of  her  heart.  His  attitude  for  the 
most  part  was  unyielding  and  repelling,  his  lan- 
guage and  manner  harsh  and  uncourtierlike.  In 
his  preaching  and  other  public  utterances  he  was 
sometimes  even  violent.  It  must  be  remembered, 
however,  that  the  momentous  issues  at  stake  re- 


quired a  plain-spoken  prophet,  not  a  smooth- 
tongued courtier.  Still  it  might  have  been  wiser 
as  well  as  more  Christlike  for  Knox,  at  the  outset 
of  their  intercourse,  to  seek  to  win  rather  thsD 
repel.  Perhaps  the  Reformer  feared  Mary's  well- 
known  power  of  fascination  and  steeled  himself 
against  it.  Later  his  heart  became  wholly  hardened 
toward  the  adulterous  accomplice,  as  be  believed, 
of  her  husband's  murderer. 

Knox's  life  from  the  time  of  his  return  to  Scot- 
land in  1559  is  a  part  of  the  history  of  his  country  and 
its  full  story  is  to  be  sought  in  the  histories  of  Scot- 
land. Only  details  which  have  a  more  personal 
interest  can  be  noted  here.  When  the  Reformed 
religion  was  formally  ratified  by  law  in  Scotland  in 
1560  he  was  appointed  minister  of  the  Church  of 
St.  Giles,  then  the  great  parish  chiut;h  of  Edin- 
burgh. He  was  at  this  time  in  the  fulness  of  his 
powers,  as  is  manifest  abundantly  in  the  style  of 
his  History  of  the  Reformation — a  work 
9.  Ministry  which  appears  to  have  been    begun 

in  Edin-  about  1559,  and  completed  in  the  course 
btirghand  of  the  next  six  or  seven  years.     The 

Private  History ,  if  sometimes  rough  and  even 
Life.  coarse  in  language,  and  not  always 
commendable  in  temper  and  spirit,  is 
written  with  a  force  and  vigor  not  surpassed  by 
any  of  his  other  writings — of  all  which  it  may  be 
said,  that,  whatever  their  faults,  they  are  works  of 
true  genius,  and  well  worthy  in  their  character, 
upon  the  whole,  of  the  great  leader  and  statesman 
who  wrote  them.  At  the  very  beginning  of  his 
labors  as  minister  of  Edinbuigh,  he  had  the  mis- 
fortune to  lose  his  much-loved  and  helpful  young 
wife,  whom  Calvin  described  as  suavissima.  She 
left  two  sons,  one  of  whom,  Nathanael,  died  at  Cam- 
bridge in  1580;  the  other,  Eleazer,  became  vicar  of 
Clacton  Magna  in  the  archdeaconry  of  Colchester 
and  died  in  1591.  In  1564  Knox  made  a  second 
marriage,  which  was  greatly  talked  of  at  the  time 
because  the  bride  was  remotely  connected  with  the 
royal  family  and  still  more  because  she  was  a  maiden 
of  seventeen  while  Knox  was  three  times  as  old.  The 
young  lady  was  Margaret  Stewart,  daughter  of  An- 
drew, Lord  Stewart  of  Ochiltree.  She  bore  Knox 
three  daughters,  of  whom  the  youngest,  Elizabeth, 
became  the  wife  of  the  famous  John  Welsh,  minister 
of  Ayr.  At  this  time  the  Reformer  lived  a  very 
laborious  life.  He  was  much  engrossed  with  the 
public  affairs  of  the  national  Church,  and  at  the 
same  time  devoted  to  his  work  as  a  parish  minister, 
to  say  nothing  of  his  continual,  and  perhaps,  in  his 
position,  imavoidable  controversies,  more  or  less  per- 
sonal, with  the  ecclesiastical  and  political  factions 
of  the  day,  which  he  regarded  as  his  country's  en- 
emies. He  was,  however,  not  without  social  and 
family  enjoyments.  A  fair  stipend  of  four  hundred 
marks  Scots,  equal  to  about  forty-four  pounds  of 
English  money  of  that  day,  enabled  him  to  exercise 
hospitality  and  to  advance  money  to  a  friend  in 
need.  He  had  a  good  house,  which  was  provided 
and  kept  in  repair  by  the  municipality.  His  home, 
during  the  greater  part  of  his  ministry  in  Edin- 
burgh, stood  on  the  site  now  occupied  by  the  City 
Council  Chambers.  Another  house  in  Edinburgh, 
still  preserved  with  little  change  and  known  since 


865 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Knox 
Knox-Littl« 


the  eighteenth  century  at  latest  as  "  John  Knox's 
house/'  may  have  been  occupied  by  him  toward 
the  close  of  his  life.  With  all  his  severity,  there 
must  have  been  much  sympathy  in  a  man  who  was 
repeatedly  invited  to  reconcile  the  sundered,  hus- 
bfuid  with  wife,  friend  with  friend.  He  lived  in 
kindly  relations  with  his  neighbors,  many  of  whom, 
in  every  rank,  were  among  his  intimate  friends, 
and  he  was  not  indisposed  to  mirth  and  hiunor,  of 
which,  ajs  of  other  traits  of  his  character,  his  wri- 
tings furnish  abundant  evidence. 

An  interesting  description  of  Knox's  appearance, 
and  especially  of  his  style  as  a  preacher,  in  his 
later  years,  is  furnished  in  the  Diary  of  James 
MelviUe  (published  by  the  Bannatyne  Club,  Edin- 
burgh, 1829,  pp.  26,  33).  Melville  was  at  the  time 
a  student  in  St.  Andrews,  and  the  pe- 
10.  Per-  riod  he  refers  to  is  the  year  1571,  when 
sooal  Ap-  Knox,  for  his  personal  security,  had, 
pearance  not  for  the  first  time  in  his  life,  taken 
and  refuge  in  that  city.  ''  Of  all  the  bene- 
Manner.  fits  I  had  that  year,"  writes  Melville, 
"  was  the  coming  of  that  most  notable 
prophet  and  apostle  of  our  nation,  Mr.  John  Knox, 
to  St.  Andrews,  who,  by  the  faction  of  the  queen 
occupying  the  castle  and  town  of  Edinburgh,  was 
compelled  to  remove  therefrom,  with  a  number 
of  the  best,  and  chose  to  come  to  St.  Andrews.  .  .  . 
Mr.  Knox  would  sometimes  come  in,  and  repose  him 
in  our  college-yard,  and  call  us  scholars  unto  him,  and 
bless  us,  and  exhort  us  to  know  God  and  his  work 
in  our  country,  and  stand  by  the  good  cause;  to 
use  oiur  time  well,  and  learn  the  good  instructions, 
and  follow  the  good  example,  of  our  masters.  .  .  . 
He  was  very  weak.  I  saw  him  every  day  of  his  doc- 
trine go  hulie  and  fear  [slowly  and  warily],  with  a 
furring  of  martriks  about  his  neck,  a  staff  in  the  one 
hand,  and  good  godly  Richard  Ballantyne,  his 
servant,  holding  up  the  other  oxter  [arm-pit],  from 
the  abbey  to  the  parish  church;  and  by  the  said 
Richard  and  another  servant  lifted  up  to  the  pulpit, 
where  he  behoved  to  lean  at  lus  first  entry;  but  ere 
he  had  done  with  his  sermon,  he  was  so  active  and 
vigorous  that  he  was  like  to  ding  that  pulpit  in 
blads  and  flee  out  of  it."  A  Latin  epistle  sent  by 
Sir  Peter  Young  to  Beza  in  1579,  contains  a  de- 
scription of  the  Reformer's  personal  appearance  in 
later  years.  His  stature  was  "  a  little  imder 
middle  height  ";  his  **  limbs  were  graceful  ";  his 
head  ''  of  moderate  size  ";  his  face  "  longish  "; 
his  nose  "  beyond  the  average  length  ";  his  fore- 
head ''  rather  narrow  ";  his  brows  '^  standing  out 
like  a  ridge  ";  his  cheeks  "  somewhat  full  "  as  well 
as  **  ruddy ";  his  mouth  "  laige  ";  his  "  com- 
plexion darkish  ";  his  eyes  dark  blue  (or  bluish 
grey)  and  his  glance  "  keen  ";  his  beard  "  black, 
with  white  hairs  intermingled  "  and  a  *^  span  and 
a  half  long."  In  his  countenance,  which  was 
"  ^rave  and  severe,"  "  a  certain  graciousness  was 
united  with  natural  dignity  and  majesty." 

John  Knox  died  as  he  had  lived — full  of  faith, 
but  always  ready  for  conflict.  He  found  a  devoted 
nurse  in  his  young  wife;  and  all  the  noblest  and 
best  men  of  Scotland  himg  about  his  house  for 
tidings  of  the  progress  of  his  malady,  in  the  vain 
hope  of  his  being  longer  spared.     His  servant. 


Richard  Ballantyne,  after  detailing  the  incidents 
of  his  last  hours,  says  of  him:  "  Of  tlus   manner 
departit  this  man  of  God,  the  lycht  of  Scotland, 
the  comfort  of  the  Kirke  within  the 
II.  Testi-  same,  the  mirrour  of  Godliness,   and 
monies     patrone  and  exemple  to  all  trew  min- 
to  His       isteris,  in  puritie  of   lyfe,   soundness 
Character,  in  doctrine,  and  in  bauldness  in  re- 
proving of  wicketness,  and  one  that 
caired  not  the  favore  of  men  (how  great  soever 
they  were)  to    reprove    thair   abuses   and    synes 
....  What  dexteritie  in  teiching,  bauldness  in 
reproving,  and  hatred  of  wickedness  was  in  him, 
my  ignorant  dulness  is  not  able  to  declair."    A 
higher  testimony  to  the  worth  of  a  man  not  with- 
out   faults  was  pronounced  at  his  grave  in  the 
churchyard  of  St.  Giles  by  the  Earl  of  Mortoun,  the 
regent  of  Scotland,  in  the  presence  of  an  inunense 
concourse,  who  had  followed  the  body  to  its  last 
resting-place:    "Here  lyeth  a  man  who  in  his  life 
never  feared  the  face  of  man,  who  hath  been  often 
threatened  with  dagge  and  dagger,  but  yet  hath 
ended  his  dayes  in  peace  and  honour." 

W.  LEsf,  revised  by  Henbt  Cowan. 
Bibuographt:  The  Works  of  Knox  are  best  oonmilted  in 
the  excellent  edition  by  David  Laing,  printed  for  the 
Bannatyne  Club,  6  vola.,  Edinburgh,  1864,  which  in- 
cludes the  principal  aouroea  for  a  biography,  vis.,  his  His- 
tory of  the  R^ormation,  his  correspondence,  and  other  his- 
torical matter,  such  as  Smeaton's  account  of  his  last  illness 
and  death.  Other  sources  are:  the  MemoridU  of  TVans- 
odionB  in  Scotland  by  Richard  Bannatyne  and  the  Me- 
moirt  of  J,  MelviUe,  both  published  for  the  Bannatyne  Club, 
Edinburgh.  Of  modem  lives  the  first  was  that  by  T. 
McCrie,  new  ed.  with  additions  by  A.  Crichton,  London, 
1880.  Other  biographies  or  discussions  of  phases  of  the 
life  are:  by  F.  Brandes,  Elberfeld,  1862;  P.  Lorimer, 
J.  Knox  and  the  Church  of  England,  London,  1876; 
T.  Garlyle,  Heroee  and  Hero  Wonhip,  Essay  iv.,  ib.  1884; 
W.  M.  Taylor,  New  York,  1886;  R.  W.  Gosae.  London.  1888; 
R.  L.  Stevenson,  in  Familiar  Studiea  of  Men  and  Booke,  ib. 
1888;  P.  H.  Brown.  2  vols.,  Edinburgh,  1806;  J.  C.  Car- 
rick,  John  Knox  and  hie  Land,  Glasgow.  1002;  R.  Mulot, 
John  Knox,  1606-72,  Halle.  1004;  J.  Stalker,  John  Knox, 
hie  Ideale  and  Ideae,  London,  1004;  H.  Cowan,  New  York, 
1005;  J.  Glasse,  New  York,  1006;  A.  T.  Innes,  Edin- 
burgh, 1006;  A.  Lang,  Jt^n  Knox  and  the  ReformaHon, 
London,  1006;  D.  MacMillan,  London,  1006;  C.  Martin, 
La  Genkee  dee  doetrinee  de  John  Knox,  Pftris,  1006;  I. 
Crook,  Cincinnati,  1007;  W.  Walker,  Oreaiesi  Men  cf  the 
Christian  Chtareh,  Chicago,  1008;  DNB,  xxxi.  308-328. 
Besides  this  the  various  works  on  the  Reformation  of 
Scotland  discuss  the  subject. 

KNOX-LITTLE,  WILLIAM  JOHN:  Church  of 
England;  b.  at  Stewartstown  (12  m.  n.  of  Armagh), 
County  Tyrone,  Ireland,  Dec.  1,  1839.  He  was 
educated  at  Trinity  College,  Cambridge  (B.A., 
1862),  and  was  ordered  deacon  in  1863  and  ordained 
priest  in  the  following  year.  He  was  curate  of  Christ 
Church,  Lancaster  (1863-64),  assistant  master  of 
Sherborne  School  (1865-70),  curate  of  Turweston, 
Bucks  (1870-74),  and  of  St.  Thomas,  Regent  Street, 
London  (1874-75),  and  rector  of  St.  Alban's,  Cheet- 
wood,  Manchester  (1875-85),  and  vicar  of  Hoar 
Cross,  Burton-on-Trent  (1885-1907).  He  has  also 
been  canon  of  Worcester  since  1881,  proctor 
for  chapter  in  Convocation  of  Canterbury  since 
1888,  and  subdean  of  Worcester  since  1902.  He 
has  written:  The  Three  Houre'  Agony  of  Our  Blessed 
Redeemer  (Manchester,  1877);  Sermons  preached  for 
the  most  Part  in  Manchester  (London,  1880);  Char- 
acteristics and  Motives  qf  the  Christian  Life  (1880); 


Xntidtwm 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOO 


866 


The  MytAery  of  the  Paanan  qf  Our  Mori  Holy  Re- 
deemer (1881);  The  Witnees  qf  the  Paeeion  of  Our 
Moet  Holy  Redeemer  (1884);  The  Hopee  and  De- 
cieiona  cf  the  Paeeion  of  Owr  Moat  Holy  Redeemer 
(1886);  The  Broken  Vow:  A  Story  €^  Here  and  Here- 
after (1887);  The  CkOd  of  Staffertan;  A  Chapter 
from  a  Family  Chronicle  (1888);  The  Light  qf  Life 
(sermons;  1889);  Sunlight  and  Shadow  in  the 
Christian  Life  (sermons;  1889);  The  Christian 
Home,  iU  Foundation  and  Duties  (1891);  The 
Journey  qf  Life  (sermons;  1892);  Skdches  in  Sun- 
shine and  Storm  (1892);  Labour  and  Sorrow  (ser- 
mons; 1894);  The  Waif  from  the  Waves:  A  Story 
of  three  Lives  (1894) ;  Treasury  of  Meditation  (1896) ; 
St.  Francis  of  Assist,  his  Times,  Life,  and  Work 
(1897);  r^  Pei/ert  Lt/e  (sermons;  1898);  Sketches 
and  Studies  in  South  Africa  (1899);  David  the  Hero 
King  of  Israel  (1903);  and  The  Conflict  <^  Ideals 
within  the  Church  qf  England  (1905). 

KNUDTZON,  knut'sen  JOBRGBN  ALBZAHDBR: 
Norwegian  Orientalist;  b.  at  Trondhjem  (240  m. 
n.  of  Christiania)  Sept.  9,  1854.  He  studied  at 
the  universities  of  Christiania  (Ph.D.,  1889),  Ber- 
lin, and  Leipsic  (studying  in  Germany  from  1885 
to  1887).  He  studied  theology  primarily  at  the 
request  of  Prof.  C.  P.  Caspari  of  Christiania,  who 
intended  to  have  Knudtzon  as  his  successor,  but 
the  latter,  after  completing  his  training  in  Germany 
and  delivering  a  course  of  lectures  for  a  term  at 
Christiania,  was  regarded  not  sufficiently  conserve^ 
tive.  He  accordingly  withdrew  from  theology  in 
favor  of  Assyriology,  holding  that  theology  "as  a 
science  must  be  historical  and  critical";  and  was 
lecturer  in  Assyriology  at  the  University  of  Chris- 
tiania, 1894-1907;  and  since  1907  professor  of 
Semitic  languages  there.  He  has  written  Om  det 
saakaldte  perfektum  og  imperfektum  i  htbraiak  (Chris- 
tiania, 1889);  Aasyrische  Gebete  an  den  SonnengoU 
far  Staai  und  kdnigliches  Haus  aus  der  Zeit  Asar- 
haddons  und  Asurbanipals  (2  vols.,  Leipsic,  1893); 
Die  zwei  Artawa-Briefe,  die  dltesten  Urkunden  in 
indogermanischer  Sprache  (in  collaboration  with  S. 
Bugge  and  A.  Torp;  1902);  and  Die  EUAmama 
Tafdn  in   Umschrift  und  Ud>erseteung  (1907). 

KOCH,  k6H,  ANTON:  German  Roman  Catho- 
lic; b.  at  Pfronstetten  (near  MOnsingen,  23  m.  w. 
of  Ulm),  WQrttembuig,  Apr.  19,  1859.  He  studied 
at  the  University  of  Tubingen  and  the  seminary 
of  Rottenburg,  and  was  ordained  to  the  priesthood 
in  1884.  He  was  stationed  at  SchOnberg,  near 
Ellwangen,  for  two  years,  and  from  1886  to  1889 
was  lecturer  at  the  Wilhelmstift,  Tubingen.  In 
1889-91  he  was  privat-dooent  in  Tubingen,  and 
then  teacher  of  religion  at  a  gymnasiimi  in  Stutt- 
gart for  three  years.  In  1894  he  was  recalled  to 
Tubingen  as  associate  professor  of  moral  and  pas- 
toral theology,  and  since  1896  has  been  professor 
of  the  same  subjects  there.  He  has  written  Der 
heUige  Faustus,  Bischof  van  Riez  (Stuttgart,  1895), 
and  Lehrbuch  der  Moraltheologie  (Freiburg,  1905). 

KOEBBRLE,  to'ber-ld,  JUSTUS  ADOLF:  Ger- 
man Lutheran;  b.  at  Memmingen  (33  m.  s.e.  of  Ulm) 
June  27,  1871;  d.  at  Rostock  Feb.  7,  1908.  He 
studied  in  Halle,  Berlin,  and  Erlangen  from  1889  to 
1893,  and  after  four  years  of  pastoral  work  in 


Munich  became  a  lecturer  in  the  University  of 
Erlangen  in  1898,  privat-docent  in  1899,  and  in 
1904  professor  of  Old-Testament  exegesis  and 
Oriental  philology.  In  theology  he  was  an  adher- 
ent of  the  Erlangen  school.  He  wrote:  De 
Elohistae  Pentateuchi  priori^  qui  vacatur  ethica 
(Erlangen,  1896);  Die  Tempelsdnger  im  AUen 
Testament  (1899);  Natur  und  Geist  nach  der  Auf- 
fassung  dee  AUen  Testaments  (Munich,  1901);  Die 
Motive  des  Glaubens  an  die  G^etserhdrung  im  AUen 
Testament  (Leipsic,  1901);  Die  geistige  KuUvr  der 
semitischen  Vdlker  (1901);  Babylonische  KuUvr  und 
biblische  Religion  (Munich,  1903);  Silnde  und  Gnade 
im  religideen  Leben  des  Volkes  Israel  bis  auf  Christum 
(1905);  Das  Ratsd  des  Leidens,  eine  Eir^Ohrung 
in  das  Such  Hiab  (Berlin,  1905);  and  Zum  Kampfe 
um  das  AUe  Testament  (Wismar,  1906;  2d  ed., 
with  title  Die  aUtestamenUiche  Offenbarung,  1908); 
Der  Prophet  Jeremia,  Sein  LAen  und  Wirken 
(Calw,  1908) ;  and  has  been  since  1907  one  of  the 
editors  of  Theologie  der  Gegenwart, 

K0B6EL,  kU'gl,  THEODOR  JOHANNES  RU- 
DOLF: German  Protestant;  b.  at  Bimbaum  (44 
m.  w.n.w.  of  Posen),  Prussia,  Feb.  18,  1829;  d.  in 
Berlin  June  2,  1896.  He  attended  the  gymnasium 
at  Halle,  and  afterward  studied  philosophy  and 
theology  at  the  universities  of  Halle  and  Berlin. 
He  became  intimate  with  Tholuck,  was  his  aman- 
uensis, and  later  accompanied  him  on  a  journey  to 
France  and  Spain.  He  waa  a  gymnasial  teacher  in 
Dresden  1852^-54,  pastor  in  charge  at  Nakel,  near 
Bromberg,  1854-57,  and  pastor  of  the  German 
Evangelical  congregation  at  The  Hague  1857-63. 
Early  in  1863  he  was  called  to  Berlin  as  court 
preacher,  and  in  1873  was  appointed  first  court 
preacher,  general  superintendent  of  the  Kuimark, 
and  ephorus  of  the  Cathedral  Probationers'  Founda^ 
tion. 

KOgel  was  distinguished  particularly  as  a 
preacher,  and  also  for  his  part  in  ecclesiastical 
affairs.  His  sermons  are  true  to  the  text,  but  they 
invariably  bear  a  definite  stamp  of  their  own. 
Their  wealth  of  content  is  conveyed  in  a  concise, 
sharply  pointed  style;  and  the  copious  illustrations 
from  history  and  human  life  are  vividly  presented 
in  terms  exceedingly  brief  and  plastic.  His  sermons 
bear  the  impress  of  a  powerful  moral  earnestness, 
psychological  acumen,  and  discriminating  taste. 
Esthetic  and  poetical  endowment  becomes  distinctly 
subservient  to  the  art  of  preaching.  KOgel  exercised 
a  considerable  influence  over  the  internal  and  exter- 
nal development  of  the  Prussian  State  Church  in  the 
decade  after  1870.  Two  of  his  characteristic  traits 
are  conspicuous  in  this  connection :  first,  his  uncondi- 
tional championship  of  the  Union;  second,  his  sharp 
opposition  to  the  Protestant  Association.  In  conform- 
ity to  this  last  was  his  antagonism  toward  Emil  Herr- 
mann's synodical  constitution  plans,  which  seemed  to 
him  to  jeopardijse  the  integrity  of  the  confessional 
standard  of  doctrine.  These  antagonisms  became  es- 
pecially acute  on  occasion  of  the  extraordinary  gen- 
eral synod  of  1875,  and  led  to  the  founding  of  the 
Positive  Union  party  under  KOgel's  leadership. 
The  final  consequence  was  that  in  1878  Kdgel  was 
called  to  the  superior  ecclesiastical  council,  from 
which  soon  afterward  President  Herrmann  with- 


867 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Knudtion 
Koaniflr 


drew.  In  the  oourse  of  the  years  1892-04  he  re- 
tired from  his  offices  on  account  of  infirmity.  His 
sermons  form  the  bulk  of  his  writings.  Of  these  he 
published  numerous  collections,  including:  Der  enU 
Brief  Petri  (Mainz,  18^);  Die  Sdigpreieungen  der 
•Bergpredigt  (Berlin,  1869);  Das  Vateninaer  (1873); 
Au8  dem  Vorhof  ins  HeQigthum  (2  vols.,  Bremen, 
1875-76);  Der  Brief  Pauli  an  die  Rdmer  (1876); 
Waeh  auf,  du  Stadt  Jeruealem  (1882);  Das  Evan^ 
gelium  Johannis  (2  parts,  1892-93);  and  GelatU 
und  Geleit  durchs  Kirchenjakr  (2  parts,  1895-96). 
Other  works  are:  Reden  und  Ansprachen  (1887); 
Ethisches  und  Aesthetisches.  Vortrdge  und  Betrachr 
ft*n^en  (1888);  and  Gerfic^  (1891).  With  W.  Baur 
and  E.  Fronmiel  he  edited  the  year-book  Neue 
Ckristoterpe  (Bremen,  1880  sqq.). 

Gbobg  Rxetbchbl. 

Bibuoobapby:  Q.  KOgel,  Rudolf  KOgel,  tein  Werden  und 
Wirken,  3  vols.,  Berlin.  1899-1904;  ChriaUidie  WOt,  1897. 
pp.  268  0qq.  (on  KOgel  as  a  poet). 

KOEHLER,  ktrh'ler,  (PHILIPP)  AUGUST:  Ger- 
man Protestant  Biblical  scholar;  b.  at  Schmalen- 
berg  (50  m.  s.s.w.  of  Heidelberg),  in  the  Rhenish 
Palatinate,  Feb.  8,  1835;  d.  at  Erlangen  Feb.  17, 
1897.  He  began  his  education  at  the  gymnasium  of 
Zweibrtlcken,  and  then  studied  theology  at  Bonn, 
Erlangen,  and  Utrecht.  In  1857  he  established  him- 
self as  privat-dooent  at  Erlangen,  and  in  1862  be- 
came professor  extraordinary  for  Old-Testament  exe- 
gesis. In  1864  he  was  called  as  ordinary  professor  to 
Jena,  in  1866  to  Bonn,  and  in  1868  back  to  Erlangen 
as  successor  of  Dehtzsch.  Here  he  labored  for 
twenty-nine  years,  becoming  one  of  the  most  influ- 
ential members  of  the  theological  faculty.  His  en- 
dowments fitted  him  for  testing  the  views  of  others, 
rather  than  to  enter  new  paths  of  investigation. 
His  theological  tendency  was  influenced  chiefly  by 
Delitzsch  and  Hofmann.  Like  them,  he  emphasized 
throughout  his  life  the  importance  of  Old-Testa- 
ment history  as  a  history  of  salvation  preparatory 
to  Christianity.  His  first  comprehensive  work  was 
exegetical.  Die  nachexUischen  Propheten  erkldrt: 
part  i..  Die  Weissagung  Haggais  (Erlangen,  1860); 
part  ii..  Die  Weissagung  Sacharjas  (1861);  part 
ill.,  Die  Weissagung  Sacharjas  (1863);  part  iv..  Die 
Weissagung  Maleachis  (1865).  But  the  most  im- 
portant work  is  his  Lehrbuch  der  Biblischen  Oeschichte 
Alien  Testaments  (2  parts,  in  sections,  Erlangen, 
1875-85,  Leipsic,  1889-93).  It  was  not  a  history 
of  the  people  of  Israel  that  he  undertook  to  write, 
but  only  an  account  of  what  the  Old  Testament 
itself  tells  about  the  origin  and  history  of  its  people, 
with  a  detailed  examination  of  the  Old-Testament 
sources  by  the  aid  of  the  modem  scientific  apparar 
tus.  He  freely  admits  the  existence  of  different 
accounts  of  single  events  and  whole  periods  of 
Israelitic  history,  as,  for  instance,  the  Jahvistic 
and  Elohistic  sources  in  the  Pentateuch,  his  aim 
being  to  show  from  the  Old  Testament  what 
finally  developed  in  the  post-exilic  time  as  the  com- 
mon view  of  the  Old-Testament  community  in 
regard  to  its  history  on  the  basis  of  the  differing 
accounts.  He  made  a  distinction  between  the  secu- 
lar and  theological  content  in  Biblical  history. 
From  the  use  which  Jesus  made  of  the  Old  Testar 
ment  he  inferred  that  it  was  to  be  considered  as 


God's  instruction  to  his  congregation  concerning  his 
former  revelations.  The  books  of  the  Bible,  he 
states,  originated  in  the  same  way  as  other  books. 
The  historians  of  the  Old  Testament  never  show 
that  in  the  composition  of  their  works  they  had 
not  the  same  freedom  or  independence  of  judg- 
ment as  other  historians.  But  if  those  books  in 
spite  of  that  fact  have  been  regarded  by  Jesus  and 
the  apostles  as  the  word  of  God  to  his  congregation, 
the  Christian  congregation  has  a  sure  test  that 
there  is  to  be  found  in  them  the  most  faithful  repre- 
sentation of  the  deeds  and  revelations  of  God.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  Old  Testament  does  not  pretend 
to  be  a  God-given  document  concerning  the  knowl- 
edge of  the  things  of  the  natiu^  life,  as,  for  instance, 
of  the  primitive  history  of  man  and  the  secular  his- 
tory of  Israel,  but  only  a  God-given  document  con- 
cerning the  knowledge  of  the  revelations  of  God  in 
so  far  as  they  reflect  themselves  in  the  consciousness 
of  Israel  as  the  congregation  of  God.  Of  other 
works  may  be  mentioned.  Die  niederl&ndiscke  re- 
farmierte  Kirche  (Erlangen,  1856);  De  pronund- 
aJbUme  ac  vi  saerosancH  tetragrammatis  n^iT  (1866); 
and  Ueber  Berichtigung  der  Lutherischen  BibeLaber" 
seUung  (1886).  (Ebnst  Sellin.) 

BiBUOORAraT:   NKZ,  vm  (1897).  273-297. 

KOEHLER,  WALTER  ERICH:  German  Lu- 
theran; b.  at  Elberfeld  (16  m.  e.n.e.  of  Dttsseldorf), 
Dec.  27,  1870.  He  studied  in  Halle,  Heidelberg 
(Ph.D.,  1895),  Strasburg,  Bonn,  and  Tubingen 
(lie.  theol.,  1898),  and  in  1900  became  privat-do- 
cent  for  church  history  at  Giessen,  associate  pro- 
fessor of  the  same  subject  in  1904;  and  professor  of 
church  history  at  Zurich,  1909.  In  theology  he 
belongs  to  the  critical  school.  He  has  written:  Die 
kaihdischen  Kirehen  des  Morgenlandes  (Darmstadt, 
1896);  Luster  und  die  Kirchengeschidde,  i.  (Er- 
langen, 1900);  Reformation  und  KeUerprozess  (Tu- 
bingen, 1901);  Dokumenie  zum  AblassstreU  von 
1617  (1902);  Die  Entstehung  des  Problems  Staai  und 
Kirche  (1903);  Ein  Wort  zu  DenifUs  Luther  (1904), 
Die  Anfdnge  des  Pictismus  in  Giessen  1689-1693 
(Giessen,  1907);  besides  preparing  a  Kritische  Aus- 
gabe  von  Luthers  fUirfundneunzig  Thesen  mit  Gegen- 
schriften  (Leipsic,  1903). 

KOENIG,  ko'nig,  ARTHUR:  German  Roman 
Catholic;  b.  at  Neisse  (46  m.  s.s.e.  of  Breslau) 
June  4,  1843.  He  studied  at  the  University  of 
Breslau  1861-^  and  at  the  theological  seminary 
in  the  same  city  1866-67,  and  wajs  ordained  to  the 
priesthood  in  1867.  He  was  instructor  in  religion 
at  the  gymnasiiun  of  Gross  Glogau  1867-68,  going 
thence  in  a  similar  capacity  to  the  Realschule  at 
Neisse.  In  1882  he  was  appointed  professor  of 
dogmatic  theology  at  the  University  of  Breslau, 
exchanging  this  position  in  1898  for  the  profes- 
sorship of  pastoral  theology.  He  has  written:  Die 
Echtheii  der  Apostdgeschichte  (Breslau,  1867);  Das 
Zeugnis  der  Natur  fUr  Gottes  Dasein  (Freiburg, 
1870);  Lehrbuch  fOr  den  katholischen  Rdigions- 
unterriM  in  den  oberen  Klassen  der  Oymnasien  und 
Realschulen  (1879);  HandbuchfOr  den  katholischen 
Rdigioneunterricht  in  den  mittleren  Klassen  der  Gym- 
nasien  und  Realschulen  (1880);  Schdpfung  und  Got- 
teserkenninis  (1885);  Der   katholische   Priester  vor 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


868 


1600  Jahren  (Breslau,  1890);  Officium  des  heUtgen 
Rosenkratuea  (1891);  LeberubUder  und  CharaktertUge 
aua  der  KirchengeachichU  (Glatz,  1890);  Ein  BlaU 
au8  der  OeachichU  det  aehleaiachen  Schulweaeru 
(Breslau,  1903);  and  Au$  dem  Kampfe  urn  den 
GoUeeglauben  (1904). 

K0ENI6,  FRIEDRICH  EDUARD:  (jerman  Prot- 
estant; b.  at  Beichenbach  (56  m.  8.  of  Leipsic), 
Saxony,  Nov.  15,  1846.  He  studied  in  Leipsio 
(Ph.D.,  1874),  where  he  became  privat-dooent  in 
1879  and  associate  professor  of  Old-Testament  exe- 
gesis in  1885.  In  1888  he  went  to  Rostock  as  full 
professor  of  the  same  subject,  and  since  1900  has 
occupied  a  similar  position  at  the  University  of 
Bonn.  In  theology  he  is  one  of  the  leading  ad- 
herents of  the  conservative  school.  His  writings 
include:  Gedanke,  Lard  und  Akzerd  aU  die  drei  Fak- 
icren  der  Sprachtnldung  (Weimar,  1874);  Neue 
Studxen  Hber  Schrift,  Aussprache  und  genereUe  For- 
menlehre  dee  Aeihiopiechen  (Leipsic,  1877);  De 
criticae  eacrae  argumento  e  linguae  legibus  repetito 
(1879);  Historiech'kriiieehee  Lehrgebdude  der  htbra- 
ischen  Spmche  (3  vols.,  1881-97);  Der  Offenbarunga- 
begriff  des  Alien  Teetamente  (2  vols.,  1882);  Die 
Hauptprobleme  der  altisraelitiechen  Rdigionege- 
achichU  (1884;  Eng.  transl.  by  A.  J.  Campbell, 
The  Religioue  Histary  of  Israel,  Edinburgh,  1885); 
Falache  Extreme  in  der  neuren  Krilik  dee  Alien 
TestamerUa  (Leipsic,  1895);  Der  Glavbenaact  der 
Chriaten  nach  Begriff  und  Fundament  unieraucht 
(Erlangen,  1891);  The  Exilea*  Book  of  ConaoUUion 
contained  in  laaiah  xl.-lxvi.  (Edinburgh,  1899);  Die 
Originalitdt  dea  neulich  entdeckten  h^diachen  Sirach- 
Uxtea  (Freiburg,  1899);  StUiatik,  Rhetarik,  Poetik  in 
Bezug  auf  die  bibliatJie  Literatur  (Leipsic,  1900); 
Neueate  Printipien  der  altleatamentlichen  Kritik  (Ber- 
lin, 1902);  Bibel  und  Babel  (1902;  Eng.  transl.  by 
K.  T.  Filter,  Bible  and  Babylon,  London,  1905);  Die 
BibeL-BabelrFrage  und  die  vnaaenachaftliche  Methode 
(1904);  and  Prophetenideal,  Judenlum  und  Chriaten- 
turn  (1906);  Hehrdiache  Orammatik  (Leipsic,  1908); 
Talmud  und  Neuea  Teatament  (Gross-Lichterfelde, 
1908);  andGeachichledeaReicheaGotteabiaaufJeaua 
Chriatua  (Brunswick,  1908). 

KOBIIIG,  kxr'nig,  SAMX7EL:  Swiss  Pietist;  b.  at 
Gersensee  (9  m.  s.s.e.  of  Bern),  1670;  d.  at  Bern 
May  31,  1750.  He  studied  theology  at  Bern  and 
Zurich,  and  after  passing  the  examination  for  en- 
trance into  the  Bernese  ministry  set  out  on  a  tour  of 
Holland,  England,  and  Germany.  In  England  the 
mystical  writings  of  Jane  Lead  (q.v.)  exercised  an 
extraordinary  influence  over  him.  Returning  to 
Bern  in  1693,  he  became  preacher  at  the  Church  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  and  gained  approval  by  his  sermons, 
in  which,  from  a  desire  of  popularity,  he  espoused 
the  cause  of  orthodoxy  against  the  younger  school 
of  Pietists,  including  Gttldin,  Christian  Lutz,  and 
others.  Personal  association  with  the  leaders  of 
Pietism,  however,  won  him  over  to  their  side,  and 
with  the  same  vehemence  with  which  he  had  as- 
sailed them  he  now  turned  against  the  orthodox 
cause,  thus  arousing  tremendous  excitement  in  the 
religious  world  of  Bern.  K6nig  speedily  ingrafted 
in  the  Pietist ic  teachings  chiliastic  and  separatist 
tendencies  which  enabled  the  clergy  to  bring  the 


Pietist  leaders  before  the  courts  on  the  charge  of 
heresy.  The  trial  began  in  1698  and  continued  till 
the  spring  of  the  following  year,  the  Pietists  being 
accused  of  disseminating  heretical  teachings,  viola- 
ting the  ordinances  and  discipline  of  the  Church, 
and  disturbing  the  public  peace.  They  defended 
themselves  with  great  skill,  and  their  arraignmeot 
of  the  orthodox  system  might  have  influenced  any 
but  the  most  stubborn  of  opponents.  The  verdict, 
however,  had  been  determined  beforehand,  and 
KOnig,  as  the  most  obnoxious  critic  of  the  existing 
system,  was  degraded  from  his  clerical  oflioe  and 
banished.  Though  the  outcome  of  the  trial  was  a 
severe  blow  to  the  Pietists,  it  wrought  harm  to  the 
Church,  since  the  severity  of  the  sentence  intensified 
the  separatist  tendency  among  the  members  of  the 
sect,  and  it  was  only  the  labors  of  the  younger  Lutz 
that  prevented  a  complete  rupture  with  the  Church. 
Konig  wandered  through  Germany  for  many  years, 
until  in  1711  he  was  appointed  French  preacher  to 
the  count  of  Isenburg  at  Budingen.  Unceasing 
yearning  for  home  and  the  conviction  that  he  had 
been  unjustly  treated  made  his  long  exile  an  unhi^>py 
one,  and  his  antiorthodox  writings  increased  in  acer- 
bity. Gradually,  however,  he  withdrew  from  the 
field  of  theology,  and  successfully  devoted  himself 
to  studies  in  Oriental  languages  and  mathematics. 
In  1730  he  was  permitted  to  return  to  Bern,  and  the 
government  created  for  him  an  associate  professor- 
ship in  languages  and  mathematics  at  the  Univer- 
sity, where  his  inability  to  maintain  discipline  still 
further  embittered  him.  His  renewed  activity  in 
Pietist  propaganda  exposed  him  to  censure,  but  he  es- 
caped punishment  in  view  of  his  age.  The  last  years 
of  his  life  were  darkened  by  the  banishment  of  his 
two  sons,  who  were  found  guilty  of  taking  part  in 
the  conspiracy  of  Hentsi  against  the  aristocratic 
city  government.  Of  KOnig's  works  the  moet  note- 
worthy is  his  Etymologieon  hdLeno-Mjraicum  (Frank- 
fort, 1722),  in  which  he  sought  to  derive  the  Greek 
language  from  Semitic  sources,  while  his  Theolo- 
giachea  Prognaatikon  vom  Untergang  dea  tHrkiachen 
Reicha  (BQdingen,  1717)  is  characteristic  of  his  doc- 
trinal bias.  (W.  Hadorn.) 

Bibuoorapht:  F.  TrechMl.  Samuel  Kdnig  und  der  Pieti»- 
mue  in  Bern,  Bam,  1852;  A.  RitMhl.  OeeehiehU  dee  Fietu- 
mttf,  pp.  406  sqq..  Bonn,  1886;  H«dom,  in  Kirthenjreund, 
1808,  and  18W,  pp.  194  sqq. 

KOBSTLin,  kOstain,HBINRICH  ADOLF:  German 
Lutheran;  b.  at  Tubingen  Sept.  4, 1846;  d.  in  Cann- 
Btadt  (4  m.  n.e.  of  Stuttgart)  Jime  5,  1907.  He 
studied  at  the  seminary  of  SchOnthal  (1860-64)  and 
the  University  of  TObingen  (1864-68),  after  which 
he  was  vicar  in  Weilheim,  near  Tubingen  (1868- 
1869),  private  tutor  to  the  family  of  Baron  von 
W&chter,  ambassador  of  WUrttemberg,  at  Paris 
(1869-70),  chaplain  of  the  Second  WUrttembeig 
Field-Bri^e  in  the  Franco-Prussian  war  (1870- 
1871),  tutor  at  the  theological  seminary  at  Tubin- 
gen (1871-73),  and  deacon  at  SuU-on-the-Neckar 
(1873-74).  He  then  held  pastorates  at  Maulbronn 
(1875-78),  Friedrichshafen  (1878-^1),  and  Stutt- 
gart (1881-83).  From  1883  to  1891  he  was  pro- 
fessor of  theology  at  the  seminary  for  preachers  at 
Friedberg,  Hesse,  and  from  1891  to  1895  was  su- 
preme consistorial   councilor  and    superintendent 


869 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Koenlff 
Xohlbruana 


of  the  province  of  Starkenbuig.  In  1805  he  became 
privy  ecclesiastical  councilor  and  was  appointed 
professor  of  theology  in  Giessen.  He  retired  from 
active  life  in  1001,  and  resided  at  Darmstadt  (1001- 
1904)  and  Cannstadt  (after  1004).  In  1883^85  he 
was  a  member  of  the  committee  for  the  preparation 
of  a  new  hymnal  for  Hesse,  and  in  lOOGMH  was 
engaged  in  preparing  the  Hessian  Ktrchenbueh,  the 
Hessian  Otmeindeg^beUnuJi,  and  similar  works.  In 
theology  he  held  that  "  the  object  of  all  theology  is 
to  understand  the  person  and  message  of  Jesus 
Christ  as  the  Savior  of  mankind,  all  creeds  being 
but  an  approximate  expression  of  the  life  and  sal- 
vation in  him."  Besides  editing  the  MonoUaackrift 
fur  PastoraUheologie  at  Berlin  since  1004,  he  wrote 
Au8  emsten  Tagen,  Feldpredigten  (Stuttgsirt,  1871); 
Kandidatef^ahrten  (TObingen,  1875);  OeachiehU  der 
Mumk  (1875) ;  Friedrich  Silcher  und  CaH  Maria  van 
Weber  (Stuttgart  1877);  Die  Tonkurui,  EiTrfUhrung 
in  die  Aeethetik  der  Mtuxk  (1878);  Die  Muaik  ala 
chriaUiche  Volkamaehl  (1878);  Josephine  Lang 
(Leipsic,  1881) ;  LtUher  ale  der  Vater  dee  evangeliechen 
Kirchengeaange  (1882);  Der  Begriff  dee  geiatlichen 
AnUa  (Ludwigsbuig,  1885);  Im  Felde  (Darmstadt, 
1886);  Oeachichte  dee  chriatlichen  OoUeadienata 
(TObingen,  1887);  Die  Lehre  von  der  Sedaorge  nach 
evangdiachen  ChrundaOUen  (Berlin,  1805);  and  Pre- 
digten  und  Reden  (Qiessen,  1001). 

KOBSTLIN,  JULIUS  THSODOR:  Oerman  Prot- 
estant; b.  at  Stuttgart  May  17,  1826;  d.  at  Halle 
May  12,  1002.  He  was  educated  at  the  univer- 
sities of  Tdbingen  (1844-48)  and  Berlin  (1840- 
1850),  and  in  1850  became  lecturer  in  the  theologi- 
cal seminary  at  Tubingen.  Five  years  later  he  was 
appointed  associate  professor  of  theology  at  GOttin- 
r  ^en,  whence  he  was  called  in  1860  to  Breslau  as  fuU 
professor  of  the  same  subject.  From  1870  until 
1806,  when  he  retired  from  active  life,  he  was 
professor  of  New-Testament  exegesis  at  Halle.  In 
1840  he  visited  Scotland,  where  he  studied  Presby- 
terianism,  later  introducing  certain  Presbyterian 
features  into  German  consistorial  government. 
Among  his  numerous  writings,  special  mention 
may  be  made  of  his:  Die  achMache  Kirche,  ihr  inr 
nerea  Leben  und  ihr  VerhoUnia  turn  Stoat  (Gotha, 
1852);  Luthera  Lehre  von  der  Kirche  (Stuttgart, 
1853);  Der  Olavbe,  aein  Weaen,  Orund  und  Oegen- 
aland  (Gotha,  1850);  Lulhera  Theologie  in  ihrer  ge- 
ackichllichen  Entukcklung  und  ihrem  inneren  Zur 
aammenhange  (2  vols.,  Stuttgart,  1863;  Eng.  transl., 
from  the  second  German  edition,  Theology  of  Lu- 
ther in  ila  Hiatorical  Development  and  Inner  Harmony, 
2  vols.,  Philadelphia,  1807);  Martin  Luther,  aein 
Leben  und  aeine  Sdiriften  (2  vols.,  Elberfeld,  1875); 
Luthera  Leben  (Leipsic,  1882;  Eng.  transl.,  London, 
1883);  Martin  Luther  der  Re/ormator,  Featachrifi 
(Halle,  1883;  Eng.  transl.,  London,  1883);  Auto- 
biographie  (Danzig,  1801);  Die  BegrHndung  unaerer 
aittlich-^-digidaen  Ueberzeugungen  (Berlin,  1803); 
Rdigion  und  Reich  Oottea,  Abhandlungen  zur  Dog- 
matik  und  Etkik  (Gotha,  1804);  Der  Glaube  und 
aeine  Bedeutung  fOr  Erkenninia,  Leben  und  Kirche 
(Berlin,  1805);  and  ChriaUiche  Etkik  (1800). 

KOHLBRUEGGE,     kOl'brOg-ge,     HERMANN 
FRIEDRICH:    Founder  of  the   Dutch-Reformed 
VI.— 24 


congregation  at  Elberfeld;  b.  at  Amsterdam  Aug. 
15, 1803;  d.  at  Elberfeld  (16  m.  e.  of  DOsseldorf), 
Rhenish  Prussia,  Mar.  5,  1875.  He  was  brought 
up  as  a  Lutheran,  and  after  attending  the  Latin 
school  and  the  Athenaeiun  became  assistant 
preacher  to  the  Lutheran  congregation  at  Amster- 
dam. He  soon  perceived  that  there  was  little  left 
of  Luther's  spirit  in  the  Lutheran  (}hurch  of  Hol- 
land, and  his  sermons  on  the  radical  corruption  of 
himian  nature  aroused  the  opposition  of  his  ration- 
alistic colleagues  and  resulted  in  his  being  deposed. 
After  living  in  retirement  for  several  years  he  became 
a  convert  to  the  Reformed  faith;  but  the  Reformed 
(}hurch,  fearing  the  disturbance  of  its  peace,  refused 
him  admission.  In  1833,  while  traveling  for  his 
health  through  the  Rhine  region,  he  accepted  a  call 
to  Elberfeld,  where  his  energetic  personality,  the 
peculiarity  of  his  doctrinal  system  and  the  profound 
earnestness  of  his  sermons  made  a  deep  impression. 
Already  Gottfried  Daniel  Krummacher  (q.v.)  had 
aroused  many  earnest  believers,  and  KohlbrOgge 
was  eagerly  demanded  to  continue  his  work;  but 
the  Prussian  government,  considering  him  a  danger- 
ous enemy  of  the  plan  of  imiting  the  Lutheran  and 
Reformed  churches,  forbade  him  the  pulpit.  For 
a  number  of  years  Kohlbrtkgge  lived  in  retirement  at 
Utrecht,  interpreting  the  Scriptures  every  Sunday 
to  some  friends.  Meanwhile  the  act  of  union  had 
produced  a  great  fermentation  in  the  Rhine  region, 
especially  among  the  Reformed  congregations. 
In  Elberfeld  a  rupture  occurred  in  the  Reformed 
church,  and  in  1847  the  dissenters  elected  Kohl- 
brtkgge  as  their  pastor,  and  constituted  themselves 
as  the  "  Dutch  Reformed  "  congregation.  This  body, 
which  was  recognized  by  royal  patent  of  1847, 
considered  itself  a  member  of  the  Dutch  State  Church 
and  adopted  the  Confeaaio  Belgica  and  the  Heidel- 
beig  catechism.  It  still  exists  secluded  from  all 
outside  movements  of  Christianity  with  a  strict 
church  order,  legal  church  discipline,  and  well- 
organized  charities. 

The  peculiarity  of  Kohlbrtkgge  consists  less  in  an 
actual  deviation  from  the  doctrine  and  confessions 
of  the  Reformed  Church  than  in  a  one-sided  con- 
ception of  certain  doctrinal  points.  In  his  effort  to 
oppose  to  Pietism  the  objectivity  and  self-glory  of 
grace,  he  did  not  emphasize  strongly  enough  sancti- 
fication  and  renovation  of  the  heart.  His  sermons, 
which  constitute  the  bulk  of  his  works,  spread  far 
beyond  the  borders  of  his  congregation.  Of  his 
writings  may  be  mentioned:  Daa  aiAente  Kapitd  dee 
Briefea  Pauli  an  die  R&ner  (Elberfeld,  1830;  Eng. 
transl.,  London,  1854);  Betrachtung  Ober  daa  erate 
Kapitd  dea  Evangdiuma  nach  Matthdtu  (1844);  Daa 
alte  Teatament  nach  aeinem  toahren  Sinne  gewiirdigt 
aiis  den  Schriften  der  Evangdiaten  und  Apoatd 
(1846);  Schriftm&aaige  Erlduterung  dea  chriatlichen 
Bekenntniaaea :  "  Ich  glaube  an  den  heiUgen  Oeiat  " 
(1855;  Eng.  transl..  Scriptural  Elucidation  of  the 
Artide  on  Sie  Chridian  Faith:  I  Bdieve  in  the  Holy 
Qhod,  1856);  Daa  Ami  der  Predfyter  (1856);  and 
Blicke  in  daa  erate  Kapitd  dea  eraten  Budiea  Samudia 
(1868).  His  numerous  collections  of  hi.!  sermons 
include:  Sid>en  Predigten  iiber  Sacharja  Hi, 
(Elberfeld,  1848);  Sid)en  Predigten  Hher  den  Pro- 
pheten  Jona  (1840);  Acht  Predigten  aber  Evangdium 


Kohlor 
Kol  Nldre 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOO 


870 


JohanniB  (1840);  Predigten  iiber  die  trtAe  Epistd  dea 
ApoM8  Petnu  (1855;  Eng.  tmul.,  1856);  Zwanxig 
Predigten  im  John  1846  gehaUen  (Halle,  1857);  and 
A  potidguckichU.  Cap,  2-10.  in  B5  Predigten  (Elber- 
feld,  1874).  Some  of  these  sennons  have  appeared 
in  English  under  the  title  MisceUaneoue  Sermons 
(London,  1855).  (H.  Calaminus.) 

Biblioorapht:  Zvtt  Efinmerung  an  Hermann  Friodrich 
KohUbrHaoe,  Elberfeld,  1875;  Eine  Erinnerung  an  H.  P. 
KohlhrUgge,  WeUand  Paator  der  mederldYidMcAe^^ormtrten 
Kireken,  Hageo.  1882;  A.  Ritsehl.  OMchidUe  dm  Pittumu§, 
I  003  sqq..  Bonn,  1880. 

KOHLER,     CHRISTIAH     and    HIEROIITMUS: 

Swiss  fanatics  and  impostors,  founders  of  the  sect 
of  the  Brtlgglers.  Christian  was  bom  in  1710  and 
Hieronymus  in  1714  at  Brtigglen  near  ROggisberg 
(0  m.  s.  of  Bern),  Switzerland,  in  a  region  dominated 
by  the  influence  of  sectaries,  prophetesses,  and 
mystics.  From  their  father  the  two  brothers  in- 
herited a  reputation  for  hydromancy,  and  soon 
discovered  how  to  turn  their  knowledge  to  material 
profit,  revealing  at  the  same  time  a  certain  degree 
of  native  talent  and  a  cunning  and  ambition  which 
became  an  important  factor  in  gaining  a  following. 
They  had  received  no  regular  education,  one  being 
a  day-laborer  and  the  other  a  wagoner,  had  married 
at  an  early  age,  and  were  conspicuous  for  their  moral 
delinquencies.  In  1745  a  remarkable  movement, 
traceable  to  the  influence  of  pietistic  separatism, 
broke  out  in  BrOgglen  and  its  vicinity,  when  children 
began  to  pray  and  to  preach  to  their  eldere.  Among 
these  inspired  children  were  the  offspring  of  the 
Kohler  brothers,  and  from  them  the  fanatic  spirit 
passed  to  their  parents,  who  now  experienced  visions 
and  dreams,  and  related  to  their  neighbors  the 
wonderful  revelations  vouchsafed  them  during  pe- 
riods of  ecstasy.  It  has  been  supposed  that  in  the 
beginning  the  two  men  were  subjects  of  self-decep- 
tion, but  it  is  not  impossible  that  their  ecstatic 
visions  were  deliberate  mendacities.  They  made 
use  of  the  plentiful  apocalyptic  literature  of  the  time 
for  all  their  revelations  with  regard  to  the  millen- 
nium and  the  antichrist,  while  they  shared  with  all 
separatists  an  irreconcilable  hatred  for  the  Chureh. 
Their  sole  innovation  was  their  audacious  imper- 
sonation of  the  Trinity,  a  claim  in  which  they  were 
assisted  by  a  woman  of  evil  repute  named  Eliza- 
beth KiHsling.  Christian  Kohler  proclaimed  himself 
the  temple  of  the  Father,  Hieronymus  that  of  the 
son,  and  the  Kissling  woman  that  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 
The  success  of  their  impostiu^  evidently  turned 
their  heads,  for  they  made  no  attempt  to  preserve 
any  consistency  of  deception,  but  announced  them- 
selves at  various  times  as  the  two  witnesses  of  the 
Apocalypse,  as  the  servants  of  Christ  and  his  repre- 
sentatives, and  as  the  successors  to  the  throne  of 
God.  The  Kissling  woman  was  not  only  the  in- 
carnation of  the  Holy  Ghost,  but  also  the  woman  of 
the  Apocalypse  who  was  to  give  birth  to  the  Sa- 
viour. At  the  same  time  they  continued  to  practise 
divination  and  answered  questions  concerning  the 
condition  of  the  dead,  being  able  to  speak  with 
authority  since  Christian  Kohler  was  in  constant 
communication  with  heaven.  In  case  the  departed 
soul  was  declared  by  them  to  be  in  hell,  they  pro- 
fessed  themselves  able   to  absolve  it,  and   thus 


profited  by  an  active  trade  in  indulgences.  In  1750, 
after  they  had  pursued  their  practises  for  more  than 
five  years,  they  were  arrested  and  banished  from  the 
canton  for  six  years.  They  frequently  returned  m 
secret,  however,  and  renewed  their  prophecies  until 
a  price  was  set  upon  their  heads.  Hieronymus  was 
seized  Oct.  8,  1752,  and  executed  Jan.  16,  1753; 
Elizabeth  Kissling  was  imprisoned;  and  Christian, 
after  incarceration,  professed  himself  ready  to 
abandon  his  beliefs.  His  subsequent  fate  is  un- 
known. Most  of  the  BrOgglers  were  quite  ignorant 
of  the  vicious  character  of  their  prophets  and  ab- 
jured their  heresies,  but  some  remained  faithful  to 
the  **  murdered  Messiah,"  and  awaited  his  speedy 
return.  The  sect  disappeared,  but  about  fifty  years 
later  the  Antonians  renewed  many  of  their  do^ 
trines  and  practises  (see  Antonians,  2). 

(W.  Hadobn.) 
BiBLiooaA.PHT:  J.  R.  Kyburs,  Dm  entdeckte  Otkeimnu  iv 
Boakeit  in  dmr  BrUggUnekU,  2  vols..  Zurich.  1753;  I. 
Meutor,  Helveiiache  Stenen  dmr  neueren  Sehw&rmerti  vsi 
IntoUranx,  pp.  161  sqq.,  ib.  1785;  J.  R.  Schlegd.  Kv- 
dtBnoeaehiehU  det  18.  JahrhwuUrU,  II.,  ii  1062  eq<i.,  3 
ToI«.,  Heilbroim,  1784-06;  K.  R.  Haeenbach,  HiH  ^ 
the  Churdi  in  the  18th  and  19th  Centuriee,  2  vols.,  Ne* 
York,  1860;  Hadom.  in  Theolooiedhs  Zeiteckrift  om  de 
Sdiweie,  1000,  part  iv. 

KOHLER,  KAUFMANN:  German-AmericaD 
rabbi;  b.  at  Fttrth  (5  m.  n.w.  of  Nuremberg', 
Germany,  May  10,  1S48.  He  studied  at  the  rab- 
binical schools  of  Hassfurt,  H6chberg,  Mains,  Al- 
tona,  and  Frankfort,  and  at  the  universities  of 
Munich,  Berlin,  Leipsic,  and  Erlangen  (Ph.D. 
1868).  In  1869  he  came  to  the  United  States  id 
was  rabbi  of  Congregation  Beth-El  in  Detroit  ucti 
1871.  He  then  became  rabbi  of  Sinai  Ojogicga- 
tion,  Chicago,  where  he  introduced  Sunday  lecture 
into  the  service  of  the  American  synagogue,  h 
1879  he  was  chosen  rabbi  of  Temple  Beth-El,  Ne% 
York  City.  In  1903  he  was  made  honorary  mi^ 
ister  of  that  synagogue  for  life,  that  he  might  a^ 
cept  the  proffered  presidency  of  Hebrew  Union  Col- 
lege, Cincinnati,  O.  He  is  one  of  the  leaders  of  R^ 
formed  Judaism  in  the  United  States.  He  edited 
the  weekly  Sabbath  Vieitor  1881-^2  and  the  weekly 
Jewish  Reformer  in  1886,  and  was  editor  of  the  de- 
partments of  theology  and  philosophy  of  the  Jn- 
ish  Encyclopedia.  He  has  edited  David  Einhom^ 
auegewMte  Predigten  und  Reden  (New  York,  I88O1 
and  has  written:  Der  Segen  Jakob*8  (Berlin,  1867'. 
Die  Bibel  und  die  Todesetrafe  (Leipsic,  1868);  D^ 
hohe  Lied  iJhereetXt  und  kritiech  neu  bearbeitei  (Nev 
York,  1878);  Backwards  or  Forwards:  Lectures  <?s 
Reformed  Judaism  (1885);  The  Ethical  Bam  of 
Judaism  (1887);  Church  and  Synagogue  in  their 
Mutual  Relations  (Cliicago,  1889);  and  A  Gmdi^^ 
Instruction  in  Judaism  (New  York,  1898). 

KOLB,  FRANZ:  Reformer;  b.  at  Intzlinga^ 
near  Ldrrach  (28  m.  s.s.w.  of  Freiburg),  Baden. 
1465;  d.  at  Bern  Nov.  10, 1535.  In  1491  he  entered 
the  University  of  Basel,  where  humanism  was  well 
represented;  in  1497  he  became  master  and  teacher 
in  St.  Martin's  school,  but  in  1502  he  retired  to  s 
CJarthusian  monastery  in  Swabia.  Zwingli  iras 
probably  his  successor  in  Basel.  In  1504  Eolb  vent 
to  Freiburg  as  cantor  and  preacher  and  after- 
ward was  active  for  some  time  in  the  neighbonog 


371 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Xohlor 
Xol  Nidre 


Murten.  In  1507  he  became  rector  of  the  schools  in 
Freiburg.  In  the  same  year  he  went  to  Italy  as 
field-chaplain  with  Swiss  mercenaries  in  the  service 
of  Emperor  Maximilian.  In  1509  he  left  Freiburg 
and  went  to  Bern  as  cathedral  preacher.  He  was 
a  stem  moralist  and  arraigned  the  people  for  their 
vices.  With  less  success  he  attacked  the  demorali- 
zing mercenary  traffic,  and  because  of  these  attacks 
was  forced  to  leave  Bern  in  1512  and  again  retired 
to  a  Carthusian  monastery,  this  time  at  Nuremberg. 
He  preached  the  Reformation  in  Nuremberg,  but 
was  persecuted  in  1522  and  fled.  On  the  recommen- 
dation of  Luther,  apparently,  he  received  the  post 
of  preacher  from  Count  George  II.  of  Wertheim. 
Here  he  was  active  in  the  reform  of  the  church  ser- 
vice, but  inclined  toward  the  doctrinal  conceptions 
of  Zwingli  with  whom  he  soon  afterward  came  in 
personal  contact  at  Zurich.  On  this  account  in  1525 
he  lost  the  confidence  of  his  protector  and  returned 
to  Nuremberg,  where  the  Reformation  in  the  mean 
time  had  achieved  its  full  victory.  Kolb  was  si]»- 
pected,  however,  of  sympathizing  with  the  teach- 
ings of  sectaries  like  Denk  and  Mtlnzer,  who  at  that 
time  were  active  in  Nuremberg,  and  although  cleared 
of  this  suspicion,  he  applied  in  1526  to  Zwingli  for 
a  position,  and  in  the  following  year  became  the 
assistant  of  Berthold  Haller  in  Bern.  With  Haller 
he  took  the  most  prominent  part  in  the  great  dispu- 
tation of  1528  which  achieved  the  victory  of  the 
Gospel  in  Bern  (see  Bern,  Duputation  of). 
Kolb's  Wertheimer  Ratschlag  (1524)  gives  his  views; 
and  some  of  his  letters  are  in  the  Luther  and  the 
Zwingli  correspondence.  (E.  BLOscHtO 

Bibuoorapht:    L.   Eiasenldffel,   Prafu  Kolh^  Zell,   n.  d.; 

8.  Fiicher,  Refcrmatum  uni  DiMpwUUion  in  Bwrn,  Bam, 

1828. 

KOLDE,  THSODOR  (FRIEDRICH  HERMANN): 
German  Lutheran;  b.  at  Friedland  (26  m.  s.e.  of 
KOnigsberg),  Upper  Silesia,  May,  6  1850.  He  stud- 
ied in  Breslau  (1869-70)  and  Leipsic  (1871-72; 
Ph.  D.,  Halle,  1874;  lie.  theol.,  Marburg,  1876),  and 
in  1876  became  privat^locent  for  church  history  in 
Marburg,  where  he  was  appointed  associate  profes- 
sor in  1879.  Since  1881  he  has  been  fuU  professor 
of  church  history  at  Erlangen.  He  has  written :  Der 
KanzUr  Bruck  und  seine  Bedeuhing  fur  die  Entr 
wicklung  der  Reformation  (Qotha,  1874);  Luihere 
SteUung  ta  KonzU  und  Kirche  his  turn  Wormser 
Reichetag  (QUtersloh,  1876);  Die  deutache  Augue- 
liner-Congregation  und  Johann  von  Staupitz  (Qotha, 
1879);  Friedrich  der  Weiae  und  die  Anfdnge  der  Re- 
.formation  (Erlangen,  1881);  Analeda  Lutherana 
(Gotha,  1883);  Luther  und  der  Reichetag  zu  Worms 
(Halle,  1883);  Martin  Luther,  eine  Biographie  (2 
vols.,  Gotha,  1884-93);  Die  HeUsarmee  naeh  eigener 
Anschauung  und  nach  ihren  Schriften  (Erlangen, 
1885);  Der  Methodismus  und  seine  Bekdmpfung 
(1886);  Beiirdge  tsut  Reformationsgeschichte  (Leipsic, 
1888);  Die  Loci  communes  Philipp  Melanchthons 
(1890);  Luthers  Sdbstmord:  eine  Oeschichtsluge  P, 
Majunkes  beleuchtet  (1890);  Ueber  Oremen  des  his- 
torischen  Erkennens  (1890);  Die  kirchlichen  Bruder- 
schaften  und  das  religiose  Leben  im  modemen  KathoH- 
zismua  (Erlangen,  1895);  Andreas  AUhamer  der 
Humanist  und  Reformator  (1896);  Die  Autburger 
Confession   laieinis^    und   deutsch    kurz    erl&utert 


(Gotha,  1896);  Das  rdigidse  Leben  in  Erfurt  heim 
Ausgange  des  Mittelalters  (Halle,  1898);  Dr.  Johann 
Teuschbein  und  der  erste  Reformationsversuch  in 
Rothenburg  ob  der  Tauber  (Leipsic,  1901);  Edward 
Irving  (1903);  Das  bayerische  Religionsedikt  vom 
10.  Jan.  1803  (Erlangen,  1903);  Der  Staatsgedanke 
der  Reformation  und  die  rdmiache  Kirche  (Leipsic, 
1903);  P.  Denifle,  seine  Beschimpfung  Luthers  und 
der  evangelischen  Kirche  (1904);  Der  Katholizismus 
und  das  zwanzigste  Jakrhundert  (1905) ;  Die  Anfdnge 
einer  katholischen  Oemeinde  in  Erlangen  (Erlangen, 
1906);  Die  dlteste  Redaktion  der  Augsburger  Kon- 
fession  mit  Melanchthons  Einleitung  (GUtersloh, 
1906);  and  Historische  Einleitung  in  die  symboli- 
schen  BUcher  der  Evangleisch4utherischen  Kirche 
(1907).  He  has  also  edited  the  Beitrdge  zur 
bayerischen  Kirchengeschiehte  (Erlangen  since  1895). 

KOL  NIDRE,  kolnt'drd  ("  AU  vows"):  The 
name  given  to  the  evening  service  taking  place  in 
the  synagogue  before  the  begiiming  of  the  Day 
of  Atonement,  derived  from  the  opening  words. 
The  service  is  opened  by  the  formula  Kol  nidre  which 
runs  as  follows:  ''All  vows,  renunciations,  bans, 
konams  and  [other]  cognomens  [with  which  vows  may 
be  designated]  and  kintue  and  oaths,  which  we  vow 
and  swear  and  ban  and  bind  upon  our  souls,  from 
this  day  of  atonement  until  the  [next]  day  of  atone- 
ment which  shall  come  for  our  welfare — we  repent 
them  all;  they  shall  be  solved,  remitted,  abolished, 
be  void  and  niiU,  without  power  and  without  validity. 
May  our  vows  be  no  vows,  and  our  oaths  be  no 
oaths."  Then  cantor  and  congregations  recite  to- 
gether Num.  XV.  26.  The  cantor  closes  with  an 
offering  of  thanks  in  that  God  has  kept  alive  his 
praying  people. 

This  ceremony  has  caused  many  accusations 
against  the  Jews,  especially  one  concerning  the  un- 
trustworthiness  of  an  oath  by  a  Jew.  It  is  to  be 
noted,  however,  that  in  this  formula  there  is  no 
allusion  to  oaths  sworn  to  others,  but  only  to  ob- 
ligations which  one  imposes  upon  himself.  Because 
the  Oriental,  through  his  emotional  temperament,  is 
easily  moved  to  make  unconsidered  vows,  the 
Talmudists  declared  vows  unmeritorious  and  even 
sinful,  and  some  vows  were  declared  initially  in- 
valid; others  could  be  solved  if  repentance  was  ex- 
pressed. Besides  that,  a  general  absolution  of 
future  vows  was  allowed  by  a  solemn  declaration  on 
New  Year's  Day.  In  post-Talmudic  times  this 
usage  was  changed  so  that  the  declaration  was  to  be 
made  on  the  first  evening  of  the  day  of  atonement 
by  the  whole  congregation  and  with  reference  to  the 
past,  not  to  the  future. 

Kol  nidre  is  first  mentioned  in  the  time  of  the 
Geonim  (589-1034  a.d.)  It  was  only  slowly  that  the 
formula  was  recognized  and  expanded.  Even  in  the 
twelfth  century  and  later  it  was  rejected  by  men 
like  Jehuda  Hadassi  (c.  1148);  Isaac  ben  Sheshet  of 
Saragossa  (d.  c.  1406);  Jacob  Landau  (flourished 
c.  1480  in  Italy)  in  a  collection  of  ritualistic  decrees 
called  Agur;  and  Mordecai  ben  Abraham  Jaffe 
(d.  Mar.  7,  1612),  rabbi  in  Poland  and  in  Prague. 
Kol  nidre  was  abolished  in  Mecklenburg-Schwerin 
in  May,  1844,  in  Hanover  at  the  end  of  the  sixties, 
and  still  later  in  Magdeburg.   There  was  substituted 


Xorta 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


372 


either  a  German  hymn  or  a  new  Hebrew  prayer;  but 
the  majority  of  "orthodox"  congregations,  in 
Germany,  Austria-Hungary  and  other  countries,  ad- 
hered to  the  early  formula. 

An  important  change  in  the  formula  was  made  by 
Meir  ben  Samuel  (d.  after  1136).  Up  to  his  time 
the  solution  of  the  yows  of  the  past  year  had  been 
pronounced,  but  he  allowed  the  vows  of  the  year 
just  b^gun  to  be  declared  invalid.  This  restitution 
of  the  original  idea  was  widely  adopted,  especially 
in  the  German  ritual.   See  also  Oath;  and  Vows. 

(H.  L.  Strack.) 

Bibuoobapht:  J.  A.  EiMnmMigar,  Entdtektet  Jud^nthum, 
part  ii..  oh»p.  0.  KAnigsberg.  17U;  M.  PhUipaon.  Utber 
dim  Vtrbmmruno  dea  JudsnndM,  NeustrBlits,  1707;  Z. 
Fmnkel.  Dm  SidMUitiuno  dmr  JwUn,  DivKien,  1840; 
L.  Zuna,  OammmMlU  Sehriften,  U.  241-204.  Berlin,  1876; 
L.  LOW,  ChmmmelU  Seknftmt,  iii  300-806.  Bncedin, 
1808.  Gonmilt  alto  liwhmann.  in  Dir  /aracIO,  1868,  not. 
20.38. 

KOMAUBBR,  kO-mOn'der  (DORFMAHN),  JO- 
HAHll:  Reformer  of  the  canton  of  Grisons;  b. 
at  Maienfeld  (12  m.  n.  of  Chur);  d.  at  Chur  early 
in  1657.  He  studied  at  Basel  with  Zwingli  in  1502- 
1 503,  was  settled  as  pastor  in  Chur  as  early  as  1523, 
and  was  active  there  till  his  death.  Though  the 
Reformation  had  made  considerable  progress  in  the 
vicinity  of  Chur,  Komander  met  with  violent  op- 
position at  first,  but  Zwingli 's  influence  induced  the 
authorities  of  the  town  to  protect  him.  Forty 
other  preachers  joined  his  cause.  The  papal  party, 
however,  found  in  1525  a  peculiar  ally  in  the  Anabap- 
tists. Theodor  Schlegel,  the  clever  abbot  of  St. 
Lucius  in  Chur,  secretly  favored  the  Anabaptists, 
and  then  at  the  federal  diet  in  1525  accused  Koman- 
der and  his  friends  as  the  instigators  of  their  heresy. 
Komander  caknly  and  courageously  requested  the 
council  to  let  him  justify  his  faith  from  Holy  Scrip- 
ture. A  religious  colloquy  was  ordered  at  Ilans  on 
Jan.  7,  1526,  for  which  Komander  prepared  eight- 
een theses  on  the  basis  of  Zwingli's  theses  for  the 
first  disputation  of  Zurich.  The  colloquy  lasted  two 
days,  but  only  the  first  thesis  on  the  authority  of  the 
Bible  was  discussed,  all  further  efforts  being  frus- 
trated by  the  intrigues  of  Schlegel.  On  the  whole, 
the  result  of  the  colloquy  was  favorable  to  the  Ref- 
ormation; the  authority  of  Komander  increased, 
and  seven  other  clergymen  of  Grisons  joined  his 
cause.  But  under  pressure  from  the  Roman  strong- 
holds in  the  confederation,  and  to  free  certain  re- 
spected Evangelical  citizens  of  the  Valtellina  (q.  v.) 
who  had  been  captured  by  Roman  noblemen,  the 
federal  diet,  assembled  in  1520  at  Chur,  resolved 
to  maintain  the  old  usages  in  regard  to  public  wor- 
ship, although  preaching  was  to  remain  free.  Soon 
after  the  issue  of  this  decree,  some  Evangelical 
preachers  were  banished  for  refusing  to  restore  the 
mass  and  images.  Nevertheless,  Komander  ven- 
tured to  expound  the  Evangelical  doctrine  of  the 
Lord's  Supper  at  Easter,  1526,  and  it  was  adminis- 
tered according  to  Evangelical  rite  in  1527.  Soon 
afterward  the  odious  decree  was  revoked,  and 
freedom  of  choice  between  the  two  conflicting  re- 
ligions was  permitted.  An  ArUkeCbrUf ,  favorable 
to  the  Evangelicals,  was  issued  Jime  25,  1526.  It 
gave  the  congregations  the  right  to  choose  their 
own  pastors,  restricted  the  rights  of  patronage  of 


the  cathedral  chapter,  and  forbade  the  election  of  a 
bishop  without  the  consent  of  the  federal  diet. 
Irritated  by  these  decisions,  the  bishop  and  Schlegel 
entered  into  treasonable  relations  with  the  Medici; 
but  the  conspiracy  was  discovered,  the  bishop  was 
exiled,  and  Schlegel  was  beheaded  in  1529. 

After  the  outward  security  of  the  Reformation  had 
been  achieved,  Komander  busied  himself  with  its 
internal  development.  Zwingli  gave  him  an  ex- 
cellent assistant  in  Nicolaus  Baiing.  Komander 
learned  Hebrew,  and  studied  so  diligently  that  he 
injured  his  eyesight.  From  his  correspondence  with 
Zwingli,  it  is  evident  that  he  had  many  disagreeable 
encounters  with  the  Anabaptists.  He  was  a  genuine 
disciple  of  Zwingli,  and  was  always  in  dose  relation 
with  his  friends  at  Zurich.  In  agreement  with 
Bullinger,  he  proposed  at  the  federal  diet  of  1536 
a  firmer  organisation  of  the  Church.  This  idea  was 
realised  in  1537  by  the  institution  of  a  synod.  The 
catechism  of  Grisons  is  Komander's  work,  and  he 
took  a  prominent  part  in  the  composition  of  the  Cofi- 
feateio  Rhaetieaf  which  was  chiefly  directed  against 
Antitrinitarian  heresies.  In  the  latter  years  of 
his  life  he  devoted  his  efforts  to  the  development 
of  the  high  school  at  Chur,  founded  in  1539,  which 
soon  began  to  flourish  under  Johannes  Pontisella 
and  Simon  Lemnius.  Komander's  last  public  ap- 
pearance was  in  a  fiery  discourse  delivered  before 
the  federal  diet  in  1556  against  the  sending  of  a 
submissive  embassy  to  the  pope. 

(B.   RiGOENBACHt.) 

Bibuoobapht:  The  aouroM  and  treatment  of  Komander 
are  beet  tought  in  the  literatim  cited  under  Zwinou.  e.fc.. 
Zwingli'e  Opera,  vole,  ▼ii.-viii.;  R.  Staehelin.  Huldreich 
Zvinoli,  2  vols..  Basel,  1805-^:  B.  M.  Jaekaon.  HtddrticK 
ZwingU,  New  York,  1003  (consult  Index  "  Conumder  "k 
and  the  literature  under  Rxtobm  ation  in  the  section  on 
Switieriand.  Consult:  U.  Oampell.  Uiat.  Raetica,  ed. 
P.  PUttner.  2  toIb..  Basel.  188^-00;  F.  Trechsel,  Dit 
proUataniieehen  Aniitrinitarier,  vol.  ii..  Heidelberg.  1844; 
H.  G.  Bulsberger,  OMdiiehU  der  Reformation  im  KanUm 
QrayhUnden,  Chur.  1880;  Schaff.  Ckriaiian  CkureK  vii. 
138-140;  BuUingere  Korreepondene  in  QueUen  xw  Sckte>n- 
eer  OeechidUe,  vol.  xxiu..  Basel.  1004;  E.  Bltech.  Gt- 
eehiefUe  der  eehweiaerieeK^refarmierUn  KvrAe,  L  65  sqq.. 
170  sqq..  Bern.  1808.  For  the  ooUoquy  at  Hans.  cf. 
J.  C.  FQssli,  BeiirAge  mr  Ktrehen-  und  Reformaiioneor^ 
eehiehte.  I  387-382.  Zurich.  1741;  U.  Oampell.  ut  sup.,  ii. 
287-806:  UefmmelUn  Akien  sum  ROi^ionegeeprAtk  \n 
ilane,  Chur.  1004. 

KOOLHAAS,     kOlOiOs,     KASPAR     JAHSZOON: 

Dutch  Protestant;  b.  at  Cologne  Jan.  24,  1536;  d. 
at  Amsterdam  Jan.  15,  1615.  After  a  few  years  of 
study  at  Cologne  and  DOsseldorf,  he  joined  the  Car> 
thusians  at  Coblens,  but  in  1560  entered  the  Prot- 
estant ministry  at  Marbach,  and  in  1566  became 
pastor  at  Deventer,  Holland.  When  the  city  fell 
into  the  hands  of  the  Spaniards  he  fled  to  Germany, 
but  returned  to  Holland  in  1573  and  became  pastor 
at  Leyden  in  1574.  At  the  founding  of  the  univer- 
sity there  he  delivered  the  opening  address.  In  a 
quarrel  between  the  government  and  the  consistory 
he  defended  the  rights  of  the  government  in  ecclesi- 
astical affairs.  In  his  opinion  the  Church  assumed 
too  many  rights  and  curtailed  freedom  of  thought. 
The  ministers  of  the  classis  of  South  Holland  now 
forbade  him  to  preach.  As  his  views  on  predestina- 
tion differed  from  those  of  the  stricter  Calvinists  an 
accusation  was  presented  against  him  at  the  83^0 1 


373 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Koamndtf 
XorMk 


of  Middelbuig  in  1581,  and  in  1582  he  was  ezoom- 
municated  at  the  Synod  of  Haarlem,  though  this  ex- 
commimication  was  soon  annulled.  On  account  of 
the  continued  opposition  of  the  clergy  he  finally 
withdrew  from  the  Church  and  earned  his  living  as  a 
distiller.  He  was  a  follower  of  Luther,  rather  than 
of  Calvin.  For  his  opposition  to  the  restrictions 
placed  upon  the  Church  by  ecclesiastical  formu- 
laries he  must  be  regarded  as  a  forerunner  of  Ar- 
mlniusandthe  Remonstrants.    (H.  C.  RooGEt.) 

Bibxiookafbt:  H.  C.  Rogge,  Catpcar  Janatoon  CoolhoM,  ds 
voofiocptr  van  Arminvua  en  der  Remonairanten,  2  vote., 
Amsterdam,  1856-58. 

KOPP,  GE0R6:  German  cardinal;  b.  at  Du- 
derstadt  (15  m.  e.  of  Gottingen)  July  27,  1837.  He 
studied  at  the  Qynmasium  of  Hildeidieim,  and  after 
being  a  telegrapher  in  the  service  of  the  Hanoverian 
government  (1856-58)  studied  theology  at  the  epis- 
copal seminary  in  Hildesheim(  1858-61).  In  1862  he 
was  ordained  to  the  priesthood,  and  was  then  vicar 
of  a  school  at  Henneckenrode  and  curate  at  Detfurt 
until  1865,  when  he  became  assistant  to  the  vicar- 
general  at  Hildesheim.  In  1870  he  was  created 
apostolic  prothonotary,  and  in  1872  became  a  mem- 
ber of  the  chapter  of  the  cathedral  at  Hildesheim  and 
vicar-general  of  the  diocese.  In  1881  he  was  con- 
secrated bishop  of  Fulda,  and  in  1887  became  prince- 
bishop  of  Breslau.  In  1803  he  was  created  cardinal- 
priest  of  Santa  Agnese  fuori  le  Miura.  He  was  a 
member  of  the  Prussian  house  of  deputies  in  1884- 
1886,  and  since  1886  has  been  a  member  of  the 
upper  house.  He  is  a  domestic  prelate  of  the  pope. 
Bibuoorapht:    Der  Papet,  dim  Retfierung,  und  die  VerwaU- 

ung  der  hem4fen  Kirehe  in  Rtnn,  pp.  185.  187-188,  Munich, 

1004. 

KORAH,  kO'rfl,  KORAHITES:  Names  which 
appear  in  three  connections  in  the  Old  Testament: 
(1)  As  an  Edomitic  stock  or  clan  (Qen.  xxxvi.  5,  14, 
16,  18;  I  Chron.  i.  35);  (2)  as  a  family  (or  city)  be- 
longing to  the  descendants  of  Caleb,  reckoned  as 
Judahites  (I  Chron.  ii.  43  and  perhaps  I  Chron.  xii.  6) ; 
(3)  most  frequently  as  descendants  of  Levi,  belong- 
ing to  the  family  of  Kohath  in  the  genealogies  of  Ex. 
vi.21,24;  IChron.  vi.22,ix.  15,xxvi.  1.  Num.xxvi. 
58  departs  from  the  usual  division  of  the  Levi 
stock  into  three  branches  and  makes  the  Eorahite 
family  one  of  five.  Num.  xvi.-xvii.  deals  with  the 
Kohathite  Korah  in  connection  with  the  rebellion  of 
Dathan  and  Abiram;  the  Chronicler  makes  the 
Korahites  doorkeepers  of  the  sanctuary  (I  Chron.  iz. 
19,  26,  31) .  The  Korahites  appear  also  in  the  super- 
scriptions of  Ps.  xlii.,  zliv.-xlix.,  boodv.,  bnov., 
Ixxxvii.,  Ixxxviii. 

Of  special  importance  is  the  passage  Num.  zvi.- 
xvii.,  formerly  thought  to  be  a  unit,  but  shown  by 
Kuenen  to  be  composed  of  three  narratives  woven 
together  and  differing  in  their  representations.  J 
makes  Dathan  and  Abiram  the  opponents  of  the 
leadership  of  Moses,  P  makes  Eorah  the  representa- 
tive of  the  laity  against  Moses  and  Aaron  who  stand 
for  the  priesthood,  while  the  third  element  regards 
Korah  as  a  non-priestly  Levite  who  champions  the 
cause  of  the  Levites  against  the  exclusive  priestly 
claims  of  the  Aaronites.  Evidently  the  Korah  of 
these  chapters  is  the  Korah  of  (3)  above  (cf.  Num. 
xxvi.  11);  P  must  have  regarded  Korah  as  a  Levite, 


and  the  editor  evidently  had  a  pragmatic  aim  in  com- 
bining the  narratives.  Difilculties  arise  regarding  the 
historicity  of  the  P  narrative,  though  traditional 
material  is  employed.  Two  Korahs---(2)  and  (3) 
above — ^may  have  been  confused  in  the  combination, 
but  from  all  passages  cited  above  no  secure  lustoiy 
of  the  family  can  be  deduced. 

In  clearer  but  not  altogether  consistent  form  is 
the  Levitical  relationship  of  the  Korahitic  Levites 
set  forth  in  Chronicles  and  in  the  priest  code.  The 
former  (I.,  ix.  10)  regards  the  Korahites  as  door- 
keepers of  the  sanctuary;  the  latter  gives  them  more 
minute  and  particular  temple  service  (Num.  iii.  31). 
In  the  older  parts  of  Esra-Nehemiah  the  singers  and 
doorkeepers  are  not  reckoned  to  the  Levites  but  are 
a  special  division.  The  Sons  of  Korah  of  the  inscrip- 
tions of  the  Psalms  appear  in  Chronicles  as  door- 
keepers, not  as  singers.  Yet  in  II  Chron.  xx.  10  the 
Kohathites  and  Korahites  appear  as  singers,  and  I 
Chron.  vi.  18  sqq.  makes  Heman  to  be  of  Kohathite 
stock,  while  I  Chron.  ix.  33  closes  the  preceding  list 
of  Levites  with  the  words  "and  these  are  the 
singers."  Thus  the  line  between  doorkeepers  and 
singers  is  not  sharply  drawn  by  the  Chronicler,  and 
the  title  of  the  Psahns  cited, "  for  the  Sons  of  Korah," 
does  not  find  satisfactory  support  in  Chronicles  and 
appears  to  be  based  on  some  variant  system.  It  is 
hardly  probable,  however,  that  a  new  gUd  of  singers 
was  oiganized  in  times  after  the  Chronicles  to  which 
the  name  "  sons  of  Korah  "  was  given;  possibly 
this  designation  was  a  collective  term  embracing 
the  doorkeepers  and  the  singers  and  was  used  in  the 
Greek  period,  to  which  Ps.  xliv.  belongs. 

(F.  Buhl.) 

Biblxoobapht:  W.  von  BsudlBBin.  Oeeehiehte  dee  aUUekp- 
mewaUhen  Prieeterhune,  Letpaic,  1880;  A.  Kuenen,  ThT, 
xii  (1878).  130  sqq.;  B.  W.  Baoon,  Triple  TradiiUm  <^ 
the  Exodue,  pp.  100  sqq.,  Hartford,  1804;  J.  KOberle,  Die 
Tempele&nger  im  A.  T.,  pp.  182  sqq..  Erlangen,  1800; 
J.  E.  Carpenter  and  O.  Harford-Battersby,  CompeeiHon 
of  the  Hexateuch,  ii.  212  sqq.,  London,  1002;  Smith, 
OTJC,  pp.  204  sqq.;  Driver,  introdtielum,  pp.  60-61; 
DB,  iii  11-12;  BB,  il  2686-88;  JB,  vii.  666-667;  and, 
in  general,  literature  on  the  Hexateuoh. 

KORAN.  See  Mohammed,  Mohammbdanism. 

KOREA. 

I.  The  Land  and  Ftople.  IL  Missions. 

Extent,  Climate,  Ilesouroes       Roman   Oatholie  Misebns 

(§  1).  («  1). 

Government    and    Recent       Protestant  Missions  ({2). 

History  ({  2).  Results  ({  3). 

I.  The  Land  and  People:  Korea  comprises  the 
peninsula  Ijring  between  Japan  and  Chinese  Asia. 
The  name  by  which  the  country  was  known  to  its 
inhabitants  when  first  opened  by  treaty  to  foreign 
entrance  was  Cho-sen,  ''  Morning-calm,"  later 
changed  to  Tai-han.  The  term  Korea  comes  from 
Korai,  Korye,  or  Koryu,  the  name  of  the  strongest  of 
three  kingdoms  which  existed  in  the  country  in  the 
tenth  century.  From  the  fact  that  foreigners  were 
until  toward  the  end  of  the  nineteenth  century  not 
allowed  to  enter  or  reside  in  the  land,  Korea  be- 
came poetically  known  as  the  ''  Hermit  Nation." 
The  peninsula  runs  approximately  north  and  south, 
having  the  Sea  of  Japan  on  the  east,  the  Strait  of 
Korea  on  the  south,  the  Yellow  Sea  on  the  west, 
while  Russian  and  Chinese  territory  bound  it  on  the 
north.    If  the  dictionary  definition  of  an  island  be 


Xor«* 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOO 


S74 


accepted,  Korea  would  more  probably  be  termed  an 
island,  for  the  small  lake  situated  on  the  slopes  of 

"  the  ever  white  motmtain  "  in  the 

X.  Extent,   north  is  the  source  of  two  rivers,  the 

Climate,    Tumen,  which  empties  into  the  Sea  of 

Resources.  Japan,  and  the  Yaloo  which  finds  its 

way  into  the  Yellow  Sea,  the  northern 
boimdary  being  therefore  entirely  of  water,  making 
of  Korea  a  body  of  land  entirely  surrounded  by 
water.  The  length  of  the  country  from  north  to 
south  is  about  700  miles,  and  it  has  an  area  vari- 
ously estimated  as  between  80,000  and  92,000 
square  miles,  approximately  that  of  the  States  of 
New  York  and  Pennsylvania  combined,  with  a 
population  estimated  at  about  twelve  millions. 
A  chain  of  mountains  running  from  north  to 
south  divides,  when  about  three-fourths  of  the 
length  of  the  peninsula  has  been  traversed,  into  two 
ranges  which  run  along  the  whole  eastern  coast  and 
are  the  sources  of  many  rapid,  turbulent  streams 
pouring  into  the  Sea  of  Japan,  and  of  several  less 
rapid  but  laiger  rivers  which,  flowing  placidly 
through  the  plains  to  the  west  coast,  make  of  Korea 
a  fertile  coimtry,  producing  all  kinds  of  cereals, 
though  rice  is  the  staple  product  and  the  main  arti- 
cle of  diet.  The  cliinate  is  not  unlike  that  of  the 
Eastern  States;  for  although  the  capital,  Seoul,  is 
as  far  south  as  Richmond,  Va.,  the  cold  ocean  current 
that  flows  down  between  Japan  and  Korea  very 
much  modifies  the  climate  of  the  peninsula.  With 
the  exception  of  some  six  weeks  of  rain,  during 
what  is  commonly  known  as  the  raiay  season,  the 
climate  is,  in  the  main,  dry  and  healthful,  warm  in 
summer,  and  quite  cold  in  winter,  with  of  course  the 
varying  degrees  that  come  from  an  extreme  length 
north  to  south  of  about  1,000  miles.  The  mineral 
deposits  in  Korea  are  large  and  varied,  silver,  tin, 
lead  and  copper  being  found  in  paying  quantities, 
and  still  larger  deposits  of  gold  and  coal  have  been 
found.  It  is  not,  however,  the  El  Dorado  that  some 
have  claimed  it  to  be.  The  people  are  inferior 
neither  mentally  nor  physically  to  other  Orientals. 
A  people  which  has  preserved  its  ancient  civilisation 
and  so  long  succeeded  in  maintaining  itself  as  a 
hermit  nation  might  be  expected  to  show  peculiar 
and  excellent  qualities,  and  these  have  appeared  and 
have  been  emphasised  especially  among  the  con- 
verts to  Christianity. 

Korea  is  a  limited  monarchy  of  the  paternal  type, 
with  a  written  constitution  limiting  the  power  of  the 
monarch  and  in  a  manner  guiding  the  administra- 
tion of  the  government.  During  a  considerable  pe- 
riod Korea  was  tributary  to  China,  but  this  position 
as  a  tribute-paying  coimtry  in  no  way  affected  its 

independence  in  internal  government. 

a.  Govern-  The  United  States  recognized  this  in- 

ment  and   dependence  when  it  made  its  treaty 

Recent      with  Korea  in  1882.    The  question  of 

Histozy.    independence  was,  however,  constantly 

arising,  and  was  a  matter  of  no  little 
controversy  imtil  the  close  of  the  China-Japan  war, 
when,  by  the  treaty  of  peace,  the  independence  of 
Korea  became  a  recognized  fact.  Japan  at  this 
time  gained  the  ascendency  in  the  little  peninsula; 
but  she  failed  to  use  her  power  wisely  and  soon 
lout  all  influence,  and  Russian  predominanoe  be- 


came a  fact.  At  the  opening  of  the  Japan- 
Russian  war,  a  treaty  of  alliance  between  Japan 
and  Korea  was  signed,  by  which,  in  payment  for 
the  privilege  of  being  permitted  freely  to  transport 
her  troops  across  Korean  territory,  Japan  guaran- 
teed in  perpetuity  to  maintain  the  independence 
of  Korea,  and  the  dignity  of  the  reigning  family. 
However,  immediately  after  the  close  of  this  war, 
after  the  treaty  of  Portsmouth,  Japan  assumed  an 
entirely  different  attitude  toward  Korea,  and,  taking 
the  place  of  a  conqueror  rather  than  an  ally,  has 
attempted  to  maintain  this  position  ever  since.  A 
forced  treaty  of  protection  was  nominally  passed 
by  the  cabinet  and  put  into  effect,  since  the  foreign 
powers  by  their  withdrawal  of  the  legations  ac- 
knowledged their  willingness  to  yield  to  Japan's  re- 
quest. The  emperor  protested  against  this,  and 
having  in  1907  sent  an  embassy  to  The  Hague  in 
order  to  bring  the  matter  to  the  attention  of  the 
civilized  powers,  Japan  compelled  the  abdication  of 
the  emperor,  had  his  eldest  son  put  on  the  throne, 
and  his  youngest  son  proclaimed  crown  prince.  At 
the  present  time,  while  there  is  nominaJly  an  em- 
peror in  Korea,  the  government  is  administered  by 
a  Japanese  ''  resident "  at  Seoul,  with  a  large  force 
of  Japanese  constabulary  and  soldiery,  and  **  under- 
residents  "  at  a  number  of  prominent  points,  though 
Japan  still  nominally  maintains  that  Korea  is  in- 
dependent. 

n.  Missionf:  The  missionaries  on  their  first 
arrival  declared  the  people  irreligious  because  they 
found  a  scarcity  of  temples  and  shrines,  and  even 
such  temples  as  they  had  were  not  crowded  by  dev- 
otees as  in  some  neighboring  lands.  They  soon 
found  that  the  people  would  announce  that  those 
things  were  good  enough  for  women  and  children, 
but  that  the  educated  of  the  land  seemed  to  have  no 
faith  in  any  one  of  their  ancient  religions,  Shaman- 
ism, Buddhism,  or  Confucianism.  Shamanism  had 
the  strongest  hold,  but  even  this  was  losing  its  grip 
upon  the  people.  The  natural  conclusion  that  they 
were  irreligious  has  been  revised  upon  a  closer 
acquaintance.  Their  religious  instincts,  coupled 
with  their  own  power  of  reasoning,  have  led  the 
people  to  reject  successively,  in  large  measure,  all 
their  ancient  faiths,  and  as  a  result  there  is  pre- 
sented before  the  world  a  people  ready  and  waiting 
for  the  truth.  Given  such  a  people,  Christianity 
might  be  expected  speedily  to  take  root  and  flour- 
ish, and  such  has  been  the  history  of  the  Christian 
faith. 

Roman  Catholicism  early  reached  Korea.  Al- 
though at  the  time  of  the  Hideyoshi  invasion,  1592- 
1597,  Roman  Catholic  Christians  and  some  priests 
followed  in  the  wake  of  the  Japanese  army,  at  this 
time  there  appears  no  trace  of  any  definite  results,  or 
in  fact  of  any  real  attempt  at  the  propagation  of 
Christianity.  In  1777,  however,  the  attention  of  a 
young  Korean  was  drawn  toward  some  Roman 
Catholic  books,  and,  securing  a  position  in  the  em- 
bassy to  China,  he  attempted  to  find  out  more  about 
the  faith,  and  returning  in  1782  to  the  capital,  was 
soon  actively  engaged  in  propagating  the  new  re- 
ligion. The  vital  truths  as  presented  by  these 
Christians  soon  took  hold  upon  the  Korran  peo- 
ple, and  the  history  of  early  Roman  Catholicism 


376 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Xor«* 


in  the  hermit  nation  is  ahnost  like  a  romance.    It 
was  not,  however,  allowed  to  progress  freely,  and 
at   the  close  of  that  century,  as  well  as  at  different 
times  during  the  first  half  of  the  nine- 
I.  Roman  teenth  century,  persecution  broke  out 
Catholic    and  threatened  the  life  of  the  infant 
Missions.    cLurch.    Many  of  the  Koreans,  how- 
ever, remained  firm,  and,  despite  all 
persecutions  and  opposition,  the  progress  was  steady 
and  constant.  The  latest  of  these  severe  persecutions 
occurred  in  1866.    Many  attempts  had  been  made 
from  the  very  beginning  of  this  work  to  introduce 
French  priests,  but  this  fkiled  until  1835,  after  which 
in  various  guises  and  by  various  means,  from  time 
to  time  they  entered  Korea.    Many  of  them  suffered 
martyrdom,  a  notably  lai^  nimiber  met  death  in 
1866.    Roman  Catholicism,  however,  did  not  give 
the  Bible.    It  gave  very  little  enlightenment  out- 
side of  a  few  catechisms,  and  did  not  seem  to  lend 
itself  to  education  and  the  general  uplift  of  the 
people.    There  are  still,  however,  in  Korea  a  large 
number  of  Roman  Catholics,  and  their  figures  total 
up  to  approximately  40,000. 

Protestant  Christianity  made  several  attempts  to 
enter  the  land.  Notable  was  the  effort  of  the  in- 
trepid pioneer,  Gutzlaff,  who  landed  from  native 
boats  on  Korean  soil,  and  sold  copies  of  Scriptures 
and  tracts  in  the  Spanish  language  as  early  as  1832. 
Missionaries  in  China  were  also  quite 
2.  Prot-  concerned  about  their  near  neighbor, 
estant  Korea,  and  the  Rev.  Dr.  Thompson,  of 
Missions,  the  London  Mission  School,  was  at  his 
own  earnest  request  permitted  to  make 
the  attempt.  He  had  learned  the  language,  and  just 
as  he  was  ready  to  leave  he  was  offered  free  passage 
if  he  would  act  as  interpreter  on  the  ill-fated  ship 
"Sherman,"  and  while  there  is  no  definite  data  to 
prove  it,  it  is  generally  conceded  that  he  was,  with 
the  others,  massacred  by  the  Koreans  when  the  ship 
stranded  in  Pyeng-Yang.  The  treaty  made  by  Japan 
with  Korea  in  1876,  followed  by  the  first  treaty  with 
a  western  power,  that  with  the  United  States,  made 
by  Admiral  (then  Commodore)  Shufeldt,  of  the 
United  States  Navy,  opened  Korea  at  last  to  the 
residence  of  missionaries.  In  the  spring  of  1884, 
J.  W.  Heron,  M.D.,  of  Tennessee  was  conmiissioned 
as  the  first  missionary  from  a  Protestant  Church  to 
the  hermit  nation.  In  June  of  the  same  year,  the 
same  board  also  appointed  Rev.  H.  G.  Underwood. 
Dr.  H.  N.  Allen,  stationed  in  Shanghai  at  the  time, 
was  transferred  to  Korea,  and  he,  reaching  Seoul 
with  his  family  in  the  fall  of  1884,  became  the  first 
resident  Protestant  missionary.  Just  prior  to  Dr. 
Allen's  arrival,  however,  Rev.  R.  S.  McClay,  D.D., 
of  the  Methodist  Church,  had  been  commissioned  by 
his  board  to  visit  Korea,  and  make  arrangements  for 
the  establishment  of  a  mission  in  Seoul.  He  was 
warmly  welcomed  by  the  authorities,  and  was  in- 
vited to  establish  medical  and  educational  institu- 
tions in  the  country.  Reporting  this  to  his  board 
they  at  once  took  action,  and  appointed  the  Rev.  H. 
G.  Appenzeller,  and  Wm.  B.  Scranton,  M.D.,  while 
the  Women's  Foreign  Missionary  Society  of  the 
same  church  appointed  Mrs.  M.  F.  Scranton  as  their 
representative.  Thus  it  may  be  seen  that  these  two 
churches  began  their  mission  work  in  Korea  at 


practically  the  same  time,  and  to  a  large  extent 
upon  these  same  missions  has  devolved  the  bulk  of 
the  work  during  the  past  years.  Very  early  in  the 
history  of  the  work,  the  missionaries  were  led  to 
adopt  what  might  be  thought  quite  stringent  rules, 
looking  toward  self-support.  The  many  principles 
underlying  these  rules  were:  (1)  to  develop  church 
missionary  work  only  so  fast  as  the  natives  were 
able  to  take  care  of  it;  (2)  to  plan  church  arehiteo- 
ture  along  native  lines;  (3)  to  insist  that  the 
natives  erect  their  own  churches;  (4)  that  native 
Evangelists  be  employed  only  so  far  as  the  natives 
were  able  to  pay  for  them,  and  that  the  responsi- 
bility for  the  salvation  of  their  neighbors  be  placed 
upon  the  native  Christians. 

Not  only  was  Korea  opened  politically  by  the 
treaties  that  had  been  made,  but  in  a  marvelous 
way  the  missionaries  seemed  from  the  beginning 
to  have  entrance  to  the  hearts  of  the  people,  and 
although  there  was  no  small  amount  of  initiatory 

work  to  be  undertaken,  a  literature  to 
3.  Results,  be  prepared,  the  Bible  to  be  translated, 

etc.,  yet  from  opening  of  work  results 
in  the  way  of  conversions  have  been  manifest.  Al- 
though the  first  missionary,  a  physician,  did  not 
arrive  until  the  sunmier  of  1884,  and  the  first  clerical 
missionary  in  1885,  yet  the  first  convert  was  bap- 
tised in  July,  1886,  and  before  the  close  of  1887 
there  were  two  regularly  organized  churches  in 
Korea.  Steadily  the  work  has  been  going  forward 
at  increasing  speed,  gathering  momentum  as  it  ad- 
vanced, until  for  some  years  past  the  speed  at  which 
the  advance  has  been  made  has  far  exceeded  the 
ability  of  the  missionaries  to  keep  up  with  it.  The 
latest  reports  concerning  the  work  for  all  denomina- 
tions show  considerably  over  1,000  native  churches 
with  more  than  120,000  Christians,  and  these  Chris- 
tians maintain,  almost  wholly  at  their  own  expense, 
over  500  schools  for  the  education  of  the  sons  of  the 
church.  Students  of  the  times  believe  that  if  the 
opportunities  presented  in  Korea  are  met,  this  will 
be  the  first  of  modem  eastern  nations  to  become 
Christian. 

The  churches  working  there  at  the  present  time 
are  the  American  Presbyterian  North,  the  Amer- 
ican Presbyterian  Church  South,  The  Methodist 
Episcopal,  the  Southern  Methodist,  the  Canadian 
Presbyterian,  the  Australian  Presbyterian,  and  the 
Churdi  of  England.  As  each  of  the  Presbyterian 
churches  has  opened  up  work,  it  has  united  with 
the  other  Presbyterian  forces  and  from  the  very  be- 
ginning, ecclesiastically,  these  churches  have  been 
one.  This  oneness  was  crystallized  in  September, 
1907,  by  the  organization  of  the  Presbyterians 
in  Korea  for  their  work  there  under  authority  de- 
rived from  the  four  general  assemblies.  The  two 
Methodist  churches  also  work  in  harmony,  and 
while  at  the  present  time  ecclesiastically  they  are 
not  yet  united,  it  is  expected  that  union  will  take 
place.  There  are  those  who  are  hoping  for  a  still 
greater  union,  that  of  Methodists  with  Presbyte- 
rians, whereby  the  unity  of  the  Church  of  Christ 
may  be  practically  demonstrated  to  the  people  of 
Korea.  H.  G.  Undbbwood. 

Biblioorapht:   The  best  work  for  a  historical  suirey  and 
at  the  same  time  for  a  view  of  the  people  and  their  eiia- 


Xonshan 
KoBtars 


BoolMlA 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


876 


tomf  is  W.  E.  Qriffis,  Cona  (h»  Hermii  Nation,  8th  ed.. 
New  York.  1007.  FerhaiM  the  bert  yrww  of  the  Koraen 
is  ghrea  in  J.  8.  Gele's  Vanguard,  ib.  1004;  ol.  the  Mine 
Aiithor'e  Kormn  SkeUkf,  Edinbuish,  1888.  Consult 
farther:  P.  Lowell,  CkoBdn,  The  Land  cf  Mofrmng  Cairn, 
Boeton.  1886;  W.  R.  Oerles,  Life  in  Coreo,  London.  1888; 
Q.  W.  Qihnoie.  Korea  fntm  Ue  Capital,  Philadelphia.  1802; 
D.  L.  Qifford,  Everyday  Life  in  Korea,  New  York,  1886; 
A.  Hamilton,  Xoreo,  ib.  1004;  Mrs.  L.  H.  Underwood. 
Fifteen  Yeare  among  the  TopknoU,  ib.  1004;  With  Tommy 
Tomptine  in  Korea,  ib.  1006;  H.  B.  Hulbert.  UieL  of 
Korea,  2  toIs..  London,  1006;  idem.  The  Paeeing  iS 
Korea,  New  York.  1006  (strongly  antaconistic  to  Japan), 
with  whieh  should  be  oompand  O.  T.  Ladd.  in  Korea 
with  Mairquie  ito,  ib.  1006  (with  strong  bias  in  favor  of 
Japan,  deeply  antagonistio  if  not  unfair  to  Korea);  G.  H. 
Jones.  Korea,  La$id,  PeopU,  and  Cuetome,  Gndnnati.  1007; 
H.  Q.  Underwood.  The  CaU  of  Korea,  New  York.  1008;  F. 
A.  McKensie.  The  Tragedy  of  Korea,  London,  1006. 

KORBSHAN   BCCLBSIA,   KORBSHAH   UHITT. 
See  CoiocuNisii,  II.,  4. 

KORNTHAL 

A  Center  of  FSetism  ({  1).        Doctrine,  Oovemment  ({  3). 
Foondatkm  of  the  Osmmu-    The  First  Pastorate  (fi  4). 
nity  (I  2).  SubaequBnt  History  ((  6). 

KomthAl,  a  small  village  near  Stuttgart,  is  note- 
worthy as  the  center  of  Warttemberg  Pietism.  In 
WUrttembeig  the  Pietistic  movement,  though  in- 
spired by  Spener  and  Francke,  had  retained  its  in- 
dividuality, thanks  to  its  nonpolemic 
X.  A  Center  and  popular  character  and  the  greater 
of         learning  of  its  theological  representa- 

Pietism,  tives.  It  also  far  outlived  its  Halle 
counterpart,  reaching  its  acme  in  the 
second  half  of  the  eighteenth  century.  It  arose 
under  the  influence  of  Johann  Michael  Hahn  (q.v.) 
who  renewed  the  speculations  of  Jakob  Boehme 
(q.v.)  and  gave  the  Pietistic  laity  a  higher  sense  of 
their  religious  independence.  This  feeling  was 
increased  both  by  their  union  with  the  Clhristen- 
tumsgesellschaft  (q.v.)  in  Basel  and  by  the  rise  of  a 
school  of  Biblical  supematuraUsm.  If  the  latter 
factor  was  a  distinct  weakening  of  the  strict  adher- 
ence to  the  Bible  taught  by  J.  A.  Bengel  (q.v.),  a 
further  impulse  toward  decay  was  given  by  the 
rationalising  policy  of  Frederick  I.  His  oppressive 
measures,  including  a  rather  rationalistic  agenda 
in  1800  and  the  denial  of  the  right  of  congregations 
to  refuse  unpleasing  pastors  in  1810,  roused  an  an- 
tagonism among  the  Pietists  which  was  augmented 
not  only  by  the  Swabian  tendency  to  cling  to  tradi- 
tional views,  but  also  by  their  acceptance  of  Bengel's 
chiliastic  theories,  which  prophesied  the  coming  of 
the  Millennium  in  1836.  Partly  following  the  ex- 
ample of  the  Harmonists  (see  GciiMUNifiii,  II.,  6), 
thousands  of  Pietists  emigrated  to  southern  Russia, 
their  exodus  being  aided  by  the  repeal  of  the  emi- 
gration-laws by  William  I.  on  Frederick's  death. 
William  sought  to  stay  such  emigration,  and  on  Feb. 
14,  1817,  issued  directions  to  all  civil  authorities 
uiiging  them  to  dissuade  would-be  emigrants  from 
carrying  out  their  intentions.  In  reply,  the  burgo- 
master of  Leonberg,  Gottlieb  WOhelm  Hoffmann, 
suggested  to  the  king  that  as  the  emigrants  sought 
only  religious  freedom,  they  would  readily  remain 
if  they  were  permitted  to  establish  congregations 
which,  although  independent  of  the  ecclesiastical 
authorities,  would  not  be  essentially  severed  from 
the  Lutheran  Church,  whose  doctrines  they  held. 


This  response  of  Hoffmann,  himself  a  leader  both  in 
Pietism  and  in  political  affairs,  led  the  long  to  re- 
quest him  (Apr.  1)  to  draw  up  a  scheme  for  the 
creation  of  such  congregations;  and  the  buigo- 
master  accordingly  formulated  a  plan  (Apr.  14) 
avowedly  based  on  the  Moravian  modeL 

On  Sept.  8,  1818,  a  royal  decree  permitted  the 
formation  of  a  religious  community,  and  on  Jan.  12, 
1810,  Komthal  was  purehaaed,  the  oratory  of  the 
community  being  dedicated  Nov.  7, 
a.  Founda-  1810.    In  all  these  transactions  Hoff- 
tionof  the  mann   acted    in   concert   with    other 
Comma-    Pietistic     leaders,    particularly     with 
nity.        Hahn,  who  was  chosen  leader  of  the 
new  community,  but  died  immediately 
after  the  purchase  of  Komthal.    Yet  the  very  pres- 
ence of  such  a  man  implied  that  the  early  purpose 
of  the  commimity  was  widened,  and  it   was   no 
longer  its  sole  intent  to  protect  Lutheranism  from 
the  rationalising  influence  of  ecclesiastical  authori- 
ties, but  to  form  a  body  of  the  truly  converted — ^the 
keynote  of  Pietism  from  its  beginning.    A  certain 
opposition  to  the  Chureh  developed,  partly  because  a 
layman  was  at  the  head  of  the  new  organization, 
partly  because  of  an  ascetic  and  legalistic  tendenqr 
in  Hahn,  combined  with  the  belief  in  the  immediate 
Second  Advent,  for  which  preparation  could  rightly 
be  made  only  by  gathering  together  the  faithful.  Nor 
was  a  degree  of  separatism  displeasing  to  Hoffmann, 
who  throughout  his  life  regarded  the  Church  as  an 
obstacle  to  all  progress  of  the  kingdom  of  God. 
Under  Moravian  influence,  he  sought  especially  to 
make  the  community  a  model  in  industrial  under- 
takings and  to  render  it  influential  over  the  peopk 
through  educational  institutions. 

To  show  the  harmony  of  the  new  body  with  the 
established  Church,  the  Augsbui^  Confession  was 
formally  adopted,  though  the  rejection 
3.  Doc-  of  the  aecua  docerUea  was  omitted,  and  a 
trine,  special  paragraph  was  drawn  up  ex- 
Govern-  pressing  abhorrence  of  all  religious 
ment  intolerance.  WhDe,  however,  the  com- 
munity was  not  subject  to  the  oonsi^^- 
tory,  but  only  to  the  minister  of  public  worship,  its 
adherence  to  the  old  ecclesiastical  books  was  not 
emphasised  as  clearly  as  might  have  been  expected. 
Yet  even  this  was  in  entire  conformity  with  its  Piet- 
istic basis,  with  its  ideal  of  an  apostolic  life  and  the 
realization  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.  This  is 
shown  by  the  program  prepared  by  Hahn  in  1817. 
with  its  insistence  on  ecclesiastical  discipline,  partic- 
ularly in  admission  of  and  exclusion  from  the  com- 
munity. These  latter  features,  however,  involved 
both  legal  and  ethical  problems,  the  former  arising 
primarily  from  the  economic  principles  of  the  com- 
munity, and  the  latter  from  the  possible  contingency 
of  the  breaking  up  of  families  because  of  variance 
in  religious  views.  On  the  other  hand,  they  were 
readily  relieved  from  the  obligation  to  military  ser- 
vice or  to  take  oath.  The  community  was  em- 
powered to  call  a  regular  deigyman  who  should  also 
inspect  schools,  etc.,  and  should,  in  this  capacity,  be 
subject  to  the  State  (I^urch,  though  the  commimity 
was  to  appoint  teachers  and  choose  religious  text- 
books for  the  schools.  A  specifically  Pietistic  trait 
was  the  requirement  that  laymen  should  have  the 


877 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Xoreshan  Boolesia 
Kosters 


right  to  edify  the  oommunity,  except  in  the  regular 
religious  services.  The  discipline  extended  even  to 
clothing,  food,  and  reading;  but  the  basis  of  it  all 
was  chiliawn,  seen  even  in  the  flimsy  construction  of 
the  houses,  so  soon  was  the  Second  Advent  ex- 
pected. A  third  motive  in  the  establishment  of 
the  community,  besides  the  desire  to  escape  rational- 
ism and  to  create  a  pure  congregation,  was  the  foun- 
dation, again  borrowed  from  the  Moravians,  of  a 
missionary  institute  and  a  printing-press.  The 
latter,  like  Hoffmann's  plans  for  the  commimity's 
industrial  enterprise,  came  to  naught;  the  former, 
on  the  other  hand,  by  the  erection  of  one  of  the  first 
refuges  for  destitute  children,  was  a  first  step  in 
home  missions. 

The  first  pastor  of  the  community  of  Komthal 
was  Friedridi  formerly  at  Winserhausen,  a  chil- 
iast,  who  was  called  in  1819.    Hoffmann,  however, 

still  remained  the  civil  head.     In  these 

4.  The     early  years  the  basal  principles  of  the 

Fixit       community    were    still    strong.      Its 

PastDimte.  foundation  had  called  forth  a  flood  of 

pamphlets,  and  evoked  not  only  the 
wrath  of  the  rationalists,  but  the  suspicions  of  the 
supematuralists — the  natural  result  being  to  in- 
crease the  enthusiasm  of  the  members  of  the  commu- 
nity and  their  friends.  The  settlement  became  a  sort 
of  place  of  pilgrimage  both  for  other  Pietists  and 
for  earnest  Christians,  as  well  as  for  mere  curiosity- 
seekers.  Yet,  despite  this  mass  of  religious  en- 
thusiasts, there  were  no  manifestations  of  fanaticism, 
owing  to  the  governing  genius  of  Hoffmann.  He 
was  now  endeavoring  to  establish  a  second  colony, 
but  meanwhile  the  opposition  of  the  government 
had  increased.  King  William,  however,  mindful  of 
the  economic  advantages  of  such  commimities,  and 
desiring  to  transform  a  marshy  district  of  Upper 
Swabia  into  fertile  land  by  the  industry  of  the  Piet- 
ists, offered  them  this  region.  Hoffmann  did  not 
dare  to  reject  it,  and  in  1824  the  conmiunity  of 
Wilhelmsdorf  was  foimded  in  the  midst  of  Roman 
Catholic  Upper  Swabia.  It  was  a  heavy  burden  for 
the  parent  colony,  and  was  joined  only  by  the  poorest 
members,  who  went  not  as  a  privilege,  but  as  a  sac- 
rifice. Wilhelmsdorf  struggled  on,  however,  until 
1852,  when  it  formally  separated  from  Komthal, 
though  it  is  still  exempt  from  the  consistory. 

After  Friedrich's  death  in  1827  there  was  an 
interim  until  1833,   when  Kapff  was   called   as 

his  successor.     The  fact  that  he  be- 

5.  Subsa-   longed  to  the  State  Church  minimized 

quent      the  antagonism  between  the  commu- 

History.     nity  and  the  Church.     Non-members 

were  admitted  to  confirmation  and  the 
Lord's  Supper;  and  as  the  remembrance  of  their 
earlier  grievances  against  the  State  Church  faded 
away,  the  danger  of  religious  extravagance  vanished 
under  Kapff's  guidance,  while  the  quiet  course  of 
1836,  the  year  set  by  Bengelfor  the  Second  Advent, 
dampened  chiliastic  hopes.  On  the  other  hand, 
between  1831  and  1848,  the  decay  of  rationalism  was 
replaced  by  the  warmth  of  Pietism  within  the  State 
Church,  to  which  Von  Kapff  himself  returned  in  1843. 
The  reason  for  the  existence  of  the  commimity  thus 
became  somewhat  questionable,  and  since  1848  its 
religious  significance  has  in  a  great  measure  vanished . 


Nevertheless,  the  third  pastor,  J.  H.  Staudt,  who 
presided  over  the  community  from  1843  to  1882, 
was  able  not  only  to  preserve  Komthal's  individual- 
ity, but  also  to  make  it  a  center  for  Pietists  and  even 
for  wider  circles.  At  the  same  time,  he  kept  the 
community  from  adopting  schemes  at  variance  with 
its  original  purpose.  Between  his  successor,  how- 
ever, and  a  portion  of  the  community  a  conflict  arose, 
which  was  settled  only  by  the  aid  of  the  consistory. 
The  position  of  the  community  has  become  more 
diflScult  as  a  result  of  recent  legislation.  The  laws 
of  Nov.  1,  1867,  granting  unrestricted  domicile,  of 
July  3,  1869,  on  the  civil  equality  of  confessions, 
and  of  June  16, 1885,  on  membership  in  communities, 
have  abrogated  its  privilege  to  prohibit  undesirable 
elements  from  citizenship.  The  result,  as  in  the 
analogous  case  of  the  State  Church,  has  been  the 
strengthening  of  the  moral  power  of  the  commu- 
nity; and  in  1892  both  Komthal  and  Wilhelmsdorf 
passed  a  sanctioned  agenda  empowering  them  to 
preserve  the  character  of  their  membership  by  ex- 
clusively ecclesiastical  regulations.  The  present 
significance  of  the  community,  which  now  numbers 
about  1,200,  is  essentially  that  of  a  refuge  for  those 
who,  wearied  of  struggle,  long  for  a  peaceful  and 
spiritual  atmosphere.  (C.  Kolb.) 

Bxbuoobapht:  S.  C.  Kapff,  Dw  wOrUenUmvi^then  Brik- 
derifemeifiden  Kornthal  und  WUhdnudorf,  Korntbal.  1830; 
C.  Palmer.  Otmein$ehafUn  und  SMen  WUrttembenfa,  ed. 
Jetter,  Tubingen,  1877;  H.  Schmidt.  Die  innare  Minion 
in  WOrlieniJberg,  pp.  52  sqq..  Hamburg.  1879;  further  lit- 
erature in  Hauck-Hersog.  RE,  xi.  38-39. 

KORTHOLT,  CHRISTIAN:  German  Lutheran; 
b.  at  Borg,  on  the  island  of  Femem  or  Fehmam  (in 
the  Baltic  Sea),  Holstein,  Jan.  15,  1632;  d.  at  Kiel 
Mar.  31  (Apr.  1),  1694.  He  studied  at  the  univer- 
sities of  Rostock,  Jena,  Leipsic,  and  Wittenberg, 
became  professor  of  Greek  at  Rostock  in  1662  and 
professor  of  theology  and  prochanoellor  at  the  newly 
founded  University  of  Kiel  in  1666.  He  owed  his 
fame  not  so  much  to  his  church  history  published 
after  his  death  (Historta  ecdesiasUca  Navi  Testor 
menti,  Leipeic,  1697),  as  to  some  excellent  mono- 
graphs, for  instance,  on  the  first  persecutions  of  the 
Christians  (De  peraecutianilmB  ecduicB  jfrimCUva  tvb 
imperaUnibua  ethnicia,  Jena,  1660,  Kiel,  1689)  and 
on  the  literary  opponents  of  Ghristianity  (Paganus 
obtredatar,  sive  de  calumniis  gentUium,  Ubri  Hi, 
Kiel,  1698).  He  was  also  one  of  the  first  Protes- 
tant theologians  who  undertook  to  refute  Baronius 
{DisquisUiones  Anti-Baroniance,  1700).  He  was  in 
harmony  with  the  Pietists,  and  was  the  personal 
friend  of  Spener  and  Francke. 

(Paul  Tbchackkrt.) 

Bibuoobaprt:  The  OedOdUnisredet  by  his  son-in-law  linde* 
mann,  is  in  H.  Pipping,  Mtmoria  thtdoovmrn  otoftt, 
pp.  57  sqq.,  Leipaio,  1706. 

KOSTERS,  WILLEM  HBNDRIK:  Dutch  the- 
ologian  and  Old-Testament  scholar;  b.  at  Enschede 
(78  m.  e.  of  Utrecht)  Oct.  3,  1843;  d.  at  Leyden 
Dec.  19, 1897.  He  was  the  son  of  Dr.  Jan  Kosters, 
a  physician  of  some  repute;  received  his  prelimi- 
nary education  in  the  schools  of  his  native  town; 
entered  the  University  of  I^eyden  as  a  student  in 
theology  in  1861,  ending  his  course  in  1868  and 
taking  his  doctorate  with  a  dissertation  on  Deuter- 


Bsr* 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


878 


onomy  compared  with  Geneiis  and  Exodus;  while 
there  he  was  greatly  influenced  by  Euenen,  whose 
successor  he  later  became.  He  assumed  the  pas- 
torate at  Rockanye  1874,  at  Heenobet  1874,  at 
Barendrecht  1877,  at  Neede  1880,  and  at  Deven- 
ter  1883;  in  1892  he  succeeded  Kuenen  as  profes- 
sor at  Leyden.  In  his  pastorate  he  made  himself 
greatly  beloved  by  his  interest  in  the  poor  and  the 
sick,  while  at  the  same  time  he  was  an  excellent 
preacher,  applying  to  his  work  the  results  of  a  wide 
reading.  In  his  chair  as  a  university  teacher  he 
was  happy  and  successful,  delivering  at  his  inau- 
guration an  address  on  Het  godsdiensiig  Karakter  van 
Israda  Histarioffrafie  (Leyden,  1892).  Notwith- 
standing the  engrossing  character  of  his  duties  in 
preparing  his  lectures,  he  collaborated  in  the  edit- 
ing of  the  Theclogische  Ttjdschrift,  contributing 
much  of  his  own  work  to  its  colunms;  he  was  the 
author  also  of  Het  Herstd  van  Israel  in  het  perzische 
Tijdvak  (Leyden,  1893) ;  the  views  advanced  in  this 
book  are  embodied  in  the  volume  on  Ezra-Nehemiah 
in  the  Century  Bible  (London  1909).  The  views 
for  which  he  was  most  noted  are  that  the  *'  return  " 
which  appears  in  the  account  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah 
never  really  took  place;  that  the  temple  was  built 
not  by  returning  exiles  but  by  the  Jews  who  were 
on  the  spot  and  had  never  gone  into  exile;  and  that 
the  reform  of  Ezra  followed  and  not  preceded  that 
of  Nehemiah — in  the  last  point  following  Van  Hoon- 
acker  of  Louvain  and  other  scholars.  These  posi- 
tions have  been  accepted  in  the  main  by  a  consid- 
erable number  of  Old-Testament  scholars,  though 
not  by  the  majority.  T.  Witton  Davies. 

Bibuoorapht:    H.  Oor,  Lev^ntberithi  van  WHUm  Hendrik 
Kotter9,  Leyden,  1808. 

KOTTWITZ,  ket'wtts,  HANS  ERNST,  BARON 
VON:  Philanthropist;  b.  in Tschepplau,  near Qlogau 
(55m.  n.w.  of  Breslau),  Silesia,  Sept.  2  (or  1),  1757; 
d.  at  Berlin  May  13, 1843.  The  facts  of  his  life  have 
to  be  gathered  from  a  few  letters  and  the  biographies 
of  others,  and  events  before  he  settled  at  Berlin  in 
1807  and  became  a  public  personality  are  veiled  in 
obscurity.  He  received  his  education,  in  an  insti- 
tution of  Breslau.  Later  he  came  to  the  court  of 
Frederick  II.  as  page.  About  this  time  he  had  a 
quarrel  with  his  parents  and  decided  to  emigrate, 
but  an  order  of  the  sovereign,  issued  at  the  insti- 
gation of  his  father,  compelled  him  to  stay.  After 
the  death  of  his  father  in  1777,  Hans  Ernst,  as  his 
only  surviving  son,  was  probably  charged  with  the 
administration  of  his  estate.  Of  the  following 
thirty  years  nothing  is  known  except  his  marriage, 
his  entrance  into  the  order  of  the  freemasons,  his 
conversion,  the  beginnings  of  his  philanthropic 
work  in  Silesia,  various  travels,  and  perhaps  also 
his  divorce.  The  imfortunate  outcome  of  his  mar- 
riage was  probably  occasioned  by  his  liberality  in 
the  cause  of  philanthropy,  which  sometimes  seems 
to  have  bordered  on  imprudence,  especially  from 
the  practical  standpoint  of  his  wife.  It  is  not 
known  in  what  relation  Kottwitz  stood  to  the  Unity 
of  Brethren  (Moravians),  but  it  is  certain  that  he 
attained  peace  of  soul  and  his  religious  convictions 
by  contact  with  this  sect;  Bishop  Spangenberg 
especially  influenced  him  deeply,  according  to  his 
own  statement.    His    relations   with  the  freema- 


sons date  probably  from  the  time  before  his  coo- 
version,  and  it  was  imdoubtedly  their  philanthropic 
efforts  that  attracted  him. 

Kottwitz  took  Exodus  vi.  9  as  the  basis  of  his 
life-work,  being  of  the  opinion  that  misery  of  the 
body  depresses  the  hiunan  spirit,  and  that  the 
tears  of  earthly  pain  must  be  dried  before  the 
realization  of  spiritual  needs  can  come  to  the  poor 
and  unhappy.  For  this  purpose  he  undertook  ex- 
tensive travels  over  several  states  of  Germany  such 
as  Silesia,  the  mark  of  Brandenburg,  Sl^wick, 
Holstein,  Mecklenburg,  and  Pomerania,  and  founded 
factories  in  Silesia  after  his  own  ideals  and  an  in- 
stitution for  voluntary  occupation  in  opposition 
to  the  compulsory  work  of  the  houses  of  correction 
at  Berlin.  Both  kinds  of  institutions  were  based 
on  the  principle  of  self-help  and  self-respect.  Kott- 
witz intended  to  discourage  begging  and  at  the 
same  time  remove  poverty  by  providing  remunera- 
tive labor.  The  poor  working  men  in  Silesia  were 
mostly  weavers.  He  distributed  material  amoDg 
them,  paid  for  their  work  generously  and  sold  their 
productions,  often  with  great  sacrifices  of  his  own 
fortune.  In  1807  he  removed  to  Berlin,  just  at  a 
time  when  there  was  great  misery  among  the  work- 
ing classes  on  account  of  the  war  with  Ni^oleon. 
Here  he  founded  institutions  similar  to  those  in 
Silesia  and  in  addition  provided  free  lodgings  for 
whole  families  of  working  men.  When  a  family  bj 
diligence  and  thrift  had  lifted  itself  out  of  its  miser- 
able conditions,  it  made  way  for  another  family. 
The  children  of  these  working  men  were  provided 
with  their  own  teachers,  and  every  evening  there 
was  held  a  common  service,  consisting  of  song, 
reading  of  Scripture,  and  extempore  prayer,  which 
was  conducted  by  Kottwitz  himself  or  by  one  of 
his  teachers.  The  maintenance  of  these  institu- 
tions must  have  devoured  immense  sums  of  his 
private  fortune,  and  it  was  only  at  a  later  time  that 
the  king  contributed  an  annual  sum  of  3,000  thalers 
for  the  care  of  120  old  and  invalid  persons.  The 
whole  colony  nmnbered  600.  In  1823  the  financial 
circumstances  of  Kottwitz  compelled  him  to  hand 
his  foundations  over  to  the  city,  but  he  became  a 
member  in  the  directorate  and  was  allowed  to  keep 
his  residence  among  his  people.  While  his  work 
on  the  whole  failed,  his  intercourse  with  his  friends 
and  his  care  for  individual  souls  remained  of  last- 
ing value.  In  Berlin  he  became  the  acknowledged 
leader  of  the  Pietists,  and  his  colony  their  prindpai 
place  of  meeting.  The  circle  of  his  friends  included 
old  and  young,  lawyers,  army  officers,  and  theo- 
logians, among  them  J&nicke,  Neander,  Strauss, 
Hengstenbeig,  Tholuck,  Stier,  Rothe,  Wichem,  and 
others.  (F.  Bossc.) 

Bibuoorapht:   T.  Bitter,  Erinnerungen  a%f  dem  LAen  da 

.  .  .  Barom  von  KottwiU,   Berlin,    1867;     J.   L.  Jaeobi. 

Erinnerungen  an  den  Baron  E.  von  KoUwiU,  Halle.  1882; 

W.  Baur.  in  Neue  Chriaioierpe,  1883;  ADB,  xvi.  765-77^ 

KRABBE,  krflb'be,  OTTO  KARSTEN:  Gennan 
Lutheran;  b.  at  Hambui^  Dec.  27,  1805;  d.  at 
Rostock  Nov.  14,  1873.  He  studied  theology  at 
Bonn,  Berlin,  and  GOHingen,  attending  also  lec- 
tures on  philology,  philosophy,  and  history.  At 
Bonn  he  was  influenced  by  Nitzsch,  Sack,  aod 
LQcke;    at  Berlin  he  was  in  personal  intercourse 


870 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Kottwitz 
Kraflt 


with  Schleiermacher  and  especially  Neander.  In 
1833  he  was  called  to  the  Johanneum  at  Ham- 
hurg  as  professor  of  Biblical  philology  and  philoso- 
phy, and  in  1840  he  became  professor  of  theology 
at  Rostock,  where  he  remained  imtil  the  end  of  his 
life.  He  lectured  chiefly  on  systematic  and  prac- 
tical theology.  He  was  also  elected  preacher  of  the 
university  and  leader  of  the  homiletical  seminar, 
in  1844  a  member  of  the  theological  board  of  exam- 
iners, and  in  1851  a  member  of  the  consistory.  He 
took  a  very  active  part  in  the  affairs  of  the  univer- 
sity, being  elected  six  times  its  rector.  His  life- 
work  tended  throughout  toward  the  practical  side 
of  religious  and  churchly  life.  He  made  it  his  chief 
task  to  combat  rationalism  in  the  theological  faculty, 
and  in  the  State  Church  of  Mecklenburg;  and  he 
was  especially  in  harmony  with  Kliefoth's  efforts 
(see  Kliefoth,  Theodor  Friedrich  Dethlof)  for 
the  reassertion  of  the  Lutheran  confession  and  the 
Lutheran  church  order.  His  most  important  dog- 
matic work  is  Die  Lehre  von  der  Sunde  und  vom 
Tode  in  ihrer  Beziehung  zu  einander  und  zu  der 
Auferstehung  Ckristi  (Hamburg,  1836).  According 
to  Krabbe,  Schleiermacher  with  his  doctrine  of  the 
activity  of  the  redemption  of  Christ  had  firmly 
founded  an  essential  basis  of  Christian  conviction, 
but  because  he  ignored  the  essence  and  importance 
of  sin,  he  had  not  penetrated  to  an  adequate  imder- 
standing  of  atonement  and  redemption.  Krabbe 
developed  on  the  basis  of  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ment the  Biblical  doctrines  of  the  original  condi- 
tion, of  the  fall  and  its  consequences,  emphasizing 
the  fact  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ  in  its  central 
importance.  Other  works  are:  Varlesungen  mber 
das  Leben  Jesu  (1839);  Die  evangelische  Landes- 
kirche  Preuseena  und  ihre  offenUichen  RechtsverhdU- 
nisse  (Rostock,  1849);  Auffust  Neander  (Hambiu-g, 
1852);  Die  UrUversU&t  Rostock  im  16.  und  16.  Jahr- 
kundert  (Rostock,  1854);  Au>8  dem  kirchlichen  und 
ausaerkirchlichen  Lfben  Rostocka.  Zur  Geschichte 
WaUensteins  und  des  dreissigjdhrigen  Krieges  (Ber- 
lin, 1863);  Heinrich  MvUer  und  seine  Zeit  (Rostock, 
1866);  David  Chytraeus  (1870);  Wider  die  gegen- 
wdrtige  Richtung  des  Staatslebens  im  Verhdltnis  zur 
Kirche  (1873).  (K.  Schmidt.) 

Bibuoorapht:    AU(feineine  evangelitcK-luiheriache  Kirchenr 

eeitung,  1874,   pp.  99  sqq.;    Evangelitdte  Kircherueitung, 

1874,  pp.  209  8qq. 

KRAFFT,  ADAM:  Early  (German  Protestant; 
b.  at  Fulda  1493;  d.  at  Marburg  Sept  9,  1558.  He 
studied  at  Erfurt  (B.A.,  1512;  M.A.,  1519),  preached 
for  a  time  at  Fulda,  and  afterward  went  to  Hers- 
feld.  He  then  became  court-preacher  to  Philip  the 
Magnanimous,  of  Hesse,  who  made  him  superin- 
tendent at  Marburg  in  1526,  and  professor  of  the- 
ology in  1527.  He  took  a  prominent  part  in  all 
important  measures  for  establishing  Protestantism 
in  Hesse,  and  as  the  head  of  the  Reformation  in 
Hesse  exerted  a  large  influence  on  the  history  of 
the  country.  Carl  Mirbt. 

Bibuoorapht:  F.  W.  Strieder,  RuHache  OelehriengeachichU, 
ii.  373-383,  Gaasel,  1782;  F.  W.  Hassencamp.  Heanache 
KirehengetehiehU,  i.  76  sqq.,  Frankfort,  1864. 

KRAFFT,    JOHANN    (CRATO    VON    CRAFFT- 

HEIM):  German  physician  and  advocate  of 
Protestantism;    b.  at  Breslau  Nov.  22,  1519;    d. 


there  Oct.  19,  1585.  In  1534  he  entered  the  Uni- 
versity of  Wittenberg,  where  he  lived  six  years  on 
terms  of  intimate  friendship  with  Luther  and  Me- 
lanchthon.  At  the  instance  of  the  former  he  studied 
medicine  at  Leipsic  and  at  Padua.  After  his  re- 
turn to  Germany  he  was  appointed  physician  in 
ordinary  to  his  native  town  (1550),  in  1560  to  the 
Emperor  Ferdinand  I.,  and  then  successively  to 
Maximilian  II.  and  Rudolf  II.  He  utilized  the 
great  confidence  which  he  enjoyed  \mder  Emperor 
Maximilian  for  the  advancement  of  Protestantism, 
continually  frustrating  the  attempts  of  Bishop 
Hoseus  and  of  the  Jesuits  to  lure  Maximilian  to  the 
side  of  the  opponents  of  Protestantism.  He  was  an 
advocate  of  the  milder  Melanchthonian  tendency 
of  German  Protestantism,  and  opposed  the  stricter 
Lutherans  imder  Flacius.  After  the  overthrow  of 
Melanchthonianism  in  1574  his  opponents  suc- 
ceeded in  breaking  his  influence  with  the  court.  In 
1581  he  retired  to  his  estate,  Rttckerts,  near  Reinerz, 
in  the  county  of  G&tz,  but  in  1583  he  returned  to 
Breslau,  where  he  exercised  a  decisive  influence  upon 
the  confessional  change  at  the  court  of  Liegnitz, 
'  BriQg,  and  Ohlau.  (Paul  T^chackert.) 

Biblioorapry:  His  Conailia  et  epitUda  fnedicituUea,  ed. 
L.  Schols,  appeared  in  7  vols.,  Frankfort,  1671.  His  life 
was  written  by  A.  G.  E.  T.  Henschel.  Breslau,  1853.  Con- 
sult further  J.  F.  A.  Gillet,  Crato  von  Crafftheitn  und  tine 
Freunde,  2  vols..  Frankfort,  1860. 

KRAFFT,  JOHANN  CHRISTIAN  60TTL0B 
LUDWIG:  German  Reformed  minister;  b.  at 
Duisburg  (15  m.  n.  of  DttsseldorQ  Dec.  12,  1784; 
d.  at  Erlangen  May  15,  1845.  He  was  educated  at 
Duisburg,  and  then  was  for  five  years  a  private 
tutor  in  Frankfort.  In  1808  he  was  appointed 
pastor  of  the  Reformed  congregation  at  Weeze, 
near  Cloves,  and  in  1817  of  that  at  Erlangen,  where 
in  the  following  year  he  became  professor  of  the- 
ology in  the  university.  For  some  years  after  his 
marriage  (1811)  his  mind  was  filled  with  doubts  re- 
garding the  great  truths  of  the  Gospel,  but  study 
opened  his  eyes,  and  at  the  time  of  his  appointment 
to  the  pastorate  at  Erlangen  he  had  become  a  firm 
Biblical  supernaturalist.  His  conviction  that  Holy 
Scripture  from  beginning  to  end  is  the  work  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  became  thenceforth  the  basis  of  lus 
theology.  Exegesis  and  apologetics  became  his 
life-work,  and  his  chief  aim  was  to  educate  theo- 
logians thoroughly  grounded  in  the  Bible.  During 
his  professorship  at  Erlangen  he  lectured  to  large 
audiences  on  pastoral  theology,  dogmatics,  New- 
Testament  exegesis,  and  the  history  of  missions, 
being  the  first  German  professor  to  discuss  the  last- 
named  topic.  Though  he  was  not  an  exceptionally 
eloquent  preacher,  his  energy  and  earnest  faith  did 
much  to  make  Krafift  an  important  factor  in  the 
revivification  of  the  Lutheran  C!hurch  of  Bavaria 
at  a  period  when  the  influence  of  ultra-rationalism 
had  caused  its  decline.  He  published  a  treatise, 
De  servo  el  libero  arbiirio  (Nuremberg,  1818),  seven 
sermons  on  Isa.  liii.,  and  four  on  I  Cor.  i.  30.  His 
Ckronoiogie  und  Harmonie  der  vier  Evangdien  was 
published  after  his  death  by  Dr.  Burger  (Erlangen, 
1848).  (K.  GoEBELf.) 

Bibuooraprt:     G.    ThomasiuB,    Das    Wiedererwaihen  deB 

evanoeliMchen  Lebena  in  der  lutherisdien  Kirthe  Bavema, 

pp.  171  sqq.,  Erlangen,  1867. 


Kzmuth 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


880 


KRAFFT,  KARL  JOHANN  FRIEDERICH  WIL- 
HBLM:  German  Reformed,  brother  of  Wilhelm 
Ludwig  Krafft;  b.  at  Cologne  Nov.  25,  1814;  d.  at 
Eiberfeki  Mar.  15,  1808.  He  was  educated  at  the 
untverntiea  of  Erlangen,  Berlin,  and  Bonn  (1832- 
1837),  after  which  he  was  instructor  in  religion  at  the 
gymnasium  at  Bonn.  He  then  held  brief  pastor- 
ates at  Flamersheim-GroflsbUllesheim  near  Bonn 
and  at  the  Reformed  Church  at  HOckeswagen  near 
Lennep.  In  1844,  however,  after  a  tour  of  Italy, 
he  accepted  a  caJl  to  DQsseldorf.  Here  he  dis- 
tinguished himself  as  an  Evangelical  preacher,  re- 
sisted all  revolutionary  tendencies  in  the  critical 
years  1848-49,  labored  earnestly  in  behalf  of  both 
home  and  foreign  missions,  taught  religion  for  five 
years  at  the  Realschule  of  DUsseldorf,  conducted 
the  local  school  for  girls,  founded  a  Protestant  hos- 
pital, and  even  found  time  to  take  part  in  the  gen- 
eral inspection  of  churches  outside  the  Rhein  prov- 
ince and  to  engage  in  literary  labors.  In  1856  he 
accepted  a  call  to  the  newly  founded  fifth  pastor- 
ate of  the  Reformed  community  at  Elberfeld.  Ex- 
eept  for  his  field  service  as  chaplain  in  1866  and 
1870-71,  his  service  here  remained  unbroken  until 
his  retirement  on  account  of  ill-health  in  1886. 
Krafft's  chief  interest  lay  in  the  domain  of  the  New 
Testament,  in  which  he  held  firmly  to  the  doctrine 
of  inspiration,  and  of  the  church  histoiy  of  the 
Rhein  province.  His  writings  comprise:  Briefs 
und  DdeumenU  aus  der  ZeU  der  Reformation  (in 
collaboration  with  W.  L.  Krafft;  Eiberfeki,  1876); 
R^iekbHek  avf  die  aynodale  Oeichiehte  dee  hergiechen 
Landea  (1878);  GeechiehU  der  beiden  M&riyrer  der 
evangeUechen  Kirche,  Clarenbach  und  Flieeteden 
(1886);  and  LebenabUd  dee  Kaufmanne  Daniel 
Hermann  (1895).  (F.  Sieffbrt.) 

KRAFFT,  WILHELM  LUDWIG:  German  Re- 
formed, brother  of  the  preceding;  b.  at  Colqgne 
Sept.  8,  1821;  d.  at  Bonn  Mar.  11,  1898.  He  was 
educated  at  the  imiversities  of  Bonn  (1839-41)  and 
Berlin  (1841-43),  and  in  1844  he  made  a  tour  of 
Greece,  Egjrpt,  Nubia,  Arabia,  Sinai,  and  Palestine. 
After  further  study  in  Rome  he  became  privat- 
docent  in  the  Lutheran  theological  faculty  at  Bonn 
in  1846,  extraordinary  professor  in  1850,  and  full 
professor  in  1859.  Here  he  lectured  on  the  geog- 
raphy of  Palestine,  and  later  on  church  history. 
In  1863  he  was  made  a  member  of  the  theological 
examining  board  at  MUnster  and  later  was  ap- 
pointed to  the  Coblens  consistory.  In  1894  he  re- 
signed from  the  consistory,  and  shortly  before  his 
death  was  relieved  from  the  obligation  to  lecture. 
Besides  minor  contributions  he  published:  Die 
Tapographie  Jeruaaleme  (Bonn,  1846);  Die  Kirchen- 
geeckiehte  der  germaniechen  VMer  (Berlin,  1854),  of 
which  only  the  first  part  of  the  first  voliune  ap- 
peared; Briefe  und  Dokumente  aue  der  ZeU  der  Re- 
fomuUian  (Elberfeld,  1876);  and  Die  deutecke  Bibel 
vor  Luther  (Bonn,  1883).  (F.  Sieffbrt.) 

Bibuoobatht:  Bonntr  Zeituno,  Jan.  10,  1897. 

KRAHICH,  kra'niH,  AHTOR:  German  Roman 
Catholic;  b.  at  SQssenbeig  (near  Heilsberg,  41  m. 
s.e.  of  K6nigBberg),  East  Prussia,  Aug.  20,  1852. 
He  studied  at  tl^  Lyceum  of  Braunsberg  (1875- 
1878)  and  the  University  of  Wttrzburg  (D.D.,  1881), 


and  after  being  liierat  at  the  Selecta  at  Wormditt 
(1882^84)  was  curate  at  Elbing  (1884^88).  He 
was  then  sub-director  of  the  seminary  for  priests 
at  Braunsberg  from  1888  to  1891,  became  privat- 
docent  at  the  lyceum  of  the  same  dty  in  1889,  aaso- 
date  professor  of  dogmatic  theology  and  auxiliary 
theological  sciences  in  1892,  and  professor  of  the 
same  subjecto  in  1894.  He  has  written:  Der  keiUge 
Baeiliue  in  eeiner  SteUung  gum  Filioque  (Brauns- 
beig,  1882) ;  Ueber  die  Empf&nglichkeU  der  mensch- 
lichen  Natur  fUr  die  GiUer  der  ubemalurlichen 
Ordnung  nach  der  Lehre  dee  heiligen  Auguetinus  und 
dee  heiligen  Thomae  von  Aquin  (Paderbom,  1892); 
Die  AekeHk  in  ihrer  dogmaiiachen  GrundUage  bei 
Baeiliue  dem  Groeeen  (1896);  Ecdesia  guibuB  de 
caueie  per  ee  ipaa  ait  moHvum  credHnlitatie  et  dir 
vina  awB  legaHonie  teatimonium  (Braunsberg, 
1898);  Kirche  und  Kirchapid  Reichenberg  (1903); 
and  Qua  vi  ae  ralione  Clemena  Alexandrinua  ethnicot 
ad  religionem  ehriatianam  adduoere  atuduerit  (1903). 

KRANTZ,  krOntc,  ALBERT:    Historian  of  the 
fifteenth  century;  b.  at  Hamburg  c.  1445  or  some- 
what earlier;   d.  there  Dec.  7,  1517.     He  was  ma- 
triculated at  Rostock  1463,  continued  his  studies 
at  Cologne,  at  first  being  interested  in  law  and  then 
turning  to  theology  and  history.    After  extensive 
journeys,  during  which  he  gathered  from  different 
libraries  material  later  utilised  in  his  works  on  his- 
tory, he  seems  to  have  been  appointed  professor  at 
the  University  of  Rostock,  of  which  in  1482  be 
became  rector  and  in  1486  dean  of  the  philosophical 
faculty.    In  the  same  year  he  was  appointed  also 
syndic  of  the  town  of  Lubeck.    He  seems  to  have 
lived  at  that  time  in  LUbeck,  and  it  is  not  certain 
whether  he  continued  to  be  active  at  Rostock.    In 
1493  he  became  first  lector  of  theology  at  the  cathe- 
dral of  Hamburg,  and  after  1500  he  seems  to  have 
held  also  the  position  of  syndic  of  Hambui^.    In 
1508  he  became  dean  of  the  cathedral  chapter  and 
twice,  in  1508  and  1514,  held  strict  church  visiu- 
tions  in  his  diocese,  urging  the  removal  of  abuses 
and  a  stricter  obedience  to  the  laws  of  the  church. 
In  theology  Krants  took  the  standpoint  of  the 
older  Catholicism,  but  in  some  of  his  views  reveals 
the  b^innings  of  the  modem  spirit.     He  approved 
of  Luther's  vehement  opposition  against  the  abuse 
of  indulgences,  but  considered  the  removal  of  them 
an  undertaking  beyond  the  powers  of  a  mooi 
A  few  days  before  his  death,  as  he  lay  on  his 
bed,   Luther's  theses  were  brought  and  read  to 
him.    He  then  ejaculated:  "Brother,  brother,  go 
to  thy  cell  and  say  'God  be  merciful  to  me.'" 
From  the  lectures  of  Krantz  to  the  clergy  of  Ham- 
burg Bertold  MoUer  edited  Spirantiaaimum  oput- 
culum  in  officium  mxaae  (1506).     Krantz  edited  also 
Ordo  miaacUia  aecundum  ritum  eccUaim  Hamintr^ 
aia  (Strasbiug,  1509),  but  his  chief  fame  rests  upon 
his  historical  works;    he  has  been  called  a  second 
Adam  of  Bremen,  although  others  have  reproached 
him  with  partisanship  and  plagiarism;  but  his  wri- 
tings show  great  diligence  and  the  method  em- 
ployed in  them  marks  essential  progress  in  histcv- 
ical  literature.    Their  titles  are  WandaUa  aeu  <ii 
Wandalorum  vera  ariginef  variia  gentibua,  .  .  .  »^- 
grationibua  (Cologne,  1518);    Saxonia.    De  Saxo^ 


881 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Kraflt 
Kzvath 


ioB  gentia  vetusta  artgine,  UmginquU  expediiionxinu 
.  .  .  et  beU%8  (1520);  Hyaioria  von  den  alien  Hvm- 
9en  gu  Behemen  in  Kaiaer  Stgmunda  Zeiten  (n.  p., 
1523);  Chronica  regnorum  aquiUmarum  Danim, 
SuecUx  et  Norvagia  (Strasburg,  Germ.,  1545,  Lat., 
1546);  Metropolia  seu  historia  de  ecclesiia  avb  Carolo 
Magna  in  Saxonia  (Basle,  1548).  These  works 
still  possess  value  for  the  church  history  of  north 
Europe  and  of  northwestern  Germany;  they  were 
continually  reprinted  in  the  sixteenth  and  seven- 
teenth centuries,  though  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church  put  them  on  the  index. 

(Cabl  Berthbau.) 

Bzbuoobapht:  N.  WilkenB,  Ltben  dea  berUhmien  Dod. 
Atberti  CranUU,  Hamburg,  1722;  ZeiUdurift  de&  Vereins 
far  AamburvMCs^  OMchiehU,  iii  (1861),  395-<413  (by  C. 
Mdnekebers),  x  (1800).  385-484  (by  E.  Schftfer);  O. 
Krabbe.  Dit  UnivenUiU  RoHoek,  I  224-236.  Rostock. 
1854;  R.  Laose.  in  Hantim^  GetchidiMUUter,  v  (1886). 
63-100;  J.  Holler,  in  Cimbria  lUerata,  iii.  378-392; 
L.  Daae.  in  HiaUrruk  Tiddtrift,  II..  iv.  187  sqq..  v.  225; 
ADB,  xvil  43-44. 

KRAPF,  JOHAHll  LUDWIG:  Pioneer  mission- 
ary; b.  at  Derendigen,  near  TObingen,  Jan.  11, 
1810;  d.  at  Komthal  (5  m.  n.w.  of  Stuttgart)  Nov. 
26,  1881.  He  studied  at  the  Latin  school  at  Tu- 
bingen, at  the  school  of  the  Basel  Mission,  and  at 
the  University  of  Tttbingen;  after  a  short  experi- 
ence as  vicar  and  teacher,  he  was  sent  in  1838  to 
join  the  Abyssinian  mission  of  the  Church  Mission- 
ary Society,  but  the  attempt  there  was  rendered 
abortive  through  hostile  Roman  Catholic  influence. 
In  1839  he  went  to  Shoa,  south  of  Abyssinia,  and 
won  the  confidence  and  protection  of  the  king  of 
that  region,  but  in  1842  Roman  Catholic  interfer- 
ence again  interrupted  his  work.  In  1844  he  es- 
tablished himself  in  Mohammedan  territory  at 
Mombasa  (see  Africa,  II.,  British  East  Africa  Pro- 
tectorate), where  he  occupied  himself  in  mission- 
ary labors,  in  the  study  of  the  languages,  the  com- 
pilation of  dictionaries,  and  in  the  work  of  Bible 
translation.  In  consequence  of  surveys  of  the  ter- 
ritories carried  out  in- frequent  missionary  journeys, 
the  mission  work  in  East  Africa  was  systematic- 
ally planned.  In  1855  he  returned  to  Komthal, 
where,  except  for  two  journeys  to  Africa  on  special 
missions,  he  carried  on  his  lexicographical  work 
and  that  of  translating  the  Bible  into  the  languages 
of  Eastern  Africa. 
BiBLXoaRAPHT:  Von  W.  Clau8.  Johann  lAidwio  Krapf,  Baael, 

1882. 

KRAXJS»  FRANZ  XAVER:  Roman  Catholic;  b. 
at  Treves  Sept.  18,  1840;  d.  at  San  Remo  (26  m. 
n.e.  of  Nice),  Italy,  Dec.  28,  1890.  He  studied  at 
Treves,  and  at  the  imiversities  of  Freiburg  and 
Bonn,  and  after  residing  for  a  time  in  Paris,  was 
appointed  to  a  benefice  at  Pfalzel,  near  Treves,  in 
1865.  In  1872  he  was  appointed  associate  pro- 
fessor of  the  history  of  art  in  the  University  of 
Strasburg,  whence  he  was  called,  in  1878,  to  Frei- 
burg, as  professor  of  church  history.  In  1904  the 
Kraus-GeiBellschaft  was  founded  in  his  honor  at 
Munich  to  promote  the  deepening  of  the  Christian 
life  and  to  further  harmony  between  Roman  Catho- 
lics and  Protestants.  Among  Kraus's  numerous 
publications  mention  may  be  made  of  his  BeitrOge 
tu  Trienchen  Archdologie  und  Oeachichte  (Treves, 


1868);  Die  chriaUiche  Kunat  in  ihren  frUheaten  An- 
fdngen  (Leipeic,  1872);  Lehrhuch  der  Kirchenge- 
achichU  fUr  Studierende  (4  vols.,  Treves,  1872-76); 
Roma  aotteranea;  die  rdmiachen  Katakomben  (Frei- 
burg, 1873);  Kunat  und  AUertum  in  Elaaaa-Lcihar- 
ingen  (4  vols.,  Strasburg,  1876-92);  Charokter- 
bilder  atia  der  diriatlichen  Kirchengeachichie  (Treves, 
1879);  Synchroniatiache  TabeUen  zur  chriaUichen 
Kunatgeachichie  (Freibuig,  1880);  Recdenzykhpdr 
die  der  chriaUichen  AUertHmer  (2  vols.,  1882-86); 
Die  Mimaiuren  dea  Codex  Egberii  in  der  StadtbibUo- 
thek  tu  Trier  (Freiburg,  1884);  Die  Wandgemalde 
der  S.  Qeorgakirche  xu  OberzeU  avf  der  Inael  Reich- 
enau  (1884);  Die  Miniatwen  der  Maneaae'achen 
Liederhandachrift  (Strasbuig,  1887);  Die  Kunatr 
denkmdler  dea  Oroaaherzogtuma  Baden  (in  collabora- 
tion with  J.  Durm  and  E.  Wagner;  6  vols.,  Frei- 
burg, 1887-1904);  Die  chriaUichen  Inachriften  der 
Rheinl&nder  (2  vols.,  1890-94);  Die  WandgenUUde 
von  St,  Angelo  in  Formia  (Berlin,  1893);  Oeachichie 
der  chriaUichen  Kunat  (2  vols.,  Freibuig,  1895- 
1908);  Eaaaya  (2  vols.,  Berlin,  1896-1901);  Dante, 
aein  Leben  und  aein  Werk,  aein  VerhdUnia  tur  Kunat 
und  zwr  Politik  (1897);  Die  WandgemOide  der  St. 
SylveaterkapeUe  xu  Goldbach  am  Bodtnaee  (Munich, 
1902);  and  Cavour,  die  Erhebung  Italiena  im  neurit 
zehnten  Jakrhundert  (Blauus,  1902). 
Bibligobapht:  K.  Braig,  Ztar  Erinneruno  an  Fratu  Xavtr 
Kraua,  Freiburg.  1902  (contains  complete  list  of  his  wri- 
tings); E.  Hauriller,  Fmru  Xaver  Krau»:  Lebentibild  au» 
der  Zeit  dea  RafarmkaAolieiamua,  Colmar,  1904. 

KRAUSS,  SAMUEL:  Hungarian  Jewish  scholar; 
b.  at  Ukk,  county  of  Zala,  Feb.  18,  1866.  He 
studied  at  the  rabbinical  seminary  at  Budapest  and 
the  university  of  the  same  dty  (1884-89),  then  in 
Berlin,  taking  the  degree  of  Ph.D.  at  Giessen  in 
1893  and  receiving  the  rabbinical  diploma  from  the 
seminary  at  Budapest  in  1894.  In  1894  he  became 
professor  of  Hebrew  at  the  rabbinical  seminary  at 
Budapest,  and  in  1906  professor  at  the  similar  in- 
stitution in  Vienna.  He  was  the  TntLnflging  editor 
of  the  Hungarian  translation  of  the  Bible  made  by 
him  in  collaboration  with  W.  Bacher  and  J.  B^6czi. 
In  theology  he  is  a  progressive  conservative.  Be- 
sides a  Hungarian  translation  of  the  Talmudic 
tractate  Derekk  Erez  (Budapest,  1895),  he  has  pre- 
pared a  Hebrew  commentary  on  Isaiak  (Zhitomir, 
1904)  and  written  Rendazerea  Zaidd  VaOda  ea  Er- 
kdUatan  (a  manual  of  systenoatic  instruction  in  the 
Jewish  religion;  Budapest,  1895);  Oriechiache  und 
laieiniache  Lehnw&rter  im  Talmud,  Midraach  und 
Targum  (2  vols.,  Berlin,  1898-99);  David  Kavf- 
mann,  Biographic  (1901);  Daa  lAben  Jeau  nach 
jUdiachen  QueUen  (1902) ;  and  Bad  und  Badeweaen 
im  Talmud  (Frankfort,  1908). 

KRAUTH,  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD:  One  of 

the  most  prominent  theologians  of  the  English  Lu- 
theran Church  in  America;  b.  in  Martinsbuig,  Va., 
Mar.  17,  1823;  d.  in  Philadelphia  Jan.  2,  1883.  At 
the  age  of  ten  he  came  to  Gettysburg,  where  his 
father,  the  Rev.  Charles  Philip  Krauth,  was  president 
of  Pennsylvania  College  and  aftecward  professor  in 
the  theological  seminary  of  the  General  Synod. 
He  was  graduated  from  Pennsylvania  College  in 
1839  and  in  1841,  having  finished  his  theological 
course  in  the  seminary,  he  took  charge  of  a  mission 


Krauth 
Xmadenar 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


882 


station  at  Canton,  a  suburb  of  Baltimore.  From 
1842  to  1855  he  served  congregations  in  Baltimore, 
Martinsbuig,  and  Winchester,  Va.  On  account  of 
the  sickness  of  his  wife  he  spent  the  winter  of  1852- 
1853  in  the  West  Indies,  and  temporarily  supplied 
the  pulpit  of  the  Dutch  Reformed  Church  in  St. 
Thomas.  In  1855  he  took  charge  of  the  First  Eng- 
lish Lutheran  Church  in  Pittsburg,  and  in  1859  of 
St.  Mark's  Church,  Philadelphia.  After  a  short 
pastorate  at  St.  Mark's  he  became  editor  of  The 
Lutheran,  which  he  made  a  powerful  weapon  against 
the  so-called  "  American  Lutheranism "  then  in 
vogue  in  the  General  Synod  of  the  Lutheran  Church 
in  America.  When  the  ministerium  of  Pennsyl- 
vania, in  its  conflict  with  the  General  Synod,  re- 
solved to  establish  its  own  theological  seminary  at 
Philadelphia,  Dr.  Krauth,  as  a  matter  of  course, 
was  called  to  the  chair  of  S3rstematic  theology.  At 
the  formal  opening  of  the  new  seminary  and  the 
installation  of  its  first  faculty  (Oct.  4,  1864),  he, 
the  youngest  of  the  faculty,  delivered  the  inaug- 
ural address  defining  its  theological  and  churchly 
position.  A  new  field  of  activity  was  opened,  when 
the  first  steps  were  taken  toward  the  organization 
of  the  General  Council  (see  Lutherans).  While 
up  to  this  time  Dr.  Krauth's  literary  work  had  been 
preeminently  of  a  polemical  character,  the  task  was 
now  to  lay  a  strong  foundation  on  which  a  general 
Lutheran  body  could  be  organized  in  the  unity  of 
the  faith  of  the  fathers.  He  composed  the  Funda- 
mental Ariidea  of  Faith  and  Church  Polity ,  adopted 
at  the  Reading  Convention  in  1866,  as  the  basis  for 
the  constitution  of  the  *^  General  Council  of  the 
Evangelical  Lutheran  Church  in  North  America." 
He  was  also  the  author  of  the  Cor^Hviionfor  Con- 
gregaium»,  finally  adopted  by  the  General  Council 
in  1880.  When  the  question  on  the  principles  of 
church  fellowship  became  burning  in  the  General 
Council,  he  wrote  a  series  of  fourteen  scholarly  arti- 
cles on  this  subject  in  The  Lutheran  (1875-76), 
which  were  afterward  simimed  up  in  106  theses  on 
PvJLpU  and  AUar  Fdhwahtp,  written  by  order  of 
the  General  Council  (1877).  These  articles  and 
theses  may  be  said  to  represent  the  height  of  his 
fully  matured  convictions  on  this  perplexing  and 
delicate  subject.  He  takes  the  strictly  confessional 
position  that  pulpit  and  altar  fellowship  means 
church  fellowship  and  that  all  syncretism  and 
unionism  in  the  pulpit  and  at  the  altar  are  to  be  re- 
jected on  principle.  For  ten  years  Dr.  Krauth  was 
president  of  the  Council,  until  his  failing  health  for- 
bade his  attendance  on  the  conventions  of  that 
body. 

Dr.  Krauth's  eminent  gifts  and  comprehensive 
scholarship  were  readily  appreciated  beyond  the 
limits  of  his  own  church.  Soon  after  he  became 
professor  in  the  theological  seminary  he  was  elected 
a  trustee  of  the  University  of  Pennsylvania,  and  in 
1868  he  was  appointed  professor  of  mental  and 
moral  philosophy  in  that  institution.  In  1873  he 
was  made  vice-provost,  and  during  a  long  vacancy 
performed  all  the  duties  of  the  provost.  In  1881, 
in  addition  to  his  other  duties,  he  imdertook  the 
department  of  history  at  the  University  of  Penn- 
sylvania. He  was  a  member  of  the  American  CJom- 
mitte  for  the  Revision  of  the  English  Version  of 


the  Bible,  and  was  assigned  to  the  Old-Tertament 
company.  His  literary  activity  covers  the  field  of 
philosophy  as  well  as  that  of  theology.  Among  his 
more  important  publications  may  be  mentioned: 
An  English  translation  of  Tholuck's  commentary 
on  the  Gospel  of  St.  John  (Philadelphia,  1859);  a 
new  edition  of  W.  Fleming's  Vocabulary  of  PhUoso- 
phy  (1860;  in  enlarged  form  1875);  an  English 
translation  of  the  Augsbuig  Confession,  with  intro- 
duction and  annotations  (1868);  The  Conaervative 
Reformation  and  its  Theology  (1872),  his  principal 
work,  in  which  he  collected  the  most  valuable  of 
his  essays  and  treatises;  and  a  new  edition  of 
Berkeley's  Principles  of  Human  Knowledge^  with 
introduction  and  annotations  (1874).  At  the  re- 
quest of  the  ministerium  of  Pennsylvania  he  had 
undertaken  an  extended  English  biography  of  Mar- 
tin Luther  for  the  Luther  jubilee  of  1883,  but  did 
not  live  to  complete  this  work.  A.  Spaeth. 

BiBUoaRAPRT:  A.  SpMth.  Charier  Porterfidd  Krauih,  vol. 
i..  New  York,  1898;  B.  M.  Schmucker.  in  Lutheran  Chvnk 
Review,  July,  1883;  American  Church  Hietory  Serie»,  iv. 
416  8qq.,et  pAaam.  New  York.  1893. 

KRAWUTZCKY,  kra-wuts1d,  ADAM:  German 
Roman  Catholic;  b.  at  Neustadt  (59  m.  s.e.  of 
Breslau),  Upper  Silesia,  Mar.  2,  1842;  d.  in  Breslau 
in  Jan.,  1907.  He  studied  in  Breslau  (1860-62), 
Tubingen  (1803-64),  and  Munich  (1864;  D.D.,  1865), 
and  at  the  seminary  for  priests  at  Breslau  (1864-65). 
He  was  ordained  to  the  priesthood  in  1865,  and 
after  being  curate  at  Kanth  and  Breslau,  became 
subdirector  of  the  seminary  and  privatKlooent  in  the 
University  of  Breslau  in  1868.  In  1885  he  was 
appointed  associate  professor  of  moral  theology  at 
Breslau,  and  professor  in  1888.  He  wrote  Zdhlung 
und  Ordnung  der  heiligen  Sakram^nte  in  ihrer  ge- 
achicktlichen  Entwicklung  (Breslau,  1865) ;  De  rnsione 
beatifica  in  Benedicti  XII.  constitulionem  **  Benedic- 
tu$  Deua''  (1868);  PetriniBche  Studien  (2  parts, 
1872-73);  Dea  BeUarmin  kleiner  Katechiamua  mil 
Kommeniar  (1873);  and  Einleiiung  in  daa  Sludium 
der  katholiachen  MordUheologie  (1890). 

KRELL  (CRELL),  RIKOLAUS;  Saxon  states- 
man and  religious  reformer;  b.  in  Leipsic  c.  1550; 
beheaded  at  Dresden  Oct.  9,  1601.  He  was  the 
'son  of  the  jurist  Wolfgang  Krell,  and  studied  at  the 
Royal  School  at  Grimma  and  at  the  University  of 
Leipsic  (B.A.,  1572;  M.A.,  1575),  concluding  his 
education  with  a  journey  to  Switzerland  and  France. 
It  was  here,  no  doubt,  that  he  obtained  the  degree 
of  doctor  of  law.  He  soon  achieved  great  renown 
at  Leipsic  as  a  university  instructor,  as  well  as  a 
practical  jurist.  In  1580  he  was  appointed  aulic 
councilor  by  Elector  Augustus,  and  in  1581  he  wa^ 
delegated  as  coimselor  and  preceptor  to  Prince 
Christian.  When  the  latter  assumed  the  govern- 
ment in  1586  he  pursued  a  policy  which  materially 
diveiged  from  that  of  his  father.  Whereas  here- 
tofore public  officers  and  the  clergy  were  required 
to  subscribe  the  Formula  of  Concord,  this  practice 
now  fell  away.  The  higher  clergy  who  had  con- 
tinued loyal  to  the  Formula  of  (Uncord  were  sup- 
planted by  men  with  Philippist  views;  and  when 
Court  Preacher  Minis  objected,  he  was  put  under 
custody  at  Konigstein.  This  attack  on  Lutheran 
orthodoxy  in  the  interest  of  Crypto-Calvinism  was 


383 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Krauth 
Xraedenar 


attributed  to  Doctor  Krell,  who  had  been  appointed 
privy  councilor  in  1586,  and  chancellor  in  1589.  In 
fact  Krell  wrote  to  John  Casimir,  "I'll  get  even 
with  the  parsons  in  short  order;  they  must  dance 
as  I  pipe."  Moreover,  a  new  catechism  was  pre- 
pared by  the  Dresden  court  preachers  Steinbach 
and  Salmuth;  by  the  latter,  too,  an  edition  of  the 
Bible  was  set  afoot,  with  Calvinistic  elucidations. 
A  great  uprising  occurred  when  the  form  of  exor- 
cism was  stricken  out  of  the  order  of  baptism.  A 
butcher  in  Dresden,  cleaver  in  hand,  compelled  the 
baptism  of  his  child  in  the  earlier  manner;  at  Wit- 
tenberg the  new  superintendent's  house  was  stormed 
and  scenes  of  turbulence  ensued  on  every  side. 
Krell,  nevertheless,  believed  himself  sure  of  com- 
plete triumph.  The  territorial  estates,  nobles  and 
public  officers  feared  some  prejudice  to  their  vested 
rights.  The  elector  had  retrenched  the  official 
power  of  the  former  court  positions  and  given 
Chancellor  Krell  almost  unlimited  power.  Besides, 
there  was  dissatisfaction  with  the  foreign  policy. 
Henry  of  Navarre  was  supported  with  troops  and 
funds  in  violation  of  a  promise  given  by  the  elec- 
tor in  1588;  and  the  discontent  was  enhuioed  when 
the  campaign  of  1591  totally  miscarried.  But  the 
sudden  death  of  Christian  Oct.  5,  1591,  put  an  end 
to  Krell's  activity.  Even  before  the  burial  of  his 
patron,  he  was  thrown  into  prison  at  KOnigstein, 
where  he  languished  for  ten  years.  Under  the  re- 
gency of  Frederick  William  of  Saxe- Weimar,  a  zeal- 
ous Lutheran,  all  public  officers  and  deigymen  were 
again  pledged  to  the  articles  of  faith  as  expressed 
in  the  Formula  of  Concord.  Although  the  estates 
interceded  for  Krell  in  a  measure,  the  judicial  suit 
against  him  was  protracted  year  after  year.  There 
were  manifold  articles  of  complaint  lodged  against 
him.  The  Meissen  Commissioner's  Diet  of  Feb.  1, 
1600,  advanced  four  charges:  seduction  of  the  elec- 
tor to  Calvinism,  instigation  to  the  French  cam- 
paign, aUenation  of  the  emperor,  and  civil  division. 
The  court  of  appeal  at  Prague  condemned  him  to 
execution  by  the  sword.  The  sword  with  which 
the  sentence  was  executed  is  still  preserved.  It 
bears  the  inscription  Cave,  Calvimane. 

Gborq  Mueller. 

Bibliographt:  An  extensive  lint  of  literature  is  given  in 
Hauck-Heriog.  RE,  xi.  85.  Consult:  M.  Hitter,  DetUache 
GMchichte  im  ZeitaUer  der  Oegennformatum,  I  044-646, 
ii.  44-61,  Stuttgart.  1889-95;  idem,  in  ADB,  xvii.  116- 
122;  A.  V.  Richard.  Der  kurfOrtaiehe  9acfm9ehe  KaruUr 
.  .  .  NicoUnu  KreU,  Dresden,  1859;  F.  Brandee,  Der 
Kamler  Krell,  Leipeic,  1873;  F.  von  Besold,  Briefe  dee 
Pfalzgrafen  Johann  Ciuitnir,  ii  419,  Munich,  1884;  G. 
Droysen,  Dae  ZeitaUer  dee  dreieeigi(ihrioen  Kriegee,  pp. 
364-375.  Berlin.  1888;  J.  Janssen.  Oeechichte  dee  deuieehen 
VoUoee,  vols,  v.-viii.  passim,  Freiburg.  1893-94,  Eng. 
transl.,  St.  Louis,  1896-1905;  G.  Kawerau,  Reformation 
und  Oegenreformatum,  pp.  267,  274-276,  Berlin,  1899; 
B.  Bohnenst&dt,  Dae  Proteeeverfahren  gegen  den  ibursflcAs- 
iechen  Karuler  N.  KreU,  HaUe,  1901;  Moeller,  Chrietian 
Church,  iii.  297-298;  Cambridge  Modem  Hietary,  lit  711. 
713,  New  York,  1906. 

KRIEG,  krig,  KORNEL:  German  Roman  Cath- 
olic; b.  at  Weisenbach  (20  m.  s.  of  Oarlsruhe), 
Sept.  14,  1839.  He  studied  in  Freibuig  and  Bonn 
(Ph.D.,  Heidelberg,  1876;  D.D.,  Freiburg,  1879), 
and  in  1880  became  privat<locent  in  the  former 
institution,  where  he  was  promoted  to  his  present 
position  of  full  professor  of  Biblical  encyclopedia. 


pastoral  theology,  and  Biblical  introduction  in 
1883.  He  has  written:  ChnmdrUs  der  rGmiachen  AU 
tertUmer  (Altbreisach,  1872);  Monotheimiua  der 
Offenbarung  und  doe  Heidentum  (Mainz,  1880);  Die 
theologiachen  Schriften  dea  Boethius  (Cologne,  1884); 
Die  liturgiachen  Beetrdmngen  im  karolingiechen 
ZeitaUer  (Freiburg,  1889);  Lehrbuch  der  Pddagogik 
(Paderbom,  1893);  Dae  Buck  von  den  heiligen  vier- 
zekn  Notheffem  (Freiburg,  1895);  FOretabt  Martin 
Qerbert  von  Sankt  Blasien  (1896);  F.  G,  Wanker, 
ein  Theologe  der  Uebergangezeit  (1896);  Encydo- 
pddie  der  theohgieehen  Wieeenechaften  (1900);  Wie- 
aenechaft  der  SedenleUung,  eine  Paetoralikeologie,  i. 
(1905);  and  Wieeenschqft  dee  kvrchlichen  Kaiechvr 
menatee  (1907). 

KROPATSCHECK,  krd-pQt'schek,  FRIEDRICH: 
German  Protestant;  b.  at  Wismar  (18  m.  n.  of 
Schwerin),  Mecklenbui^-Schwerin,  Jan.  25,  1875. 
He  studied  in  Basel,  Berlin,  and  Greifswald  (Ph.D., 
1898),  and  from  1899  to  1901  was  inspector  of  the 
theological  Studienhaus  at  Greifswald.  During 
this  period  he  was  privat-docent  at  the  university 
of  the  same  city,  where  he  became  associate  pro- 
fessor of  systematic  theology  and  New-Testament 
exegesis  in  1902;  since  1904  he  has  held  a  similar 
position  in  Breslau.  He  has  edited  the  Btblieche 
Zeil-  und  Streitfragen  since  1904,  and  has  written 
Johannee  Ddlech  aua  Feldkirch  (Greifswald,  1898); 
Occam  und  Luther  (Gdtersloh,  1900);  and  Die 
Schriftprimip  der  lutheriachen  Kirche,  t.  (Leipeic, 
1904). 

KROTEL,     krS'tel,     60TTL0B     FREDERICK: 

Lutheran;  b.  at  Hsfeld  (25  m.  e.  of  Carlsruhe), 
Germany,  Feb.  4,  1826;  d.  in  New  York  aty  May 
17,  1907.  He  emigrated  to  the  United  States  in 
childhood  and  was  educated  at  the  University  of 
Pennsylvania  (B.A.,  1846).  He  then  studied  the- 
ology and  was  licensed  to  preach  in  1848  by  the 
Evangelical  Lutheran  mimsterium  of  Pennsylvania, 
holding  pastorates  at  Passyunk,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 
(1848-49),  Lebanon,  Pa.  (1849-53),  Lancaster,  Pa. 
(1853-61),  Philadelphia  (1861-68),  Holy  Trinity, 
New  York  City  (1868-^5),  and  the  Church  of  the 
Advent  in  the  same  city  (1896-1907).  He  was  also 
professor  in  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Theological 
Seminary,  Philadelphia,  in  1864-68,  and  president 
of  the  General  Council,  of  which  he  was  one  of  the 
founders,  in  1869-70  and  1888-93.  He  was  editor 
of  Der  lutherieche  Herold  from  1872  to  1875  and 
one  of  the  editors  of  The  Lutheran,  the  official  oigan 
of  the  General  0>imcil,  from  1881  to  1883  and  edi- 
toi^inrchief  from  1895  till  his  death.  In  addition 
to  translating  C.  F.  Ledderhose's  Life  of  Mdanch- 
thon  (Philadelphia,  1854)  and  J.  G.  W.  Uhlhom's 
Luther  and  the  Swiee  (1876),  he  wrote  Who  are 
the  Bleeeedf  Meditationa  on  the  Beatitudes  (Phila- 
delphia, 1855)  and  Explanation  of  Luther*8  Small 
Catechism  (1863;  in  collaboration  with  W.  J.  Mann). 
Bibuoorapht:  In  Memoriam  Rev,  O.  F,  Krotet,  privately 
printed.  New  York.  1908. 

KRUEDENER,  krei'de-ner'',  BARBARA  JU- 
LIANA VOR:  Russian  mystic;  b.  at  Riga  Nov. 
11,  1764;  d.  at  Karasubazar  (70  m.  n.e.  of  Sebas- 
topol)  Dec.  25,  1824.    She  was  the  daughter  of 


XnunmAohMr 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


884 


Otto  Hermann  von  Vietinghoff,  a  Ruasian  imperial 
privy  councilor  and  a  man  of  rationalistic  views 
and  a  leading  freemason,  and  of  his  wife  Anna 
Ulrica,  a  strict  Lutheran.  After  a  fashionable  ed- 
ucation, she  was  married  to  Baron  von  ErQdener 
Sept.  23,  1782,  who  was  then  first  Russian  minister 
at  the  court  of  Courland.  The  marriage  proved 
unhappy,  since  the  husband  was  conscientious  and 
retiring,  while  the  wife  was  restless,  given  to  co- 
quetry and  to  the  enjoyment  of  fashionable  society 
in  various  capitals.  At  Paris  she  formed  a  liaison 
with  a  young  officer  which  she  refused  to  terminate 
at  her  husband's  demand,  and  would  not  return  to 
her  home  even  during  her  husband's  last  illness, 
his  death  occiu*ring  June  14,  1802.  Meanwhile  she 
published  a  graceful  novel,  Valdrie,  ou  leUres  de 
Gustave  de  Linar  d  Ernest  de  G.  (issued  anonymously, 
2  vols.,  Paris,  1804;  a  reissue,  ib.  1878). 

During  a  sojourn  at  Riga  in  the  simuner  of  1804, 
Juliana  experienced  conversion,  an  experience  which 
nothing  in  her  past  life  seemed  to  make  probable. 
From  this  time  forth,  as  her  utterances  attested, 
an  unwholesome,  nervous  "  religiosity  "  came  to  be 
the  dominant  element  in  her  character,  and,  through 
its  extravagance,  reflects  a  cloudy  mysticism  like 
that  of  the  enthusiasms  of  the  Chiliasts  of  Baden, 
Alsace,  and  WQrttemberg,  with  whom  she  cultivated 
relations  of  intimacy.  Borne  along  by  the  charm 
of  a  seductive,  and  yet,  amid  all  its  aberrations, 
always  distinguished  personality,  Baroness  Kra- 
dener  contrived  to  bring  singular  effects  to  pass. 
But  even  the  sympathetic  side  of  her  nature,  which 
impelled  her  to  numberless  benefactions  to  the  poor 
and  sick,  came  gradually  to  lose  its  purity  in  the 
atmosphere  surrounding  her.  What  especially  con- 
tributed to  lead  her  astray  and  to  impair  her  esteem 
was  her  association  with  the  WOrttemberg  "  proph- 
etess "  Marie  Gottliebin  Kummer  (familiarly  styled 
Die  Kummerin).  From  the  close  of  1808,  the 
baroness  and  her  new  companions  traveled  about 
in  the  WUrttemberg  districts,  holding  conventicles; 
but  in  the  siunmer  of  1809,  she  was  expelled,  while 
Kummer  was  put  in  ward. 

Meanwhile,  the  apocalyptic  elation  of  the  en- 
thusiasts had  become  powerfully  enhanced  by  the 
political  and  military  events  of  that  era.  In  Napo- 
leon they  beheld  ApoUyon  (Abaddon,  Rev.  ix.  11); 
Alexander  of  Russia  seemed  to  them  the  deliverer. 
And  as  the  baroness  learned  that  Pietistic  influ- 
ences were  felt  by  the  czar,  her  plan  was  laid.  At 
Heilbronn,  accordingly,  in  June  1815,  she  so  thor- 
oughly succeeded,  in  an  audience  lasting  several 
hours,  in  beguiling  this  mobile  potentate  with  her 
personal  views  that  he  became  a  constant  "  guest  " 
at  her  Bible  classes  in  Heidelberg  and  Paris.  She 
fostered  in  him  the  thoughts  the  material  sequel 
of  which  was  the  treaty  later  known  as  the  Holy 
Alliance,  concluded  between  the  czar  of  Russia, 
the  emperor  of  Austria,  and  the  king  of  Prussia, 
Sept.  26,  1815.  Before  long,  however,  Alexander 
turned  away  from  his  new  friend,  whose  persisting 
association  with  Kummer  and  other  unsalutary 
elements  rendered  him  distrustful;  to  this  was  added 
his  displeasure  on  accoimt  of  her  indiscreet  utter- 
ances regarding  the  Holy  Alliance. 

That  episode  marks  the  climax  in  the  life  of 


Baroness  KrQdener.  In  the  years  1816-18,  at- 
tended usually  by  an  ample  retinue,  she  traversed 
northerly  Switzerland  and  southern  Baden,  win- 
ning souls,  in  her  manner,  for  the  kingd<»n  of  heaven, 
and  lavishly  dispensing  among  the  poor  and  suffer- 
ing the  money  constantly  supplied  by  her  infatuated 
adorers.  She  fell  under  a  particularly  demoralizing 
influence  in  the  person  of  the  Post-Secretaiy  Kelkr 
from  Brunswick,  who  hailed  her  as  Deborah,  Esther, 
Judith,  and  even  as  that  woman  of  the  Apocalypse 
(xii.  1)  who  should  bear  the  Messiah;  or  as  Mary's 
'*  vicaress,"  who  should  engender  the  New  Church. 
Indeed,  miraculous  powers  were  claimed  by  the 
baroness  herself.  She  was  finally  expelled  from 
Switzerland  and  the  South  Grerman  States,  and  (in 
1818)  returned  to  her  home.  That  she  and  her 
companions  remained  unmolested  there  was  owing 
to  the  grace  of  the  Czar  Alexander.  She  conducted 
classes  for  Biblical  study  at  Mitau,  Riga,  and  on 
her  estate  Eosse,  near  Werro.  But  when  once  again 
she  played  the  political  prophetess,  and  aodaimed 
Alexander  as  future  liberator  of  the  Greeks,  the 
Czar  wrote  to  her  in  his  own  hand,  enjoining  her  to 
silence  under  pain  of  his  disfavor.  By  invitation 
of  Princess  Alexander  Galitzin  she  journeyed  to  the 
Crimea  in  1824,  both  to  improve  her  health  and 
to  labor  among  the  Pietists  of  that  r^on,  and  there 
fell  ill  and  died.  G.  E^Bt^oER. 

Bxbuooraprt:  The  earlier  literature  (cf.  for  it  Hauck- 
Herioc.  RE,  id.  146-147)  ia  entirely  euperaeded  by  EL  llnh- 
lenbeck,  J6tud€  9ur  Im  engintt  de  la  8aifUe~AUianc9.  Arte 
«n  portraii  du  Mm$,  de  Krvdenmrt  Paris,  1888. 

KRX7B6ER,  krei'ger,  HBRMANH  GUSTAV 
EDUARD:  German  Protestant;  b.  at  Bremen 
June  29,  1862.  He  studied  in  Heidelberg  (1881- 
83),  Jena  (188^-84;  Ph.D.,  1884),  Giessen  (1884- 
85;  lie.  theoL,  1886),  and  G5ttingen  (1885-86). 
In  1886  he  became  privat-docent  for  theology  in 
Giessen,  where  he  was  appointed  associate  profes- 
sor of  the  same  subject  in  1889.  Since  1891  he  has 
been  full  professor  at  Giessen,  and  in  1902-03  was 
rector  of  the  university.  He  is  primarily  a  student 
of  patristics  and  the  history  of  dogma,  and  belongs 
to  no  denomination.  Since  1888  he  has  been  a  col- 
laborator on  the  Theologiacher  Jakretberickt,  of  which 
he  has  been  joint  editor  since  1895,  first  with  H.  Holz- 
mann  (1895-1901)  and  later  with  W.  Kdhler  (since 
1901) .  He  has  likewise  edited  the  Sarnndtrng  autge- 
wdhUer  QueUenachrifien  xur  Kirchen-  und  Dogmen^ 
geechichUf  to  which  he  contributed  Juetins  ApoUh 
gieen  (Freiburg,  1891)  and  Augiutin  de  caieckimndit 
rudibus  (1893).  He  also  translated  J.  Reville's  La 
Religion  d  Rome  aoua  lee  Sivh^  (Leipsic,  1888)  and 
edited  the  second  and  third  volumes  of  K.  von 
Hase's  Kirchengeachichte  a^f  der  Orundlage  aktuU- 
miacher  Varleeungen  (1890-92)  He  has  written: 
Monophyeiiieche  StreitigkeiUn  im  Ztuammenhange 
mit  der  Reichepolitik  (Jena,  1884);  Lucifer  vm 
Calaris  und  das  Schiema  der  Luciferianer  (Leipsic, 
1886) ;  Oeachickte  der  aUchrieUichen  Liieratur  in  den 
ereten  drei  Jahrhunderten  (Freiburg,  1895;  £ng- 
transl.  by  C.  R.  GiUet,  Hiatory  of  Early  Chria- 
tian  LiUraiure,  New  York,  1897);  Woe  heitd 
und  en  welehem  Ende  thidiert  man  Dogmen^ 
ackickte  f  (1895);  Die  Entstekung  dee  Neuen  Teda- 
mente  (1896);    Dae  Dogma  vom  Neuen  Testameni 


885 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Kmadener 
Kmmniftolisr 


(Giessen,  1896);  Die  netieren  Bemukungen  um 
Wiedervereinigung  der  chrisUichen  Kitchen  (Frei- 
h\xrgf  1897);  Petrua  Caniaiua  in  GeschicfUe  und 
Legende  (Giessen,  1897);  Die  neuen  Funde  auf  dem 
Gebiet  der  OUesten  Kirchengeachichte  (1898);  Die 
sogenanrde  Kirchengeschichte  des  Zachariaa  Rhetor 
(Leipsic,  1899) ;  Kritik  und  Ueberlieferung  airf  dem 
Gebiet  der  Erfarachung  dea  Urdiriatentuma  (Giessen, 
1903);  Philipp  der  Groasmutige  aU  Palitiker  (1904); 
Daa  Dogma  von  der  Dreieinigkeit  und  Gottmenach- 
heit  (Tubingen,  1905);  Philipp  Melanchthon,  eine 
Charakterakizze  (Halle,  1906);  and  Daa  PapaUhum 
(Tubingen,  1907;  Eng.  tranal.,  The  Papacy;  italdea 
and  ita  Exponenta,  New  York,  1909). 

KRUMMACHER,  kram'm(lH''er :    The  name  of 
four  distinguished  Reformed  preachers  of  Germany. 
1.  Friedrich  Adolf   Krumznacher  was   bom    at 
Tecklenb\irg  (22  m.  n.n.e.    of   MUnster)  July  13, 
1767;  d.  at  Bremen  Apr.  4,  1845.     He  attended  the 
Latin  school  of  his  native  town  and  in  1786  became 
a  student  of  theology  at  the  small  Reformed  Col- 
lege of  Lingen.     Dissatisfied  with   the   conditions 
there,  he  removed  to  Halle,  where  he  attended, 
among  others,  the  lectures  of  Knapp  and  Bahrdt. 
After  the  completion  of  his  studies,  he  spent  one 
year  as  schoolmaster  in  Bremen.     In  1790  he  was 
appointed   associate  rector  of  the  gymnasium  at 
Hamm.    In  1793  he  assumed  the  rectorship  of  the 
gymnasium  in  Mdrs,  on  the  left  bank  of  the  Rhine, 
in  spite  of  the  menace  of  war.    In  1800  he  was 
called  to  the  professorship  of  theology  and  rhetoric 
at  Duisbuig.     His  theology,  though  tinged  by  the 
influences  of  the  period,  was  marked  by  a  piety 
and  a  reverence  for  Scriptural  Christianity  which 
made  him  a  valuable  counterpoise  to  the  rational- 
ism of  his  colleague  Grimm.    The  pressure  of  Na- 
poleonic autocracy  had  a  paralyzing  effect  upon 
the  University  of  Duisburg,  and  it  declined  still 
more  after  the  town  came  under  the  rule  of  the 
newly  established  grand  duchy  of  Berg;  the  French 
government  did  not  even  pay  the  salaries  of  the 
professors,    and    after    Krmnmacher's    brother-in- 
la.w  MOller  had  left  the  institution  in  1805,  he  was 
glad  to  exchange  his  position  in  1807  for  that  of  a 
country  pastor  at  Kettwig  in  the  romantic  valley 
of  the  Ruhr,  where  he  soon  won  the  confidence  of 
the  WestphaMan  peasants.    In  1812  Duke  Alexis 
Frederick  Christian  of  Anhalt-Bemburg  appointed 
him  general  superintendent,  councilor  of  the  con- 
sistory, and  chief  preacher  at  Bemburg.    In  1820 
he  declined  a  call  to  the  University  of  Bonn  as  pro- 
fessor of  theology.     In  1821  the  Evangelical  Union 
iva;s  introduced  in  Bernburg  under  his  guidance. 
From  1824  to  1843,  when,  owing  to  old  age,  he  re- 
signed his  position,  he  was  pastor  of  the  Church  of 
St.  Ansgar  in  Bremen,  where  he  acquired  great  pop- 
ularity, though  he  could  not  compete  with  his  col- 
leSLgue  Drflseke  as  a  preacher. 

i^rummacher  possessed  a  contemplative,  esthetic, 
and  poetic  nature,  a  genial  disposition  with  a  tender 
he&rt,  a  dignified  earnestness,  and  a  child-like  sim- 
plicity. He  was  well  trained  in  philology  and  the- 
ology* ft^d  lus  education  was  very  comprehensive. 
He  exerted  much  influence  upon  his  contempo- 
raries, not  only  as  professor  and  preacher,  but  also  as 
VI.— 25 


poet  and  prose  writer.  During  the  Duisburg  period 
he  published  Hymnua  an  die  LiAe  (Wesel,  1801), 
followed  by  Parabeln  (Duisburg,  1809;  Eng.  transl., 
Parablea,  London,  1824  and  often),  which  acquired 
a  permanent  place  in  German  literature,  and  a 
treatise,  then  very  popular,  Ueber  den  Geiat  und  die 
Form  der  evangeliaehen  Geachichte  in  hiatoriacher  und 
dathetiacher  Hinaicht  (Leipsic,  1805).  In  his  rural 
solitude  at  Kettwig  he  wrote,  beside  essays  and 
criticisms  in  magazines.  Die  Kinderwelt  (Duisbiirg, 
1809),  a  favorite  book  of  Queen  Louise;  Daa  Featr 
hUchlein,  eine  Schri/t/ura  VoOc  (1809-18);  Apoljogen 
und  Paramythien  (1809);  and  Bibelkatechiamua 
(1810).  While  at  Bemburg  he  published  the  pa- 
triotic poem  Der  Eroberer  (1814);  the  Biblical 
drama  Johannea  (Leipsic,  1815);  and  the  anony- 
mous polemical  treatise  Apoatoliachea  Sendachreiben 
an  die  Chriatengemainden  von  dem  waa  Noth  thut 
zur  Kirchenverbeaaerung  (1815),  called  forth  by  the 
institution  of  the  so-called  liturgical  commission  in 
Berlin.  Then  followed:  Leiden,  Sterben  und  Aufer- 
atehung  unaera  Herm  Jeau  Chriati,  twelve  pictures 
after  Goltzius  with  preface  and  text  (Berlin,  1817); 
Paragraphen  zur  heUigen  Geachichte  (1818);  FOrti 
Woifgang  zu  AnhaU,  eine  Reformationapredigt  (Des- 
sau, 1820),  Briefwechael  zwiachen  Aamua  und  aeinem 
Vetter  (Duisburg,  1820),  a  polemical  treatise,  di- 
rected against  Voss;  Die  freie  evangeliache  Kirche, 
ein  Friedenagruaa  (1821);  Biider  und  BUdchen 
(Essen,  1823);  Katechiamua  der  chriatlichen  Lehre 
(1823);  and  Die  chriaUiche  VMaachule  im  Bunde 
mit  der  Kirche  (1825).  To  the  Bremen  period  be- 
long: Katechiamua  der  chriatlichen  Lehre  nach  dem 
Bekenntnia  der  evangeliaehen  Kirche  (1825);  St. 
Anagar  (Bremen,  1828);  Daa  Tdubdien  (Essen, 
1828);  Der  Hauptmann  Comeliuat  sermons  on  Ac^ 
X  (Bremen,  1829;  Eng.  transl.,  Comditta  the  Centu- 
rion, Edinburgh,  1839);  Die  Geachichte  dea  Reicha 
Gottea  nach  der  heiligen  Schri/t  (Essen,  1831-45); 
Le6en  dea  heiligen  Johannea  (1833).  Krummacher 
was  a  most  faithful  contributor  to  the  Bremer  Kirch- 
enboU  edited  by  Mallet.  The  first  parts  of  the  Feat- 
bUchlein,  the  juvenile  writings,  and  the  catechism 
were  received  with  special  favor  and  went  into 
numerous  editions.  (H.  MALLETf.) 

2.  Gottfried  Daniel  Krummacher,  brother  of 
Friedrich  Adolf,  was  bom  at  Tecklenburg  (22  m. 
n.n.e.  of  MUnster)  Apr.  1,  1774;  d.  at  Elberfeld 
(24  m.  n.e.  of  Cologne)  Jan.  30,  1837.  Even  as  a 
boy  he  gave  evidence  of  a  peculiar  and  dreamy  nar 
ture.  At  the  University  of  Duisburg  he  came  under 
the  influence  of  its  rector  Franz  Arnold  Hasen- 
kamp  (q.v.),  and  of  Professor  M6ller,  which  pre- 
served him  from  being  carried  away  by  the  ration- 
alism of  Grinmi.  After  the  completion  of  his  studies 
he  went  to  his  brother  Friedrich  Adolf  at  Hamm 
where  he  taught  and  preached;  then  he  became 
private  tutor  in  Soest  and  in  1796  in  Mdrs,  where 
his  brother  now  was.  Thence  he  was  called  as 
preacher  to  the  neighboring  town  of  Baerl,  in  1801 
to  Wtllfrath  near  Elberfeld,  and  in  1816  to  Elber- 
feld itself.  He  exerted  a  wide  influence  by  the 
whole-hearted  sincerity  of  his  character,  evidenced 
in  his  preaching;  but  owing  to  his  peculiar  educa- 
tion he  possessed  some  rugged  and  harsh  traits. 
In  his  theology  he  followed  the  Dutch  school  of 


Kmmmmeher 
Kii«hii06l 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


386 


Cocoeius  and  Lampe,  but  at  the  aame  time,  espe- 
cially in  the  beginning  of  his  activity  in  Elberfeld, 
taught  absolute  predestination  with  aU  possible 
harshness  according  to  the  articles  of  the  Synod 
of  Dort.  Unlike  Lampe,  Krummacher  attracted 
only  the  elect  while  he  repelled  the  unconverted. 
In  spite  of  the  apparent  dryness  and  stiffness  <^ 
his  sermons,  he  attracted  his  hearers  by  the  irre- 
sistible power  of  his  conviction,  and  by  the  depth 
and  fervor  of  his  Christian  experience  which  he 
owed  chiefly  to  writings  like  those  of  Madame 
Guyon,  Bunyan,  Bogat^y,  and  Tersteegen.  From 
an  exegetical  standpoint  his  sermons  are  open  to 
criticism  for  their  arbitrary  Biblical  interpretation. 
Krummacher 's  appearance  at  Elberfeld,  just  at  the 
time  of  the  religious  awakening,  produced  a  re- 
vival which  caused  a  sensation  in  the  whole  coun- 
try. Carried  away  by  his  success,  he  did  not  shrink 
from  the  very  extremes  of  the  doctrine  of  predes- 
tination, and  the  offensive  conduct  of  his  adher- 
ents necessitated  the  interference  of  the  ecclesias- 
tical authorities.  Knunmacher  tried  to  modify 
his  doctrine  and  manners,  but  some  of  his  follow- 
ers adhered  strictly  to  the  principles  of  predestina- 
tion, and  after  his  death  and  that  of  his  nephew 
joined  the  Dutch  Reformed  congregation  of  Dr. 
KohlbrQgge  in  Elberfekl. 

Krununacher  published  a  nimiber  of  sermons: 
Re/ormatumBpredifften  (Elberfeld,  1817),  Beiirag 
zur  BeatUwortung  der  Frage:  TTos  tat  evangditchf 
(1828),  Jakobs  Kampf  und  Sieg  (1829;  Eng.  transl., 
Jacob  Wrestling  wUh  the  Angd,  London,  1838),  Die 
evangdiache  Lehre  von  der  RecfU/ertigung  (1831),  Die 
Wanderungen  Israels  durch  die  Waste  nach  Kanaan, 
in  Betiehung  auf  die  innere  FHhrung  der  Gldubigen 
Meuchtet  (1834;  Eng.  transl.,  Israd's  Wanderings 
in  the  Wildemess,  2^  vols.,  London,  1837),  Die  hohe- 
priesterliche  Segens/ormel  (1834),  Wahrheit  mr  QoU- 
sdigkeit,  oder  Uauspostille  (1834),  OnU  Botechaft 
(1838).  Tdgliches  Manna  fur  PUger  durch  die  WusU 
was  published  posthumously  by  his  friends  (1843). 
He  idso  published  a  translation  of  Calvin's  com- 
mentary on  Philippians  (DQsselthal,  1836). 

(M.  GOBBLf.) 

8.  Friedrich  Wilhelm  Knunmacher,  elder  son  of 
Friedrich  Adolf,  was  bom  at  Mdrs  (17  m.  n.n.e.  of 
Dtlsseldorf)  Jan.  28,  1796;  d.  at  Potsdam  Dec.  10, 
1868.  He  studied  at  the  high-schools  of  Duisburg 
and  Bemburg,  and  then  studied  theolpgy  in  HaUe 
and  Jena.  In  1819  he  became  assistant  preacher 
of  the  Reformed  congregation  in  Frankfort.  In 
1823  he  was  appointed  preacher  at  Ruhrort,  in 
1825  at  Gemarke  (Barmen).  In  1834  he  went  to 
Elberfeld  as  colleague  of  his  uncle  Gottfried  Daniel. 
A  sermon  preached  by  him  on  Gal.  i.  8,  9  in  1840 
at  the  Church  of  St.  Ansgar  in  Bremen  (translated 
into  English  under  the  title  Paul  not  a  Man  to  Suit 
the  Taste  of  our  Age,  London,  1841),  occasioned  the 
"  Bremen  Controversy,"  which  extended  over  sev- 
eral years  and  called  forth  numerous  treatises.  In 
1847  he  became  preacher  at  Trinity  Church  in  Ber- 
lin, and  in  1853  court  preacher  at  Potsdam.  His 
style  is  sometimes  too  picturesque  and  addicted  to 
the  use  of  foreign  words;  but  his  homiletic  power 
is  undeniable.  As  he  successfully  opposed  ration- 
alism with  all  the  resources  of  wit,  genius,  and 


faith,  and  tried  to  restore  the  old  beliefs,  so,  with 
Tholuck  and  Claus  Harms,  he  was  influential  in 
throwing  overboard  the  mechanical  mode  of  preach- 
ing whidi  followed  Reinhardt. 

The  most  important  of  F.  W.  Krummacher's 
numerous  works  was  Elias  der  Tkisbiter  (Elberfeld, 
1826;  Eng.  transl.,  Elijah  the  TiMite,  London, 
1836;  a  classic).  Other  works  were:  Salomo  and 
Sulamith  (1828;  Ens.  transl.,  SoUmumandShulamite, 
London,  1838);  BlSke  ins  Reich  der  Onade  (1828; 
Eng.  transl.,  A  Olanee  into  the  Kingdom  of  Grace, 
1837);  Kirehliehe  Lehrstimmen  (1832;  Eng.  transL, 
The  Church's  Voice  of  Instruction,  1839);  Der  Pro- 
phet Elisa  (1837;  Eng.  transl.,  EliOia,  1838);  Der 
scheinheUige  Rationalismus  (1841);  Weg  gum  HeU 
(1842);  TheologischeReplik(lM6);  Das  Adventdmdi 
(Leipsic,  1847);  Die  Sabbathsglodee  (12  parte,  1851- 
1858);  Das  Passiansbueh  (1854;  Eng.  transL,  The 
Suffering  Saviour,  Edinburgh,  1856);  Des  Christen 
WalVohri  nach  der  himmlischen  Heimath  (Beriin. 
1858);  Immanuel  Friedrich  Sander  (1860);  Christtu 
lefft;  ein  Oster-  und  Pfingstbuch  (1862;  Eng.  transL. 
TheRisenRedeemer,lSQS);David,derK&mgvonl8rad 
(1867;  Eng.  transL,  1867);  and  an  autobiography 
(Berlin,  1869;  Eng.  transl.,  1869).    (R.  EOGKLf.) 

4.  Emil  Wilhelm  Krummacher,  younger  son  of 
Friedrich  Adolf,  was  bom  at  MOrs  (17  m.  n.n.e. 
of  DQssekiorf)  May  7,  1798;  d.  at  Bonn  Jan.  15, 
1886.  From  1841  to  1876  he  was  preacher  in  Duis- 
burg. Like  his  father  and  brother  he  published  a 
number  of  devotional  works,  which,  however,  did 
not  attain  the  same  importance  as  theirs.  Amoog 
them  are:  Hirtenruf  nor  lebendigen  Qudle  des  HeQi 
(Elberfeld,  1830);  Das  Dogma  von  der  GnadenwaM 
(Duisburg,  1856);  and  Gideon,  der  Riehter  Israeii 
(Elberfeld,  1861).  (H.  MAiXErf.) 

BiBUOoaAPHT:    1.  A.  W.  llfiUer.  F.  A.  Krummaeker  vmi 
MifM  FreuiuU,  2  vols.,  BmoiAn,  1S49;  ADB,  zviL  240-241 

2.  E.  W.  KrummMber.  Gct^M^  DmvM  Krummmekm 
Ltimn,  Elberfeld,  1888;  A.  W.  lldUer.  ut  rap.;  ADA 
xvU.  246-247; 

3.  Friedrieh  WUhslm  KnnnmMher.  Sttb^tbioorofkk, 
Berlin,  1860;  £ng.  tnul.,  AtiSobiooraphw,  Edinbur^  1869; 
A.  Nebe,  ZicrGMeAidhtedfriV«ii0f,  WMbKfeB,  1879;  DSB, 
ami  248-246. 

KUEBEL,  kul)el,  ROBERT:  German  Protestant; 
b.  at  KiroUieim-unter-Tedk  (15  m.  s.e.  of  Stutt- 
gart) Feb.  12,  1838;  d.  at  Tabingen  Dec  4,  1894. 
He  studied  theolpgy  at  TQbingen,  1856-60,  and,  oo 
completing  his  studies,  became  instructor  of  He- 
brew in  the  Seminary  of  Blaubeuren.  In  1865  be 
became  repetent  at  the  theological  seminary  in 
TQbingen,  in  1867  deacon  in  Balkigen,  in  1870  pro- 
fessor and  director  in  the  preachers'  seminary  at 
Herbom,  and  in  1874  city  pastor,  religious  instrue- 
tor,  and  school  inspector  at  Ellwangen.  In  1879 
he  succeeded  J.  T.  Beck  as  professor  of  Christian 
dogmatics  and  ethics  at  Tubingen.  His  theolog- 
ical position  was  essentially  that  of  Beck.  Indeed, 
he  was  the  last  academic,  representative  of  that 
peculiarly  Swabian  Biblical  realism  which  was 
founded  by  Bengel  and  revised  by  Beck. 

In  the  center  of  Kuebel's  theolpgystands  the  con- 
ception of  the  kingdom  of  God.  This  exists  in 
heaven,  and  has  been  revealed  to  nuin  through  the 
appearance  of  Christ.  Christ  belongs  essentially  to 
the  other  world  and  brings  us  the  state  of  justifi- 


3«7 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Knmnukolisr 
Kuehnoel 


cation.  Great  emphasis  is  laid  upon  the  authority 
of  Scripture,  though  its  infallibility  is  restricted  to 
that  which  Christ  and  the  apostles  established  by 
the  authority  of  their  teachings.  Regeneration  is 
not  accomplished  without  the  faith  of  the  person 
to  be  baptized.  The  baptism  of  children  produces 
a  Christian  disposition,  but  not  regeneration.  The 
main  task  of  the  Christian  is  self-training  for  the 
kingdom  of  God;  but  since  God  is  also  the  lord  of 
the  earth,-  faithful  fulfilment  of  our  earthly  calling 
serves  as  preparation  for  eternal  destiny.  Chris- 
tian virtue  is  similarity  to  Christ.  Kuebel  distin- 
guishes sharply  between  the  secular  state  and  the 
kingdom  of  God.  The  life  of  the  people  can  be 
Christianized  neither  through  a  Christian  state  nor 
through  a  church  of  the  people  (VoUcskirche).  The 
test  of  the  true  Church  is  its  membership  of  real 
believers.  The  majority  of  chiu-ch  members  are 
catechumens  who  stand  in  the  vestibule  of  the  true 
Church.  He  reproaches  the  modem  Church  be- 
cause it  strives  to  be  a  world  power,  in  contrast  to 
the  world-renouncing  spirit  of  Christianity  in  earlier 
times.  Modem  Chjristianity  preaches  the  recon- 
ciliation of  Christianity  and  culture,  while  the  mod- 
ern view  of  the  world  is  irreconcilable  with  the  Bib- 
lical view.  In  the  Evangelizing  spirit  and  in  the 
craze  for  forming  religious  associations  he  sees  an 
infringement  upon  family  life.  He  holds  that  the 
worldly  spirit  of  modem  Christianity  must  sooner 
or  later  disperse  the  Church  and  produce  a  more 
compact  union  of  tme  believers.  The  hope  of  a 
millennium  in  the  sense  of  a  material  kingdom  of 
Christ  is  to  be  rejected;  it  is  the  duty  of  the  Chris- 
tian in  this  world  to  remain  faithful  to  the  Lord  in 
patience  and  to  long  for  the  future;  for  Christianity 
can  never  make  heaven  out  of  earth.  His  principal 
works  are:  Bibelkunde  (2  parts,  Stuttgart,  1870); 
Das  chrUUiche  Lehraystem,  nach  der  heUigen  Schrift 
dargestelU  (1874);  Katechetik  (Barmen,  1877); 
Ueber  den  UtUerschied  der  pantiven  und  der  liberalen 
Richtung  in  der  modemen  Theclogie  (N6rdlingen, 
1881);  ChrUUiche  Bedenken  uber  modemrchriatlickes 
Wesen  von  einem  Sorgvollen  (1888);  Exegetiach- 
homileUaches  Handbuch  zum  Evangdium  des  Mat- 
thdus  (2  parts,  1889);  and  the  posthiunous  Christ- 
liche  Ethik  (1896).  He  also  wrote  commentaries  on 
Galatians,  Philippians,  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  and 
James  for  Grau's  Bibeltoerk  (2  vols.,  Bielefeld,  1876- 
1S80),  and  commentaries  on  the  Pastoral  Epistles, 
Hebrews,  and  Revelation  for  Strack  and  ZOck- 
ler's  Knrzgefasster  Kommenlar  (9  vols.,  NOrdlingen, 
1886-94).  (Karl  von  BuRxf.) 

Biblioorapbt:    Robert  KUbel,  naeh  eigenen  Aufteiehnunom 
oeKhUderU  Stuttgart,  1896;   Burk,  in  NKZ,  vol.  vi.  1895. 

KUECHERERf  ktl'Hen-er,  HERMANN:  German 
mystic.  He  is  known  only  through  his  trial  for 
heresy  at  WQrzburg  in  1342.  The  trial  ended  with 
his  recantation,  but,  as  his  sincerity  was  doubted, 
he  was  detained  in  prison  for  some  time.  His  con- 
fessions before  the  court  show  that  he  was  an  ad- 
herent of  the  then  widely  prevalent  quietistio-pan- 
t heist ic  mysticism  (see  Free  Spirit,  Brethren  of 
xhe).  By  a  mystical  absorption  into  the  absolute 
ciivine  being  he  imagined  that  he  transformed  him- 
Hclf  into  God.  He  became  impervious  to  all  sense- 
impressions,  fancied  that  he  was  soaring  high  above 


the  earth,  and  that  he  could  walk  across  the  Rhine 
without  wetting  his  feet.  In  this  "  deiied  "  state, 
the  person  of  Christ,  the  hierarchy,  dogmas  and 
precepts  of  the  Church,  and  even  moral  laws,  lost 
all  significance  for  him.  Hbrman  Haupt. 

Bxbuoorapht:  Monumenia  Boko,  xl.  416-421,  liunieh, 
1870;  H.  Haupt,  Dm  rtlioidtn  Stkien  in  Franktn  var 
dm"  lUformaium,  pp.  6  aqq..  WOrsbuiv*  1882. 

KUBHL,   kOl,    ERNST   RICHARD   THBODOR: 

German  Protestant;  b.  at  Visbuhr  (near  KOslin, 
100  m.  w.  of  Danzig)  Apr.  29,  1861.  He  studied 
in  Berlin  (1878-82;  Ph.D.,  Halle,  1882),  and,  after 
a  year  in  Italy  (1882-83),  was  inspector  of  the 
Sedlnitzkysches  Johannaeum  in  Breslau  1883-^7. 
In  1887  he  became  associate  professor  of  New-Tes- 
tament exegesis  in  Breslau,  and  in  1803  went  to 
Marburg  as  full  professor  of  the  same  subject. 
Since  1805  he  has  been  professor  of  New-Testa- 
ment exegesis  at  K6nigsberg.  He  has  written:  Die 
Massorak  und  die  Septuaginta  im  Jeremia  (Halle, 
1882);  Die  Oemeindeordung  in  den  Pastoralbriefen 
(Berlin,  1885);  Die  Briefs  Petri  und  Judd  (in 
H.  A.  W.  Meyer's  Krvtisch-exegeUscher  Handkom- 
mentcar  iiber  das  Neue  Testament,  GOttingen,  1887); 
Die  HeOsbedeuJhing  des  Todes  Christi  (Berlin,  1890); 
Zur  paulinischen  Theodicee  (1897);  Reehtfertigung 
auf  Orund  des  Olavbens  und  Oerieht  nach  den  Wer- 
ken  bei  Paulus  (EOnigsberg,  1904);  Ueber  II  Kar. 
V.  1-10,  ein  Beiirag  zum  Hdlenismus  bei  Paulus 
(1904);  SteHung  des  Jakobuabrie/es  sum  aUtestor 
mentlichen  Oesetz  und  zur  paulinisehen  Reehtfertig' 
ungstehre  (1905);  Erl&tdernde  Umsehreibung  der 
paulinischen  Briefs  unter  BeibehaUung  der  Brieffarm, 
i.  (1905);  and  Das  Sdbstbeumsaisein  Jesu  (1908). 

KUEHNOEL,  ktLh'neil  (KUINOL,  KUINOELIUS), 
CHRISTIAN  GOTTLIEB:  German  Protestant;  b. 
at  Leipsic  Jan.  2,  1708;  d.  at  Giessen  Oct.  23,  1841. 
He  was  educated  at  the  Thomas  School  in  Leipsic, 
and  at  the  University  of  Leipsic  (Ph.D.,  1787), 
where  in  1788  he  established  himself  as  privat- 
docent  for  philosophy  and  philolpgy.  In  his  lec- 
tures, as  well  as  in  his  publications,  he  occupied 
himself  equally  with  Old-  and  New-Testament  exe- 
gesis and  with  the  exposition  of  Greek  and  Roman 
classics.  In  1790  he  became  professor  extraor- 
dinary of  philosophy  at  Leipsic;  in  1799  he  was 
called  to  Giessen,  where  he  remained  until  his 
death.  In  1809  he  became  ordinary  professor  in 
the  theological  faculty  there.  His  lectures  suffered 
from  philological  drsmess,  but  he  exercised  a  sound 
and  stimulating  influence  upon  many  of  his  hear- 
ers, in  a  scientific  as  well  as  practical  direction,  and 
his  writings,  in  spite  of  their  disagreeable  diffuse- 
ness  and  pedantry  were  in  high  authority  and  ac- 
quired fame  even  beyond  the  borders  of  Germany. 
He  wrote  translations  of  Hosea  (Leipsic,  1789),  of 
the  Messianic  prophecies  (1792),  and  of  the  Psalms 
(1799),  with  brief  German  notes;  Oeschichte  des 
judischen  Volks  von  Abraham  bis  auf  Jerusalems 
Zerstdrung  (1791);  a  Latin  commentary  on  Hosea 
(1792);  Observationes  ad  Novum  Testamenium  ex 
libris  apocryphis  Veteris  TestamenH  (1794);  Peri- 
copcB  evangeliccB  (2  vols.,  1796-97);  and  Specimen 
observationum  in  Psalmos  (in  Commentatumes  the- 
ologiccB  (vol.  iv.,  1798).  Of  higher  value  are  his 
commentaries  on  the  New  Testament,  especially 


KurtB 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


888 


his  CammmteniM  in  Wmm  Novi  TettamenH  hi9- 
torieoB  (4  vols.,  1807-18),  and  the  Commentariut 
in  EpiHolam  ad  H^jtobob  (1831).  He  wrote  also 
a  number  of  works  on  classical  philology. 

(O.  ZOCKUBBf.) 
Bduoorapht:  C.  W.  Juiti  and  J.  II.  HArtmAim.  Htmiathe 
I>enkw1irdi4Mi«^  iv.   2.   pp.   436  kki.,  llaibiiiK,   1805; 
H.  E.  Scrib*.  BiograpkUehMigrikriachsa  Ltxikcn,  L  IW- 
200.  ii.  410,  DarmtUdt,  1831-43;   ADB,  xvii.  364-367. 

KUBNEN,  kH'nen,  ABRAHAM:  Dutch  theo- 
logian and  Biblical  scholar;  b.  at  Haarlem  Sept. 
16,  1828;  d.  at  Leyden  Dec.  10,  1891.  He  studied 
at  the  gymnasium  in  Haarlem  and  the  University 
of  Leyden,  and  at  the  latter  institution  attracted 
the  attention  of  his  teachers,  particularly  of  the 
orientalist  Juynboll  and  of  the  theologian  Scholten. 
In  1851,  by  editing  passages  of  the  Samaritan 
Pentateuch  and  of  the  Arabic  version  of  Abu  Said, 
he  gained  his  doctorate  and  also  an  assistant-curar 
torship  in  the  University  of  Leyden;  he  also  be- 
came assistant  professor  of  the  Semitic  languages, 
and,  in  1855,  professor  of  theology.  He  lectured 
on  introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,  on  the  his- 
tory and  religion  of  Israel,  on  the  branches  of  New* 
Testament  studies  which  were  especially  in  his 
charge,  on  propsBdeutics  and  methodology,  and, 
from  1860,  also  on  ethics.  As  a  member  of  the 
theological  faculty  until  1877  it  was  his  duty  to 
preach  regularly  at  the  academic  services.  Tiele 
says  that  the  sermons  thus  delivered  were  uttered 
with  warmth  but  without  emotion,  and  that  while 
the  convincing  logic  of  Euenen's  exposition  ap- 
pealed to  the  intelligence  of  his  hearers,  the  philo- 
sophical repose  of  the  man  did  not  attract  the  mul- 
titude. Kuenen  was  neither  a  brilliant  speaker 
nor  a  popular  orator,  but  he  was  an  excellent 
teacher  and  a  convincing  lecturer,  possessing  the 
gift  of  clear  communication  of  ideas.  His  style 
was  simple,  but  warm  and  impressive  when  a 
question  of  principle  was  involved.  He  sought  to 
convince  not  by  showy  rhetoric  but  by  a  wealth  of 
illustration,  keen  criticism  and  convincing  argu- 
mentation. The  variety  of  subjects  taught  by 
him  is  sufficient  proof  of  his  versatility.  In  a  new 
partition  of  the  branches  of  instruction  among  the 
professors,  Kuenen  retained  the  department  of  the 
Old  Testament. 

Kuenen  was  one  of  the  founders  and  editors  of 
the  Theologische  Tijdschrifi,  was  president  of  the 
Teyler  Stichting,  secretary  of  the  Haa^Mshe  Ge- 
nootfichap  tot  Verdediging  van  den  Christelijken 
Godsdienst,  and  president  of  the  Koninklijke  Aka- 
demie  van  Wetenschappen  at  Amsterdam.  In  the 
struggle  between  orthodoxy  and  the  liberal  move- 
ment, he  was  a  leader  of  the  modem  school.  In 
his  De  religione  Christiana  per  continuas  theotogia 
commtUationes  sibi  consianti  et  incolumi  he  com- 
bated the  orthodoxy  which  demanded  belief  in 
the  contravention  of  natural  law.  On  the  other 
hand,  he  often  preached  moderation  to  the  more 
ardent  advocates  of  liberalism.  Industrious  from 
his  youth,  Kuenen  was  endowed  with  a  remark- 
able memory,  so  that  the  volume,  variety,  and 
exactness  of  his  learning  were  phenomenal.  He 
was  not  a  discoverer  of  truth,  but  was  a  scholar  of 
great  acumen,  a  critic  of  the  first  rank,  whose  im- 


portance can  be  explained  by  the  oombination  of 
a  pure  chaiacter  with  a  high  intelUgenoe.  His  per- 
scmality  was  revealed  both  in  his  great  mode^y 
and  in  his  stem  devotion  to  duty,  whidi  led  him 
to  accept  from  opponents  as  weU  as  from  sympa- 
thetic fellow  workers  whatever  he  recognised  as 
truth.  In  his  writings  he  aimed  to  present  simply 
the  facts  as  he  believed  he  had  found  them,  while 
his  readers  were  left  to  draw  the  conclusions. 

Kuenen's  most  noteworthy  production  is  his  His- 
iarisch'KriUach  Onderxoek  naar  ket  ongtaand  en  de 
vertamding  van  de  Boeken  dee  Ouden  Verbonde  (3 
vols.,  Leyden,  1861-65;  Eng.  transl.  of  part, 
Hietorico-criHeal  Inquiry  into  the  Origin  and 
CompoeUion  of  the  Hexateuch,  London,  1886), 
an  exhaustive  study  of  the  sources  for  the 
history  of  the  people  and  religion  of  Israel  pre- 
served in  the  Old  Testament.  In  this  he  adopts 
the  hypothesis  of  Graf  that  the  priest  code  is  of 
later  date  than  the  other  Pentateuchal  documents, 
and  defends  and  illustrates  it  with  a  wealth  of 
learning  and  quiet  moderation,  and  with  great 
sobriety  of  judgment.  He  also  contributed  much 
of  value  to  the  knowledge  of  the  structure  of  He- 
brew poetry.  Of  less  value  is  Kuenen 's  other 
principal  work,  De  Godedienat  tot  den  ondergang 
van  den  Joodschen  stoat  (2  vols.,  Haarlem,  1869- 
1870;  Eng.  transl..  Religion  of  Israd  to  the  FaH  of 
the  Jewish  States  London,  1873-75),  which,  in  its 
sympathy  with  the  recoil  from  a  one-sided  super- 
naturalism,  fails  to  take  account  of  the  divine  fac- 
tor in  history;  e.g.,  when  merely  natural  evolution 
is  discerned  in  prophecy.  This  comes  out  espe- 
cially in  De  Prqfeten  en  de  profetie  onder  Israel  (2 
vols.,  Leyden,  1875;  Eng.  transl..  Prophets  and 
Prophecy  in  Israd,  London,  1877).  Another  valu- 
able contribution  is  Kuenen 's  Hibbert  Lectures 
on  National  Rdigions  and  Universal  Rdigions 
(London,  1882),  which  appeared  also  in  Dutch, 
German,  and  French.  He  rendered  great  ser- 
vice by  his  collaboration  with  H.  Oort  and  I. 
Hooykaas  in  the  translation  of  the  Old  Testament 
from  the  Hebrew  into  Dutch  in  De  Bijbd  voor  Jon- 
gelieden  (8  vols.,  The  Hague,  1871-78,  new  ed., 
1900,  Eng.  transl.,  Bible  for  Learners,  6  vols., 
1873-79),  and  in  Kinderbijbd  (2  vols.,  1887-88; 
cf.  E.  Kautssch  in  TSK,  bcxiv.,  1901,  pp.  670- 
681).  He  wrote  also:  Het  goed  recht  der  modemen 
(Leyden,  1866);  Friedrich  Schleiermacher  in  de 
akademische  godsdienstoefening  (1868);  and  Les 
Origines  du  texts  masorkhigue  de  VAnden  Testa- 
ment (Paris,  1875),  while  his  contributions  to  peri- 
odicals were  exceedingly  numerous  and  weighty, 
especially  those  to  Nieuw  en  Oud  and  to  the  Th^ 
ijiogikhe  Tijdschrift.  A.  Kamphauben. 

Bibuookapht:  A  oompleta  list  of  Kuenen's  works  is  pven 
in  Oasammelte  AhhamUungen  Kueimns,  ed.  K.  Budde.  pp. 
601>51 1.  Freiburc.  18M.  For  his  life  oonsult  the  sketches 
by  P.  H.  Wieksteed.  in  JQR,  ▼  (1802).  571-«05;  C.  H. 
Toy,  in  New  World,  i  (1802).  64-88:  C.  P.  Tiele,  in  tht 
*'  Year  Book  of  the  Amsterdam  Academy  of  Scienoes  " 
for  1802;  H.  Oort.  in  ThT,  1802.  pp.  113-116.  and  in 
De  Cfid9,  1802:  W.  C.  van  Manen,  in  Proteatantiaehe  Kvr- 
chenMntung,  1802,  passim;  A.  lUriUe,  in  Mamnen  von 
heteekenU,  vol.  xzL,  Haarlem,  1800.  A  valuable  list  of  review 
articles  is  indicated  in  Richardson,  Bneyetopoiediat  p.  606. 

KUENSTLE,  kOnst'le,  KARL:    Roman  Cathob'c; 
b.  at  Schutterwald  (near  Offenbuig,  17  m.  s^.w. 


889 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Kuenen 
KurtB 


of  Oarlsruhe)  Baden,  Oct.  8,  1859.  He  studied 
in  Freiburg  and  WUrsburg,  was  curate  at  Mees- 
burg  (1884^86)  and  Rastatt  (1886-88),  and  stud- 
ied for  two  years  in  Italy.  In  1895  be  became 
privat-docent  in  Freiburg,  associate  professor  of 
patristics  in  1896,  and  honorary  professor  of  the 
same  subject  in  1903.  He  has  written:  U^ber  den 
LSbeHus  precum  des  Faustinua  und  MarceUinua 
(Freiburg,  1890);  Hagiograpkische  Studien  vber 
die  Paeeio  FelicitaHs  cum  Beptem  filiis  (Paderbom, 
1894);  Eine  Bibliothek  der  Synibole  und  tkeotog- 
iecken  Traktaten  zur  Bek&tnpfung  des  PrisciUianie- 
mue  und  westgotkiechen  ArianiemuB  aue  dem  aeehe- 
ten  Jahrhundert  (Mainz,  1900);  Die  Pfarrkirche 
St,  Peter  und  Paul  in  Reichenau-Niederzell  und 
ihre  neuentdeckten  Wandgemdlde  (in  collaboration 
with  K.  Bayerle;  Freibui^,  1901);  Dob  Comma 
Joanneum  avj  seine  Herkunft  untersucht  (1905); 
Antipriscillianaf  dogmengeschichtliche  Forschungen 
und  Teste  (1905) ;  and  Die  Legende  der  3  Lebenden 
und  der  3  Toten  und  der  Totentam  (1908). 

KULTURKAMPF.    See  Ultramontanibm. 

KUIIZE,  kun'ze,  JOHANNES  WILHELM:  Ger- 
man Protestant;  b.  at  Dittmannsdorf,  near  Meis- 
sen, Saxony,  Aug.  31,  1865.  He  studied  in  Leip- 
sic  and  Erlangen,  and  taught  at  the  seminary  in 
Annaberg  1888-89  and  at  the  Wettiner  Gymna- 
sium, Dresden,  1889-92.  Then  until  1903  he  was 
assistant  university  preacher  at  Leipsic,  where  he 
became  privat-docent  in  1894  and  associate  pro- 
fessor of  the  history  of  dogma  in  1899.  In  1903 
he  was  appointed  professor  of  systematic  theology 
in  the  Evangelical  theological  faculty  in  Vienna, 
and  in  1905  became  professor  of  systematic  and 
practical  theology  in  Greifswald.  He  has  written 
Marcus  Eremita,  ein  newer  Zeage  fUr  das  altchrist- 
liehe  Taitfbekenntnis  (Leipsic,  1895);  D<is  nicanisch- 
kanstantinopditanische  Symbol  (1898);  Glavbens- 
regel,  heOige  Schri/t  und  Tatrfbekenntnis  (1899); 
Christoph  Ernst  Luthardt,  ein  Ixbens-  und  Charak- 
ierbild  (1903) ;  Die  ewige  OottkeU  Jesu  Christi  (1904) ; 
and  Die  Uebergabe  der  Evangdium  beim  Taufun- 
terricfU  (1908).  Kunxe  is  one  of  the  editors  of 
QudLenschriften  zur  Oeschichte  des  Protestaniismus 
(1905  sqq.). 

KUNZE,  JOHN  CHRISTOPHER:  Lutheran;  b. 
at  Artem  (30  m.  w.s.w.  of  Halle),  Prussian  Saxony, 
Aug.  4,  1744;  d.  in  New  York  July  24,  1807.  He 
received  his  classical  training  in  the  gynmasia  at 
Rossleben  and  Merseburg,  and  studied  theology 
at  the  University  of  Leipsic.  After  teaching  a 
few  years  he  came  to  Philadelphia  in  1770  as  asso- 
ciate pastor  of  the  Lutheran  congregation  there. 
He  remained  in  this  work  till  1784,  maintaining 
during  a  part  of  this  time  a  theological  seminary 
and  also  serving  as  professor  of  oriental  languages 
and  literature  at  the  University  of  Pennsylvania 
1780-84.  From  1784  till  his  death  he  was  pastor 
of  the  Lutheran  congregation  in  New  York,  and 
was  also  professor  of  oriental  languages  and  litera- 
ture at  Columbia  1784-87  and  again  1792-99.  He 
was  an  early  advocate  of  the  necessity  of  English 
education  for  German  youth,  and  it  was  largely 
through  his  influence  that  English  was  introduced 
into  the  pulpits  of  German  churches  in  America. 


He  edited  A  Hymn  and  Prayer  Book  for  .  .  .  Lu- 
theran Churches  (New  York,  1795),  the  first  English 
Lutheran  hynm-book  published  in  the  United  States. 
BnuooEAPHT:    C.  E.  Norton,  Four  Ameriean  UnivenUie; 

New  Yoiic,   1896;    Avpteton*%  Cyclopaedia  cf  American 

Biography,  iii.  678,  ib.  1898. 

KURTZ,  kOrtz,  JOHANN  HBINRICH:  German 
exegete  and  church  historian;  b.  at  Montjoie  (16 
m.  s.s.e.  of  Aachen),  Rhenish  Prussia,  Dec.  13, 
1809;  d.  at  Marbui^  Apr.  26,  1890.  He  attended 
the  Latin  school  of  Montjoie  (1821-23)  and  the 
gymnasia  of  Dortmund  (1825-27)  and  Soest  (1827- 
1830),  studied  theology  at  Halle  (1830-31)  and  Bonn 
(1831-33),  became  teacher  of  religion  at  the  gym- 
nasium of  Mitau  in  1835,  and  professor  of  church 
history  at  Dorpat  in  1849.  In  1859  he  became 
professor  of  Old-Testament  exegesis,  and  continued 
as  such  until  1870  when  he  was  pensioned.  From 
1855  to  1866  he  was  dean  of  the  theological  faculty. 
In  1871  he  settled  at  Marburg,  where  he  spent  the 
rest  of  his  life  in  literary  labors. 

His  first  book  was  Die  Astronomie  und  die  Bibd. 
Versueh  einer  Darstellung  der  biblischen  Kosmologie, 
sowie  einer  ErUtuterung  und  Bestdtigung  dersetben 
aus  den  ResuUaten  und  Ansichten  der  neueren  As- 
tronomie (Mitau,  1842);  in  later  editions  the  ma- 
terial of  this  work  was  considerably  enlaiged  and 
the  title  was  changed  to  Bibel  und  Astronomie, 
ndfst  Zugaben  verwandten  InhaUs.  Eine  Darstel- 
lung der  biblischen  Kosmologie  und  ihrer  Beziehung 
zu  den  Naiurwissenschaften  (5th  ed.,  Berlin,  1865; 
Eng.  transL,  The  Bible  and  Astronomy,  Philadelphia, 
1857).  The  work  is  characterized  by  a  certain  the- 
osophical  tjrpe  of  thought  and  shows  the  great 
interest  which  Kurtz  took  in  the  results  of  natural 
science.  He  tried  to  prove  the  central  position  of 
the  earth  in  the  history  of  the  universe  and  show  how 
the  universe  is  connected  with,  and  subordinate 
to,  the  progress  and  completion  of  man's  salvation. 
In  the  same  year  appeared  Das  Mosaische  Opfer, 
ein  Beitrag  zur  SytkMik  des  Mosaischen  KttUus. 
The  same  topic  was  treated  by  Kurts  in  theological 
periodicals  and  culminated  in  Der  aUtestamenUiche 
OpferkuUtus  nach  seiner  gesetzlichen  BegrUndung  und 
Anioendung  (Mitau,  1862;  Eng.  transl.,  Sacrificial 
Worship  of  the  Old  Testament,  Edinburgh,  1863). 
Another  work  on  the  Old  Testament  was  the  Lehr- 
buch  der  heiHgen  Oeschichte,  ein  Wegweiser  zum 
Verstdndnis  des  gdtUichen  Heilsplans  (Kdnigsberg, 
1843;  19th  ed.,  Leipsic,  1906;  Eng.  transl.  Manual 
of  Sacred  History,  Philadelphia,  1855).  From  this 
Lehrbuch  proceeded  Biblische  Oeschichte  der  heUigen 
Schrift  nacherzdhU  und  fUr  das  Verstdndnis  der  un- 
teren  Klassen  in  Oymnasien  und  hdheren  BUrger- 
schvlen  erlAutert  (Berlin,  1847;  51st  ed.,  Breslau, 
1901;  Eng.  transl.,  Bible  History,  Edinburgh,  1867), 
the  work  that  made  the  name  of  the  author  most 
widely  known.  It  is  used  even  in  the  missionary 
schools  of  India.  From  the  same  Lehrbuch  pro- 
ceeded also  the  principal  work  of  Kurtz  in  the  field 
of  the  Old  Testament,  his  Oeschichte  des  alien  Bundes 
(vol.  i.,  Berlin,  1848,  3d.  ed.,  1864;  vol.  ii.,  1855,  2d 
ed.,  1858;  Eng.  transl.,  History  of  the  Old  Covenant, 
with  annotations  by  A.  Edersheim,  3  vols.,  Edin- 
burgh, 1860),  which  extends,  however,  only  to  the 
death  of  Moses.    The  work  had  been  preceded  by 


Kajvgat 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0Q 


890 


investigations  on  the  Pentateuch  such  as  Beiirdge 
gur  Verteidigufig  und  BegrHndung  der  Einheit  det 
PentaUuchB  (Kdnigsbeig,  1844)  and  Die  Einheit  der 
Oeneeia  (Berlin,  1846).  Later  Kurts  changed  his 
opinion  and,  like  DeUtsseh,  distinguished  different 
sources  in  the  Pentateuch,  but  considered  all  as 
belonging  to  the  time  of  Moses.  The  historical 
reality  (^  the  account  in  the  Pentateuch  and  its 
character  of  revelation  are  the  fundamental  pre- 
suppositions of  his  woric.  The  Lehtbudi  der  heUigen 
Geechichie  had  been  followed  in  1844  by  ChrieUiehe 
Religumelehre  (15th  ed.,  Leipsic,  1902),  which,  like 
the  former  work,  was  destined  for  use  in  secondary 
schools.  In  1849  appeared  the  LehHmch  der  Kirch- 
engeechiehte  far  Shidierende  (14th  ed.,  by  N.  Bon- 
wetsch  and  P.  Tschackert,  2  vols.,  Leipsic,  1906; 
Eng.  transl.,  Church  Hietcry,  8  Tols.,  Londoa  and 
New  Yoik,  1889-90)  and  in  1852  the  LeUfaden, 
■inca  the  thiid  ed.  (1856)  called  the  Ahriee  der 
KirchengeeehichU  (16th  ed.,  Leipsic,  1906).  KurU's 
works  on  church  history  are  distinguished  by  his 
peculiar  gift  of  deariy  arranging  and  condensing  his 
material  and  making  prominent  the  most  chuac- 
tezJstio  features  in  popular  and  vigorous  language* 

(N.  BONWBTBCH.) 

KUTPBR,  ABRAHAM:  Dutch  Protestant;  b. 
at  Maassluis  (10  m.  w.  of  Rotterdam)  Oct.  29, 
1837.  He  studied  in  Leyden,  and  was  pastor  at 
Beest  (1868-68),  Utrecht  (1868-70),  and  Amster- 
dam (1870-74).  In  1874  he  became  a  figure  in  the 
political  life  of  Holland,  being  a  member  of  the 
States-General  for  Gonda  from  that  year  until 
1877.  In  1894  he  was  again  returned  to  the  same 
body  for  Sleidrecht,  and  in  1901  became  prime 
minister.  In  1880  he  founded  at  Amsterdam  the 
Free  University,  where  he  has  since  been  professor, 
lecturing  on  various  topics  as  occasion  requires. 
In  theology  he  is  a  strict  orthodox  Calvinist,  and 
as  such  founded  the  Reformed  Free  Church  in 
1886.  He  has  lectured  extensively  in  the  United 
States,  and  in  1898  was  L.  P.  Stone  lecturer  at 
Princeton  Theological  Seminary.  Besides  editing 
the  StaiukuMTd  (a  daily  newspaper)  since  1872  and 
the  HerotU  (weekly)  since  1878,  he  has  written 
many  works,  including:  EenvomUgheid,  de  vloeck 


van  het  modeme  leven  (Amsterdam,  1869);  Het 
modeminne,  ten  Fata  Morgana  op  ehrietelijk  gdned 
(1871) ;  Tradaat  van  de  reformatie  der  kerken  (1883) ; 
Het  werk  van  den  HeUigen  Geeat  (3  parts,  1888-89; 
Eng.  transl.,  New  York,  1900);  E  voto  dordraeeno 
Todiehting  op  den  Heidelbergachen  Caieehiemus  (4 
parts,  1892-95);  and  Calviniem  (Stone  lectures, 
1899) .  He  also  edited  Johannes  a  Laaco's  complete 
works  (2  vols.,  Amsterdam,  1866);  Kerkeraada- 
protocoUen  der  hoUandache  gemeente  ie  London,  1669- 
1571  (Utrecht,  1870);  and  F.  du  Jon's  Opuecuia 
theologica  aeUda  (Amsterdam,  1882) .  Portions  of  his 
Eneydopaedie  der  heilige  Godgeleerdheid  (3  vob.,  Am- 
sterdam, 1894)  have  been  translated  into  English 
under  the  title,  EncydopcBdia  of  Sacred  Theology: 
lu'Prineiplea  (London  and  New  York,  1898). 
BiauooEAnnr:  L.  H.  JortUn,  ComparaHv  Rtiigion,  pp. 
434-435.  New  York.  1005;  W.  H.  de  8.  Lohxnan.  in  Fn^ 
hyUrian  and  lUformtd  Review,  ix  (1808),  661  eqq.;  C.  A. 
llMon.  in  OuOook,  \%x  (1002),  333  aqq. 

KTDONES,  koi-dO'nlz,  DEMBTRIOS:  Greek 
theologian;  flourished  between  1330  and  1400, 
chiefly  at  Thessalonica  and  Constantinople.  He 
was  acquainted  with  many  famous  men,  including 
Barlaam,  Gregorios,  Palanuis,  Nioephoros,  Gregoras, 
Joseph  Bryennios,  and  the  Emperor  John  ^uita- 
cusenus.  He  understood  Latin,  and  in  ecclesias- 
tical questions  of  the  day  inclined  toward  Rome, 
favoring  the  union  and  opposing  the  Hesychasts. 
In  this  spirit  he  wrote  "  On  the  Procession  of  the 
Holy  Ghost "  and  ''  On  the  blasphemous  Dogmas 
of  Gregory  Palamas,"  the  latter  one  of  the  roost 
important  works  in  the  Hesychastic  controversy. 
Kydones  also  polemised  against  Mohammedanism, 
and  made  a  Greek  translation  of  the  Confutatio 
Alcorani  Muhamedid  of  Richardus  Florentinus. 
He  was  likewise  able  to  prepare  Greek  versions  of 
considerable  portions  of  such  Latin  theologians  as 
Augustine  and  Thomas  Aquinas,  was  the  author 
of  a  treatise  "  On  Contempt  of  I>eath,"  and  cer- 
tain other  theological  addresses  are  ascribed  to 
him.  His  works,  so  far  as  edited,  are  collected  in 
MPG,  div.  (Philipp  Meter.) 

Bibuoorapht:     Fabrioiue-HArlefl.    Bihliotheea    Oraea,    zi. 

80a-«06;   Knimbftcher.  OeaekichU,  pp.  101,  487-488. 

KYRIB  SLBISOH.    See  LrruBOics,  IIL 


LABADIB,  WWdl\  JBAR  DS»  LABADISTS: 

The  founder  of  a  Dutch  quietistic  sect  and  his  ad- 
herents. De  Labadie,  also  called  Jean  de  la  Badie, 
was  bom  at  Bouig  (15  m.  n.  of  Bordeaux)  Feb. 
13,  1610;  d.  at  Altona  Feb.  13,  1674.  He  studied 
in  the  Jesuit  school  of  Bordeaux,  and  against  the 
wishes  of  his  friends  connected  himself  with  the 
order,  although  he  never  became  a  professed  mem- 
ber. After  1626  he  devoted  himself  to  philosophy 
and  theology,  as  well  as  to  the  Vulgate  and  the 
writings  of  St.  Augustine,  developing  a  mystical 
and  Augustinian  trend.  He  was  ordained  in  1635, 
but  four  years  later  was  released  from  his  vows  as 
a  Jesuit  at  his  own  request  on  the  plea  of  ill  health. 
He  then  began  to  preach  with  much  success  as  a 


secular  priest  in  his  native  town,  as  well  as  in 
Paris,  Amiens  (where  he  was  made  canon  and 
teacher  of  theology  in  1640),  and  Abbeville.  [He 
regarded  himself  as  divinely  inspired;  cf.  DSdara^ 
turn  de  la  foi,  p.  84;  Hietoriach  verhad  Lebena  Lor 
badiaten  Schewingh,  p.  109.]  He  became  attracted 
to  the  doctrines  of  the  Reformation  through  his 
studies  of  the  Scriptures,  but  was  protected  against 
the  anger  of  the  monks  and  priests  by  Cardinal 
Richelieu,  only  in  1645  to  be  expelled  from  Amiens 
by  Masarin  as  a  disturber  of  the  peace  (a  modi- 
fication of  a  sentence  to  life  imprisonment,  ob- 
tained through  an  appeal  from  the  assembly  of 
the  clergy  of  France,  then  in  session;  TraiU  de  la 
Sol  de  Chreti^ne.]    He  went  later   to  the  Car- 


801 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Knypar 
lAlMdie 


melite  hennitage  at  Qraville  in  enforced  retirement, 
where  he  read  the  ''  Infltitutes  "  of  Calvin,  with 
which  he  came  into  thorough  agreement  in  doc- 
trine, though  Btill  in  sympathy  with  the  practise 
of  the  Roman  Catholic  Ciiurch.  [The  change  in 
his  attitude  he  expressed  in  the  words,  ''  This  is 
the  last  time  Rome  shall  persecute  me  in  her  Com- 
munion. Up  to  the  present  I  have  endeavored  to 
help  and  to  heal  her,  remaining  within  her  juris- 
diction; but  now  it  is  full  time  for  me  to  renounce 
her  and  to  testify  against  her.''  Cf.  Q.  D.  J. 
Schotel,  Anna  Maria  van  Schvrman,  p.  160,  Ley- 
den,  1863.]  The  ceaseless  opposition  of  the  Jesu- 
its, who  had  now  become  his  bitter  foes,  and  his 
knowledge  of  the  life  of  the  Reformed  congrega- 
tions first  led  him  formally  to  declare  his  allegiance 
to  the  Reformed  Church  at  Montauban  in  1650. 
He  now  sought  to  be  a  reformer  of  the  Reformed, 
finding  his  opportunity  first  as  a  preacher  and 
later  as  professor  of  theology  at  Montauban.  In 
1657  he  was  expelled  from  Montauban  and  took 
refuge  in  Orange,  but  was  forced  to  leave  when 
that  city  was  taken  by  Louis  XIV.  in  1659.  He 
then  started  for  London' to  become  pastor  of  the 
Reformed  French  congregation  there,  but  was  so 
strongly  uiged,  on  the  way,  to  remain  at  Geneva 
as  preacher  that  he  accepted,  and  worked  there 
successfully  for  a  revival  in  religion  and  morals 
alike.  He  gathered  about  himself  a  circle  of 
disciples,  including  Pierre  Yvon  (1646-1707),  Pierre 
Dulignon  (d.  1679),  Francois  Menuret  (d.  1670), 
Theodor  Untereyk  (d.  1693),  and  Friedrich  Span- 
heim  (d.  1701).  His  reputation  and  his  writings 
on  asceticism,  meditation,  and  contemplation  were 
spread  throughout  Holland,  chiefly  by  the  agency 
of  Gottschalk  van  Schurman,  and  attracted  the  at^ 
tention  of  earnest  Christians  at  Utrecht  like  G. 
Voetius,  J.  van  Lodenstein,  and  Anna  Maria  van 
Schurman  (q.v.),  who  came  to  look  upon  Labadie 
as  a  possible  reformer  of  the  Dutch  Reformed 
Church,  which  had  degenerated  into  crass  worldli- 
ness.  After  a  short  stay  at  Utrecht,  where  some 
of  the  prominent  theologians  denounced  him  as  an 
irresponsible  visionary,  he  was  invited  to  Middle- 
buig  in  1666  as  preadier  to  the  Walloon  Reformed 
oongr^ation.  His  pastorate  at  Middelbiug  was 
at  first  successful,  and  while  there  he  published 
his  6cril  stir  la  prophitie  (Amsterdam,  1668)  and 
his  Manuel  de  pUU  (1669). 

Gradually,  however,  Labadie's  caprice  and  self- 
will  restricted  his  ministrations  to  a  small  circle  of 
ardent  followers,  which  developed  into  a  separatis- 
tic  sect.  He  refused  to  subscribe  to  the  Belgic 
Confession,  considering  it  unbiblical  in  many  arti- 
cles, and  he  declined  to  follow  the  Reformed  lit- 
urgy, preferring  extempore  prayers.  The  breach 
widened,  and  in  1668  Labadie  publicly  refused  to 
submit  to  the  judgment  of  the  synod  and  was 
suspended.  Nevertheless  he  celebrated  the  com- 
munion before  tha  regular  service,  and  was  ao- 
cordingly  deposed  and  forbidden  to  remain  in 
Middelburg.  Retiring  with  his  followers  to  the 
neighboring  town  of  Veer,  he  sought  to  gather  there 
and  at  Amsterdam  a  congregation  of  the  truly  re- 
generate. Few  of  importance  joined  them,  however, 
excepting  Anna  Maria  van  Schurman  and  Conrad 


van  Benningen.  Despite  this,  their  services  were 
attended  by  such  niunbers  that  their  meetings  were 
prohibited  by  the  authorities  in  1670,  whereupon 
the  community  of  some  fifty  persons,  with  five 
pastors  and  preachers,  were  invited  by  the  Pal- 
gravine  Elizabeth  (see  Elizabeth,  Albertinb)  to 
settle  at  Herford.  Their  presence  raised  serious  op- 
position there,  and  in  1672  they  retired  to  Altona. 

Shortly  after  the  death  of  Labadie,  his  followers, 
now  numbering  162,  returned  to  Holland,  alarmed 
at  the  war  which  had  broken  out  between  Den- 
mark and  Sweden,  and  settled  in  the  neighbor- 
hood of  the  castle  of  Waitha  or  Thetinga  near 
Wiewert  in  western  Frisia. 

Many  hundreds  of  Labadie's  converts  remained 
in  the  Reformed  Church  as  an  Evangelical  element. 
Here  their  communism  was  further  developed.  In 
the  Labadist  conmiunities  all  dressed  in  the  most 
simple  fashion  without  adornment,  and  ate  to- 
gether at  three  tables,  for  the  leaders,  the  brethren, 
and  the  guests  respectively.  Each  family  had  a 
separate  dwelling,  but  was  obliged  to  leave  the 
doors  open  in  token  of  the  community  of  goods. 
The  colony  supported  itself  chiefly  by  weaving, 
soap-boiling,  and  the  working  of  iron.  The  gov- 
ernment was  aristocratic  and  hierarchic,  while  the 
distinctive  doctrines  were  the  immediate  efficacy 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  hearts  of  the  elect,  the 
Chiu-ch  restricted  to  the  regenerate,  and  chiliasm. 
The  sacraments  were  allowed  only  to  the  regenerate, 
so  that  infant  baptism  was  barely  tolerated  and 
communion  was  rare.  The  marriage  of  the  re- 
generate was  r^arded  as  holy,  the  children  being 
considered  as  belonging  not  to  the  parents  but  to 
the  Lord,  so  that  they  were  brought  up  in  the  com- 
munity. On  the  other  hand,  the  marriage  of  un- 
believers was  rejected  as  sinful.  The  first  and 
most  necessary  virtue  was  obedience.  Worship 
was  extremely  simple,  and  was  led  partly  in  French 
and  partly  in  Dutch  by  the  "  speakers.''  The  ob- 
servance of  Sunday  was  lax.  During  the  acme  of 
their  prosperity  in  1680  the  Labadists  were  invited 
by  Comelis  van  Sommelsdyk,  governor  of  Surinam, 
to  send  colomsts  to  his  dominions.  They  gladly 
responded,  but  in  1688  their  plantation,  wl^ch  they 
had  named  Providence,  had  to  be  abandoned  when 
the  governor  was  murdered  by  his  soldiers.  A 
second  attempt  at  colonization  was  made  at  Bo- 
hemia Manor,  Cecil  Co.,  Md.,  in  1684,  after  Jasper 
Dankers  and  Peter  Sluyter,  agents  of  the  Labadists, 
had  visited  America  in  1679.  The  Maryland  colony 
survived  until  a  few  years  after  Sluyter's  death 
(1722),  but  was  gradually  absorbed  in  the  surround- 
ing population.  [This  was  the  first  conmiunistic 
settlement  in  the  New  World  (see  Communism,  II., 
S  1).  The  principal  industries  were  sheep  raising 
and  tobacco  culture.  The  peaceful  existence  of 
the  community  was  due  to  t^  religious  toleration 
practised  in  Maryland.]  In  1692  the  communistic 
system  of  the  parent  house  was  abandoned  and 
each  member  lost  a  fourth  of  his  investment.  From 
this,  blow  the  Labadists  never  recovered.  By  1703 
the  conmiunity  at  Wiewert  had  dwindled  from  be- 
tween three  and  four  hundred  to  thirty,  and  in 
1732  the  last  "  speaker  "  died  and  the  society  was 
finally  dissolved.  (G.  FBANxf.) 


LftOortUirs 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


892 


Bxbuoqbapbt:  The  Mrlier  literature  ia  given  in  J.  O. 
Waleh,  Bihlioihtea  OuoUHfun  •uUeia,  ii.  48-66.  Jena.  1757- 
1766.  Amonc  the  Bouroee  (ooUeeted  in  the  Library  of 
the  Faabody  Institute,  Baltimora,  Md.)  are:  Didaniifm 
d9  J,  de  L'Abadie,  .  .  .  amitnani  Ua  rai$on»  qui  Vont 
MigS  h  quitUr  la  communion  de  VSgliae  romaiiM,  Montau- 
ban.  1650;  alao  his  DSdaraHon  ...  A  quitter  la  eom^ 
munion  de  Vigliae  r^formie,  Qenera,  1666;  Hiatoire  ewrieuae 
de  la  vi$,  de  la  eonduiie,  et  dee  vraie  eenHmone  du  8r.  Jean 
de  Labadie^  The  Hague,  1670  (this  yoluzne  oontaine  alto 
the  Modeeie  Refutation  eopiSe  de  deux  lettrea  qui  ei  douient 
ioindre  h  VhieUnre,  etc.);  A.  II.  van  Schunnan,  Opueeula, 
Reims.  1667;  idem,  Euklena,  Latin  Altona,  1673.  Dutch 
Amsterdam.  1684.  Consult  further:  M.  Goebel,  Oe- 
eehiehte  dee  ehrieUu^en  Lebene,  iL  181-273.  Coblenti. 
1852  (exists  also  in  French);  H.  Tan  Berkum,  De  Labadie 
en  de  Labadietene,  Sneek,  1851;  F.  Sjoerds.  Beknopt  U- 
veneberi^  van  ...  7.  de  Labadie,  Gorinohem,  1860; 
H.  Heppe.  Oeechiehte  dee  Pietiemue  der  refcrmierten  Kirehe, 
pp.  241-374,  Leyden,  1879;  A.  Ritschl,  Oeechiehte  dee 
Pietiemue,  I  194-268,  Bonn,  1880;  J.  H.  Kurts,  Lehr- 
bueh  der  Kirehengeediichte,  u.  166.  7-8.  Leipsic.  1890; 
M.  Bajorath.  in  TSK,  1893.  pp.  125-166;  B.  B.  James. 
The  Labadiet  Colony  in  Maryland,  Baltimore.  1899;  Von 
Schubert,  in  Sduiften  dee  Vereine  /Or  echleewiii-hoUteiniedie 
Kinhenoeeehichte,  ill  part  2,  Kiel,  1904;  Lichtenberger. 
B3R,  Til  630-632;  Journal  of  Jaeper  Dankere  and  Peter 
Sluyter,  ed.  Long,  in  Memoire  «/  Long  leland  Hietorical 
Society,  vol.  i..  1867. 

LAB  ARUM.    See  Jesus  Christ,  Monogram  of; 

CONSTAMTINB  THE  QrBAT  AND  HIS  SONS,  I.,  {   4. 

LABBB,  Wli^',  PHILIPPB:  French  Jesuit,  one 
of  the  most  famous  and  prolific  authors  of  his 
order  in  the  seventeenth  century;  b.  at  Bouiges 
July  10,  1607;  d.  at  Paris  Mar.  25,  1667.  For  a 
few  years  he  taught  philosophy  and  theology  in 
his  native  city  and  elsewhere,  but  he  was  soon 
called  by  his  superiors  to  Paris,  where  he  devoted 
the  remainder  of  his  life  to  investigation  and  au- 
thorship. Of  his  writings,  which  number  almost 
eighty,  the  most  important  was  his  Sacroaanda 
concilia  ad  regiam  editionem  exada  (18  vob.,  Paris, 
1662-72;  reprinted  by  N.  Coletus,  23  vols.,  Venice, 
1728-32),  the  last  ten  volumes  being  edited  after 
Labbe's  death  by  the  Jesuit  Gabriel  Cossart  (d. 
1674).  Introductory  to  this  collection  Labbe  had 
already  written  OallicB  tynodorum  conciliorumque 
brevia  et  accuraia  hiataria  (Paris,  1646)  and  His- 
torica  aynopna  canciliorutn  tuUionaliumf  pnmn- 
daUum,  ditEcesaneorum,  cum  vitU  epistolisque  Ro- 
manorum  porUificum  (1661).  Other  works  were 
devoted  to  chronology:  Concordia  chronologica  (4 
vols.,  Paris,  1656)  and  Ahr6gi  chronoloffique  de  Vhia- 
toire  aacrie  el  prqfane  de  taua  les  ages  et  de  tons  lea 
aikHea  (4  vols.,  1663-66);  martyrology:  Hagio- 
logium  Fmnoo^aJUa  excerptum  ex  antiquo  martyro- 
logio  aanda  abbaiia  Sancti  Laurentii  Bituricenaia 
(1643);  Byzantine  history:  Michadia  Glyca  an- 
nalea  (the  first  edition  of  this  historian,  1660); 
French  history:  Milangea  curieux  de  pluneura  aw- 
jeta  rarea  pour  aervir  d  Vhiatoire  de  la  France  eccUsi- 
aatique  et  politique  (1650);  the  history  of  literature: 
Bxbliotheca  biblioihecarum  (1664);  and  the  Jansen- 
ist  controversy:  Triumphua  cathcdiccB  veriUUia  ad- 
veraua  novatorea,  aive  Janaeniua  damnatua  (1651) 
and  Bibliotheca  antijanaenicana  (1654). 

(O.  ZOCKLERf.) 
Bibuoobapbt:  L.  G.  Michaud.  Biographie  univeraeUe, 
xxii  256-268,  46  vols..  Paris.  1843-66;  A.  and  A.  de 
Baeker,  Bibliothkiue  dee  icrivaine  de  la  eoci£U  de  JUue, 
ii.  549-562.  3  voIb..  Li^.  1869-76;  H.  Hurler,  Nomenn 
tiUUor  literariue,  u.  201-210,  Innsbruck,  1881;    KL,  vii 


1281-1282.  On  the  Concilia  oonmilt:  Hefele.  ConeUien- 
{feaehichte,  L  76  0qq.,  £□«.  tranal.,  L  60  aqq.:  H.  Quentin. 
Jean  Dominique  Manei,  et  lee  grandee  eoUacUone  am- 
eiliairee,  Pmria,  1000. 

LABOURS,  l(i"bi^,  GmLLAUMB  MABIE 
JOSEPH:  Cardhial;  b.  at  Achietrle-Petit  (11  m. 
s.  of  Arras)  Oct.  27,  1841;  d.  at  Rennes  1906. 
He  studied  at  the  Seminary  of  St.  Sulpice,  Paris, 
and  became  professor  and  superior  at  the  Petit 
S^minaire  of  Arras.  He  was  then  vicar-general  of 
Arras,  in  1885  was  consecrated  bishop  of  Mans,  and 
in  1893  was  enthroned  archbishop  of  Rennes.  In 
1897  he  was  created  cardinal  priest  of  Santa  Maris 
e  San  Francesco  al  Foro  Romano. 

Bibuoorapht:  Der  Papet,  die  Regierung  und  die  F«rvaft- 
ung  der  heiligen  Kirehe  in  Ro»^  Munich,  lOOi. 

LACHMANN,  lOH'man,  CARL  COHRAD  FRIED- 
RICH  WILHELM:  German  philolo|pst;  b.  at 
Brunswick  Mar.  4,  1793;  d.  in  Berlin  Mar.  13, 
1851.  He  studied  classical  and  Gennanic  phi- 
lology in  Leipsic  and  Gottingen,  became  private 
docent  at  GOttingen  1815,  at  Berlin  1816,  professor 
of  philology  at  KOnigsberg  1818,  and  at  Berlin 
1825.  He  was  one  of  the  founders  of  modem  tex- 
tual criticism,  made  the  restoration  of  texts  the 
special  object  of  his  studies,  and  edited  many  Latin 
and  old  German  works.  His  editions  of  Proper- 
tius  (Leipsic,  1816),  Catullus  (Berlin,  1829),  Tibul- 
lus  (1829),  and  Lucretius  (1850)  are  famous.  His 
excellent  editions  of  the  New-Testament  text  (1831; 
large  ed.,  with  the  Vulgate,  2  vols.,  1842-^50)  at- 
tempt to  restore  that  current  in  the  Eastern  Church 
in  the  fourth  century.  Through  his  Betraehtungen 
uber  Homer* a  lliaa  (1847),  in  which  he  sought  to 
show  that  the  Iliad  ia  made  up  of  a  number  of  in- 
dependent lays  he  exerted  a  considerable  influence 
on  modem  Homeric  criticism. 

Bibuoorapht:  M.  Herts,  Karl  LtuJimann,  Berlin.  1851; 
P.  Schaff,  Companion  to  the  Greek  Teetament,  pp.  254- 
26S.  New  York.  1883;  Scrivener,  introduction,  ii.  231- 
235  et  peaaim  (a  review  of  his  work  on  the  N.  T.). 


LACHMANN,  lOH^mdn  (LACHAMAHN),  JO- 
HANN:  German  Reformer;  b.  at  Heilbronn  c. 
1491;  d.  there  1538.  He  was  a  son  of  Bemhsrd 
T<achamann,  a  celebrated  bell-founder,  entered  the 
University  of  Heidelberg  in  1505,  beoune  baccalau' 
reua  1507,  magiater  and  assistant  in  master's  ezsin- 
inations  1508,  and  baccalaureua  juria  1509  (Dr.  jur.. 
1521).  In  1514  he  became  vicar  of  the  parish  of 
his  native  town,  which  belonged  to  the  cathedral 
chapter  at  WOrzbui^,  and  at  the  dose  of  1520  he 
succeeded  his  friend  Johannes  KrOner  of  Scherdiog 
as  city  preacher.  Luther's  ideas  early  found  & 
fertile  soil  at  Heilbronn.  Even  KrOner  is  reported 
to  have  preached  that  more  importance  rested 
in  diligently  hearing  the  word  of  God  than  io 
the  mass.  Through  Lachmann's  influence  the  old 
Church  continued  to  lose  ground.  In  1524  the  con- 
cubinage of  priests  was  forbidden,  and  the  mari- 
olatry  of  the  Carmelites  was  vigorously  assailed. 
In  1525  the  barefoot  friars  were  enjoined  to 
preach  the  Gospel  and  then  they  were  forbidden 
to  preach  at  all.  The  citizens  requested  commu- 
nion in  both  forms,  which  request  the  bishop  re- 
fused Mar.  9,  1525.    The  Evangelicals'  leader  was 


808 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Laoordaire 


Lachmann,  whom  Gotz  von  Berlichingen  entreated 
to  serve  as  his  pastor's  colleague  at  Neckarzim- 
mern  on  occasion  of  a  disputation  with  an  over- 
bearing barefoot  friar. 

In  the  Peasants'  War  Lachmann  proved  his 
Evangelical  moderation,  his  courage,  and  his  patriot- 
ism. In  a  written  appeal  (Apr.  5,  1525),  he  fear- 
lessly admonished  the  insurgent  peasants  to  obey 
the  sovereign  authority  and  return  home.  When 
the  peasants  entered  the  town  (Apr.  18)  the  coimdl 
turned  to  Lachmann,  who  induced  the  peasant 
leaders  to  moderate  their  demands,  and  also  to  re- 
noimoe  Heilbronn's  cooperation,  thus  preserving  his 
native  place  from  grievous  injuries.  While  the  re- 
action fancied  that  it  held  the  stakes  of  a  game 
already  won,  Lachmann  carried  the  council  step 
by  step,  demanding  the  appointment  of  an  Evan- 
gelical preacher,  more  frequent  preaching,  inaugu- 
ration of  the  Evangelical  conmiunion,  suppression 
of  the  niunerous  holidays,  strict  moral  discipline, 
and  Evangelical  care  of  the  poor.  In  1526  he  even 
dared  to  enter  into  wedlock  with  the  daughter  of 
the  burgomaster,  dreading  neither  the  bishop's 
jurisdiction  nor  the  revilements  of  the  old  school 
of  believers.  He  earnestly  grappled  with  irregu- 
larities in  public  worship  and  in  moral  matters, 
and  prompted  the  young  schoolmaster  Kaspar 
Greter  (q.v.)  to  undertake  the  religious  instruction 
of  youth.  Communion  was  observed  according  to 
the  Evangelical  rite  for  the  first  time  on  Apr.  28, 
1528;  and  in  1529  the  German  rite  of  baptism  was 
also  introduced. 

At  the  Diet  of  Speyer  in  1529,  Heilbronn  joined 
the  Protestants,  and  also  adopted  the  Schwabach 
Articles,  with  the  exception  of  the  seventeenth, 
but,  at  Lachmann's  advice,  in  common  with  Hall, 
Nuremberg,  and  Brandenbuig — Ansbach  declined 
to  enter  the  Schmalkald  League.  For  the  diet  at 
Augsburg,  Lachmann  prepaied  a  memorial  in- 
tended to  give  the  emperor  a  clear  view  of  the 
Reformation  and  of  the  state  of  the  Church  in 
Heilbronn  (Cf.  ZKO,  xxv.,  1904,  pp.  318-328, 
460-^74).  The  emperor  was  to  see  that  the  pastor 
remained  unprejudiced  in  his  pastoral  rights,  not- 
withstanding that  Lachmann,  together  with  the 
deacons,  followed  the  regular  Lutheran  form  of 
public  worship,  communion,  and  baptism,  with 
daily  preaching  on  week-days.  Congr^ational 
singing  in  German  alternated  with  the  Latin  sing- 
ing by  the  school  choir.  After  both  councils  and 
the  entire  citizenship  had  pledged  themselves  to 
fidelity  toward  their  native  town,  the  diet's  deci- 
sion was  rejected,  Dec.  8,  1531,  and  the  Reformat 
tion  was  approved  by  the  whole  congregation. 
Thereupon  all  priests,  cloisters,  and  the  comman- 
der of  the  Teutonic  Order  were  simmioned  to  ac- 
cept the  Reformation.  The  priests  complied;  the 
cloister  churches  and  that  of  the  Teutonic  Order 
-were  closed,  on  refusing  their  support  of  the  Refor- 
mation. A  new  Evangelical  litui*gy  was  introduced 
Aug.  22,  1532.  To  relieve  Lachmann  from  over- 
^work  the  council  resolved  to  call  a  second  preacher 
And  tried  unsuccessfully  to  secure  Erhard  Schnepf . 
On  May  20,  1533,  Menrad  Molther  (q.v.)  of  Augs- 
t>uig  was  called;  and  in  1536,  Lachmann's  faithful 
colleague,  Johann  Bersich,  was  appointed  pastor. 


Lachmann,  an  ardent  follower  of  Luther  and  an 
intimate  friend  of  Johann  Brenz,  had  taken  part, 
with  perfect  conviction,  in  the  Syngramma  Suevi- 
cum  (1525);  and,  with  Brenz  and  Schnepf,  he  had 
constantly  upheld  Luther's  aims.  There  was  no 
need  of  Melanchthon's  warning  him  on  June  3, 
1530,  against  ZwingU  (CR,  ii.  30).  In  1532  when 
Butzer  was  reassuring  his  adherents  in  Eraichgau 
and  gaining  new  ones,  Lachmann,  with  Brenz,  as- 
sembled the  friends  of  Luther  at  Heilbronn. 

Lachmann  early  sacrificed  his  strength  to  his 
fidelity  in  office.    He  was  a  finely  cultivated,  hu- 
mane, and  spirited  man,  of  inflexible  courage,  holy 
zeal  against  everything  evil  and  vulgar,  and  glow- 
ing love  of  coimtry.  G.  Bobsert. 
Biblxogbapht:    C.   Jfiger,   MittheUungen  zwr  a^w&b%»then 
und  frOnkiaehen  ReformatumagMchiehU,  Stuttgart.   1828; 
H.  Titot,   Kirdienoeadiidalidie  BeUrOge  Ober  Stadt  und 
OberanU  Heilbronn,  Heilbronn,  1862;   T.  Pressel,  Aneodota 
BrenHana,  iii.  164-165,  Ttibingen.  1868;    F.  Dtirr.  HeU- 
bronner    Chronik,    Heilbronn,     1806;     Betdtreibuno    dea 
OberamU  Heilbronn,  2  vols..  Stuttgart,  1001-03;    Monu- 
menla  Germaniae  paedagogica,   vol.   mm.,   Berlin,    1003; 
ADB,  xvii.   460;    Duneker,   in  ZKO,  xxv.  308-328;     J. 
Lachmann  aU  Patriot  im  Bawmkrieg  nach  uinen  Brief  en, 
in  WOrUemb.  JahrbUdier,  1008,  pp.  44-76.     Letters  from 
Melanchthon  to  Lachmann  are  in  CR,  ii.  82,  871. 

LACORDAIRE,  la"c6r"d&r',  JEAN-BAPTISTE 
HENRI:  French  preacher  and  theological  writer; 
b.  at  Recey-sur-Ource  (135  m.  s.e.  of  Paris),  de- 
partment of  Cdte  d'Or,  Mar.  12,  1802;  d.  at  Sor- 
^ze  (14  m.  s.w.  of  Gastres),  department  of  Tarn, 
Nov.  21,  1861.  He  was  educated  at  Dijon,  where 
as  a  law-student  he  came  under  the  influence  of 
Rousseau's  writings  and  was  a  pronounced  deist. 
Beginning  to  practise  his  profession  in  Paris  in 
1822,  he  was  stirred  by  Lamennais'  Esaai  sur  Vivr 
diffirence,  and  within  two  years  was  convinced 
that  Christianity  was  the  indispensable  basis  of 
modem  social  life.  He  entered  the  seminary  of 
Saint-Sulpice  in  1824,  was  ordained  priest  in  1827, 
declined  the  position  of  auditor  of  the  Rota  at 
Rome  with  the  idea  of  devoting  himself  to  preach- 
ing, and  began  as  almoner  of  the  Convent  of  the 
Visitation  in  Paris  and  also,  a  little  later,  at  the 
Collie  Royal  Henri  IV.,  where  his  impatience 
with  the  old-fashioned  Qallicanism  of  the  imiver- 
sity  body  became  more  and  more  excited.  With 
Lsjnennais  and  Montalembert,  enthusiastic  over 
the  prospect  of  freedom  offered  by  the  revolution 
of  1830,  he  opened  a  school  without  seeking  the 
sanction  of  the  privileged  state  university.  It  was 
closed  by  the  police  and  its  projectors  were  fined; 
and  almost  at  the  same  time  their  newspaper 
UAvenxr  was  condemned  by  the  pope.  Lacor- 
daire  went  to  Rome  and  submitted  imcondition- 
ally.  On  his  return  to  Paris,  he  took  up  the 
defense  of  the  Church's  doctrine  in  a  course  of  pub- 
lic addresses  or  con/l^encea,  which  were  enthusias- 
tically listened  to  by  great  crowds  and  set  forth 
the  Ultramontane  view  of  history  in  its  most  daz- 
zling form.  He  now  conceived  the  idea  of  bring- 
ing back  the  Dominican  order,  banished  since  the 
Revolution,  to  France.  With  this  end  in  view,  he 
visited  Rome  again  in  1838,  and  early  in  the  next 
year  published  his  Mimaire  pour  le  rHabliasemerU 
en  France  de  Vordre  dee  Frbree  Prkheure.  With 
two  other  Frenchmen*   he  entered  the  order  on 


X«aotu&tiii* 


Yh£  NfiW  8CHAli*F-H£RZ0G 


d04 


Apr.  9,  and  after  a  novitiate  at  Santa  Haria  sopra 
Minerva,  returned  to  France,  where  he  continued 
to  command  the  greatest  popularity  as  a  preacher. 
After  the  revolution  of  1848,  he  was  elected  to  the 
National  Assembly,  but  resigned  his  seat  on  being 
censured  by  his  superiors  for  a  profession  of  repub- 
lican principles,  abandoning  also  the  publication 
of  his  newspaper  UEre  nouvdU.  In  1850  he  went 
to  Rome  to  defend  the  cause  of  the  archbishop  of 
Paris,  who  had  oondenuied  the  reactionary  news- 
paper VUniverB,  At  the  same  time  France  was 
constituted  a  separate  province  of  the  Dominican 
order,  with  Lacordaire  for  provincial.  After  the 
coup  d'Hai  of  1851  he  left  Paris,  and  preached 
there  but  once  more,  in  1853,  after  which  the  gov- 
ernment insisted  on  his  absenting  himself  from  the 
capital.  He  delivered  a  course  of  ctrnftrtnou  at 
Toulouse  in  1854,  and  then  devoted  himself  to  ed- 
ucation, first  at  Oullin  and  then  at  Sor^se,  where 
he  remained  until  his  death,  with  the  exception  of 
a  visit  to  Paris  for  his  reception  into  the  Academy. 
His  complete  works  were  published  in  Paris,  9 
vols.,  1872-73;  his  sermons  and  addresses  in  4 
vols.,  1886-88;  and  three  different  collections  of 
letters  in  1863,  1864,  and  1886.  [The  following 
have  appeared  in  Enghsh  translation:  four  volumes 
of  ConfereneeB  delivered  in  N6tre  Dame  in  Paris 
(London,  1851-72);  Life:  Cofrferenon  Ddivered  at 
Toulouse  (1873);  8t  Mary  MagdaLm  (1880);  Life 
rf  Si.  Dominie  (1883);  ThaughU  and  Teachinge  qf 
Lacordaire,  selections  (Dublin,  1892).] 

(C.  PnNDBR.) 

BxBUooBAnrr:  Liatt  of  Laoordaira's  works  and  a  long  list 
of  notioM  of  his  life  are  siven  in  the  Britidi  Mueeum 
Gatalogue.  Among  the  many  aooounta  of  hie  life  the 
beet  are  by  J.  T.  Foieeet,  Faria.  1874;  F.  Beday,  Parie. 
1862;  A.  Ouillemin,  Toun,  1862;  C.  F.  R.  de  Montalem- 
bert.  Paris,  1862,  Eng.  tranel..  London.  1878;  Dora 
Greenwell,  Edinburgh,  1867;  B.  Chooame,  Pane.  1873, 
Eng.  tranal.,  London,  1878;  H.  L.  Farrer  (H.  L.  Lear), 
ib.,  1887;  A.  de  Broglie,  Paris.  1806;  Abbe  du  Hamel,  Abbe- 
ville. 1896. 

LACTANTIUSi  lao-tan'shii78. 

I.  Life. 
II.  Works. 

The  De  Diviniu  IfUtUutUmOmM  (i  1). 
Lost  Works  (i  2). 
Doubtful  Works  (|  8). 

L  Life:  The  most  frequently  reprinted  of  the 
Latin  Fathers,  Lucius  OeBcilius  Finnianus  Laetan- 
tins,  was  probably  of  African  birth,  though  he  was 
long  thought  to  have  been  an  Italian.  Very  little 
is  Imown  of  his  life.  Jerome  asserts  {De  vir.  iU., 
Ixxx.)  that  he  was  a  pupil  of  Amobius,  called  by 
Diocletian  to  Nicomedia  as  a  teacher  of  rhetoric, 
and  forced  to  become  a  writer  by  lack  of  scholars; 
and  he  is  said  to  have  been  in  his  old  age  the  teacher 
in  Gaul  of  Crispus,  the  son  of  Constantine.  His 
having  studied  under  Amobius  is,  however,  doubt- 
ful; and  it  is  impossible  to  determine  the  date  of 
his  birth  or  whether  he  was  of  Christian  or  pagan 
parentage.  Since  Diocletian  took  up  his  perma- 
nent residence  at  Nicomedia  in  285,  the  call  of 
Lactantius  thither  was  probably  not  much  later 
than  that  date;  and  it  is  evident  from  the  De  di- 
vinU  inetUuHamlnie  (I.,  i.  8)  that  he  was  still  hold- 
ing his  office  there  at  the  beginning  of  the  perse- 
cution of  Diocletian  (Feb.  23,  303).    If  he  was  a 


Christian  at  that  time,  he  must  have  lost  the  op- 
portunity to  teach  in  that  jrear,  and  then  presum- 
ably he  took  up  his  literary  activity.  But  there 
is  no  certain  evidence  as  to  the  date  of  his  ooover- 
sion  to  Christianity  or  as  to  his  fortunes  in  the 
persecution,  assuming  that  he  was  then  a  Chris- 
tian. The  facts  which  he  describes  as  an  eye-wit^ 
ness  lead  to  the  conclusion  that  he  was  still  in 
Bithynia  in  305,  and  probably  longer.  His  so- 
journ in  Qaul  as  the  teacher  of  Criapus  (b.  Zfft) 
was  probably  before  317.  If  the  De  mortOtus  per- 
eecuiorum  was  written  by  him,  and  in  Bithynia 
(see  below,  {  3),  he  was  there  as  late  as  313. 

XL  Works:  In  the  above-cited  passage  Jeronoe 
names  twelve  works  of  Lactantius,  of  which  seven 
are  wholly  or  almost  wholly  lost.  Of  those  stiQ 
extant,  the  De  opificio  Dei  is  a  small  treatise  ad- 
dressed to  a  former  pupil  named  Demetrianus,  a 
wealthy  man  in  danger  of  deserting  his  philosoph- 
ical principles  for  a  life  of  pleasure.  The  main  pur- 
pose of  the  treatise  ib  to  determine  the  relation  be- 
tween soul  and  body.  Lactantius  shows  that  God 
has  given  reason  to  man  as  a  protection,  and  jus- 
tifies the  arrangements  of  providence  by  a  detailed 
description  of  the  structure  of  the  human  body. 
concluding  with  an  exposition  of  the  nature  of  the 
soul,  and  referring  to  a  treatise  still  to  be  written 
against  the  pagan  philosophers,  obviously  the  /»- 
MtitiUianee.  As  to  the  date  of  the  work,  it  has  been 
customary  to  draw  conclusions  from  I.,  i.  7  and  xz. 
1,  which  would  place  it  after  the  beghming  of  the 
persecution;  but  the  passages  quoted  do  not  justify 
even  such  an  approximate  decision  as  this. 

The  principal  work  of  Lactantius  is  the  De  di- 
vinie  inetitutumibua,  in  seven  books.  The  first,  De 
faUa  reUgionCf  combats  polytheism  as  the  basis  of 
aU  errors,  the  imity  of  God  being  proved  philo- 
sophically from  the  concept  of  a  So- 

X.  The  De  preme  Being  and  historicaUy  from  the 
Divinis     testimony  of  poets  and  pUlosopbers. 

Institu-     In  the  second  book,  De  arigine  ertorit, 

tionibus.  Lactantius  endeavors  to  show  that  the 
demons  are  the  source  of  error.  The 
third,  De  faha  aapientia,  shows  the  weakness  of 
philosophy,  pretending  to  unattainable  knowledge 
and  divided  into  mmierous  ccmflicting  sects;  while 
the  fourth,  De  vera  aapientia  et  reUgione,  draws  a 
contrasting  picture  of  C!hristianity.  The  three  re- 
maining books  discuss  ftmHiimftntAl  ethicsl  con- 
ceptions (v.),  the  proper  form  of  rendering  wocsh^ 
to  God  (vi.),  and  inunortality  (vii.).  The  same 
difficulty  exists  as  in  the  case  of  the  De  opifido 
about  the  determination  of  the  date;  but  it  is  a 
tenable  hypothesis  that  the  outbreak  of  the  per- 
secution, covering  a  period  of  at  least  two  years, 
lies  between  the  composition  of  the  first  four  books 
and  that  of  the  fifth,  according  to  which  tbeoiy 
the  author  found  leisure  to  continue  his  woik  only 
when  he  had  left  the  headquarters  of  the  anti- 
Christian  movement.  From  such  passages  as  V., 
xi.  15  and  VI.,  xvii.  6  it  follows  that  these  books 
were  written  not  earlier  than  305  or  later  than  the 
toleration  edict  of  Galerius  in  311.  The  Epiiame. 
or  abbreviated  form  of  the  InsHhiHanee,  was  kno^-n 
to  Jerome,  and  generally,  until  1712,  only  in  a  mr- 
tilated  form  from  which  about  one-third  was  mK^- 


306 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


XaAOtantlii* 


ing  at  the  b^giiming.  In  the  year  named  it  was 
published  by  C.  M.  Pfaff  in  full  from  a  manuscript 
discovered  by  Mafifei  at  Turin.  It  is  addressed  to 
B, /rater  Pentadvua,  possibly  Lactantius'  own  brother, 
and  offers  not  so  much  a  selection  as  a  complete 
recasting  in  briefer  form  of  the  large  work,  made, 
according  to  the  preface,  long  afterward. 

The  De  ira  Dei  treats  a  question  suggested  in 
the  InsHlutionea  (II.,  xvii.  5) — ^whether  a  personal 
affection  like  anger  may  properly  be  ascribed  to 
God.  According  to  it,  Christian  theology  presup- 
poses a  God  who  is  the  ruler  of  the  world,  and 
whom  we  must  reverence  and  fear.  Without  the 
fear  of  God,  man  would  fall  a  prey  to  his  desires, 
and  if  God  looked  upon  this  without  anger  he 
would  be  permitting  sin.  The  date  can  not  be 
more  closely  fixed  than  by  its  references  to  the  /n^ 
atitiUiones;  Brandt  places  it  in  308,  but  it  was 
more  probably  written  after  the  cessation  of  the 
persecution,  and  thus  at  least  as  late  as  311  or  312. 
Of  the  lost  works  of  Lactantius,  outside  of  a  few 
fragments,  nothing  is  known  beyond  the  titles  given 
by  Jerome.    Completely  lost  are  the  Sympoeiutn, 

the  GrammaHcus,  the  two  books  ad- 
2.  Lost  dressed  to  Asdepiades,  and  the  met- 
Works.     rical  description  of  Lactantius'  journey 

from  Africa  to  Nicomedia,  in  which  hd 
followed  a  wide-spread  literary  fashion  of  his  time. 
A  few  fragments  remain  of  the  three  collections  of 
letters  mentioned  by  Jerome,  which  seem  to  have 
been  rather  small  treatises  on  various  subjects  in 
epistolary  form  than  letters  in  the  modem  sense. 
Damasus  complains  (EpiH,  ad  Hieranymumf  in 
Jerome,  Ejnst,,  zsxv.  1)  that  they  are  long  and 
tedious,  insufficiently  representative  of  Christian 
doctrine,  and  written  too  much  in  the  tone  of  a 
pedagogue. 

To  the  works  whose  authenticity  is  doubtful 
belongs  the  treatise  which  has  been  known  since 
1679  from  a  single  manuscript  where  it  bears  the 
title  L.  CcBcilii  liber  ad   Danatum  cartfeaaorem  de 

martibua  peraecutorum.  Its  purpose  is 
3.  Doubt-  to  show  that  the  persecutors  of  Chris- 
ful  Works,  tianity  have  been  visited  by  special 

divine  judgments.  The  author  is  ap- 
parently well  informed  as  to  the  facts  he  narrates, 
though  obviously  inspired  by  bitter  hatred  of  the 
persecutors  and  disposed  to  give  credence  to  any 
current  gossip  that  suited  his  purpose.  The  book 
was  written  before  the  outbreak  of  the  Lidnian 
persecution  in  321,  and,  since  the  death  of  Dio- 
cletian (Dec.  3,  316)  is  mentioned  in  it,  not  earlier 
than  317.  The  authorship  has  been  questioned 
almost  ever  since  its  first  publication — in  recent 
times  most  vigorously  by  Brandt;  but  conclusive 
grounds  for  denying  the  Lactantian  authorship 
have  not  yet  been  presented.  The  following  facts 
have  weight  in  the  discussion:  the  style  shows  both 
resemblances  to  and  differences  from  that  of  Lac- 
tantius, and  is  thus  inconclusive;  tradition,  from 
Jerome  down,  is  favorable  to  Lactantius;  the 
author  evidently  was  in  Nicomedia  during  the  per- 
secution, and  states  the  facts  fairly,  though  making 
his  own  selection  of  them;  he  was  evidently  a  man 
of  position,  from  the  way  in  which  he  gives  impor- 
tant people  as  his  authorities.    The  hypothesis  of 


a  literary  forgery  presents  too  many  difficulties, 
while  there  is  nothing  in  the  known  facts  of  Lac- 
tantius' life  which  militates  against  the  acceptance 
of  his  authorship,  since  the  date  of  his  leaving  Nico- 
media is  imsettled.  The  poem  De  ave  phomice  Is 
a  version  of  the  old  phenix  legend,  written  by  a 
Christian,  as  is  shown  in  the  conclusion,  where  the 
phenix  comes  to  symbolize  Christ  in  his  resurrec- 
tion. There  are  resemblances  in  diction  between 
this  and  the  prose  works  of  Lactantius,  who  is 
known  (see  above,  {  2)  to  have  written  verses;  and 
since  the  manuscripts  ascribe  it  definitely  to  him, 
there  is  no  reason  for  doubting  this  attribution,  in 
spite  of  the  fact  that  Jerome  does  not  include  it  in 
his  list.  Two  other  poems  sometimes  attributed 
to  Lactantius  are  now  known  not  to  be  his:  that 
entitled  De  reeurrectUme  or  De  pascha  is  by  Venan- 
tius  Fortimatus  (see  Fortunatus),  and  of  the  De 
paeeione  Domini,  first  published  in  the  AMine  edi- 
tion of  1515,  no  manuscript  has  yet  been  found,  so 
that  it  may  possibly  be  a  Renaissance  forgery. 

All  the  works  of  Lactantius  bear  the  marks  of 
his  rhetorical  profession.  They  »re  pleasant  read- 
ing, and  successfully  imitate  the  best  classical 
models  in  style,  showing  a  wide  range  of  historical 
and  antiquarian  knowledge  and  frequently  citing 
the  classical  poets  and  philosophers.  These  en- 
dowments, however,  which  won  for  Lactantius 
from  Pico  della  Mirandola  the  title  of  the  Christian 
Cicero,  are  less  valued  to-day  than  those  of  such 
technically  inferior  authors  as  Tertullian  and  Au-  . 
gustine.  As  a  theologian  he  has  small  importance. 
Becoming,  as  it  seems,  a  Christian  only  in  his  ma- 
ture years,  he  never  fully  penetrated  the  deeper 
religious  spirit  of  his  new  faith.  In  Brandt's  edi- 
tion the  index  of  his  quotations  from  classical 
authors  fills  twenty-four  pages,  against  four  for 
those  from  the  Scriptures;  and  of  the  latter  most 
are  given  on  Cyprian's  authority.  His  main  theo- 
logical content  is  siunmed  up  in  the  belief  in  God 
as  the  Creator  of  the  world  and  in  the  power  of  the 
new  law  given  by  Christ,  the  following  of  which 
frees  men  from  sin  and  its  penalty.  He  was  not 
touched  by  the  Christological  controversy,  and  his 
eschatology  is  a  reproduction  of  the  old  millenar 
nan  teaching.  In  a  word,  Lactantius  does  not  be- 
long to  the  really  great  men  of  the  early  Church; 
but  with  all  his  superficiality  he  stands  out  as  an 
attractive  personality,  followed  as  a  leader  by  a 
great  many  in  his  own  and  later  ages. 

(Erwin  Prbusghen.) 
Bxbuooraprt:  Literature  on  the  subject  is  to  be  found  in 
ANF,  Bibliography,  pp.  77-^1;  KrOger,  Hutory,  pp. 
307-317;  Potthast,  WegvoeUer,  p.  703;  J.  M.  Baldwin, 
DidAonary  of  Phiioaophy  and  Ptyeholooy,  iii  1,  p.  325. 
New  York,  1906.  The  Opera  of  Lactantius  have  been 
frequently  printed,  eighty-six  editions  being  known 
1461-1739.  Among  the  best  issues  are  those  by  O.  F. 
Fritssohe,  2  vols.,  Leipsic,  1842-44,  in  MPL,  vi.-vii., 
and  in  CSEL,  xix.,  xxvii.,  parts  1-2,  Vienna,  1890-^. 
Eng.  transl.  with  introductory  notice  is  in  ANF,  vii. 
1-328.  Accounts  of  the  life,  so  far  as  known,  are  usually 
found  in  the  prolegomena  to  the  editions  of  the  Opera. 
Consult:  R.  Pichon,  Lactanee,  Paris,  1903  (an  important 
contribution  to  the  subject);  P.  Bertold,  Prolegomena  eu 
LadanHuM,  Metten,  1861;  S.  Brandt,  Ueber  daa  Leben  det 
LaetanUut,  Vienna,  1890;  C.  £.  Freppel,  Commodian,  Amo- 
biut,  LadanHtu,  Paris,  1893;  A.  Mandni,  in  Studi  etoriei, 
u  (1893).  444  sqq. 
On  his  writings  and  phaaee  of  hia  work  consult:    B. 


X«aotlolnl« 
XittffardA 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


396 


Mountain,  Summeay  of  (ka  Writino*  i4  LoeConlitM,  Lon- 
don, 1839;  C.  LeuiUier.  ElMdm  mr  Ladanet  apolotfuU, 
Caen,  184d;  C.  F.  Jacob,  Lactanc$  eontideri  eomitm  apo- 
logUtt,  Straabuic  1848:  E.  Overlach,  Dia  TK§oloffi$  dst 
LadanUuB,  Sohwvrin,  1858;  T.  llOUw,  QumtHomt  Lac- 
tantianm,  QAttinfen,  1875;  H.  E.  Heinig,  Die  Ethik  det 
LaetanHu;  Grimma,  1887;  A.  Ebert,  AUotnmns  G«- 
Bekida$  dm  Ltfaralur  dm  MUUUUUn,  i.  72  aqq..  Leipne. 
1889:  F.  Harbaoh.  Dm  Ptyekoiooit  det  LaeianHua,  HaUa. 
188Q;  J.  Belnr,  in  TQ,  Izxir  (1802),  246-293,  439-464; 
P.  G.  Frotaehar,  Dm-  ApoUtgtt  LadafUiua  in  atiiMm  Vtr^ 
KiOtniB  gur  gnsekiadten  Pkiloaopkis,  Leipoic,  1896;  Ceil- 
liar.  Auleun  meria,  iL  494-621;  Behaff,  Chriatian  ChurtK, 
U.  966-968:  Harnaok,  Dogma,  i.-v.  paanm;  DCS,  iiL 
613-617;  and  in  ■•naral.  worka  on  tha  church  history 
of  tha  third  and  fourth  centuries  and  on  tha  history  of 
doctrine. 

LACTICnnA:  LiteraUy  "  milk  foods,"  i.e.  arti- 
cles of  food  which  are  the  product  of  an  animal,  as 
distinguished  from  its  flesh,  such  as  milk,  butter, 
lard,  cheese,  and  egga.  At  an  early  period  it  be- 
came customary  to  abstain  on  fasting-days,  espe- 
cially in  Lent,  not  only  from  meat,  but  from  other 
foods.  The  Synod  of  Laodicea  (between  343  and 
381)  restricted  the  food  taken  during  Lent  to  xero- 
phagy,  or  bread,  herbs,  salt,  and  water,  this  being 
confirmed  by  the  Trullan  Council  of  692,  which 
expressly  forbade  eggs  and  cheese,  and  punished 
violation  by  the  deposition  of  priests  and  the  ex- 
communication of  laymen.  In  the  Greek  Church, 
especially  in  the  Russian  branch,  abstinence  from 
tfa«  lacticinia  begins  with  the  end  of  ''  cheese- 
week,"  which  extends  from  Sexagesima  to  Quin- 
quagesima. 

In  the  West  the  custom  of  abstinence  from  the 
lacticinia  on  fasting-days  developed  at  an  early 
date,  although  the  rule  was  not  as  rigid  as  in  the 
East.  It  was  recommended  from  Rome,  however, 
in  the  sixth  or  seventh  century,  and  was  confirmed 
by  synods  after  the  ninth  century,  which  subse- 
quently forbade  the  eating  of  the  lacticinia.  Thomas 
Aquinas  states  that  this  abstinence  was  custom- 
ary in  his  time,  and  it  was  finally  established  by 
Alexander  VII.  on  Mar.  18,  1666.  From  Lent  the 
prohibition  of  lacticinia  extended  to  other  fast- 
days,  as  .is  shown  by  papal  dispensations  for  the 
dioceses  of  Cologne  and  Treves  (1344),  and  for  the 
landgravate  of  Meissen  (1485).  Dispensations  were 
also  granted  for  the  eating  of  lacticinia  in  Lent, 
particularly  in  the  North,  and  the  power  of  such 
dispensation  is  now  generally  placed  in  the  hands 
of  the  bishops  at  their  quinquennial  faculties,  the 
exact  extent  to  which  lacticinia  may  be  eaten  being 
determined  annually  by  a  papal  indult. 

(P.  HlNBCHIUSt.) 

LACT,  JOHN.    See  French  Prophet8. 

LADD,  GEORGE  TRXTMBIJLL:  Congregation- 
alist;  b.  at  Painesville,  O.,  Jan.  19,  1842.  He  was 
graduated  at  Western  Reserve  College  in  1864  and 
at  Andover  Theological  Seminary  in  1869.  After 
acting  as  supply  at  Edinburg,  O.,  1869-71,  he  was 
pastor  of  Spring  Street  (Congregational  Church, 
Milwaukee,  Wis.,  1871-79,  professor  of  mental  and 
moral  philosophy  in  Bowdoin  College  1879-81,  and 
from  1881  to  1906  held  a  corresponding  chair  at 
Yale.  In  1879-81  he  lectured  on  church  polity 
and  systematic  theology  at  Andover  Theological 
Seminary,  and  in  1895-96  had  charge  of  the  grad- 


uate seminar  in  ethics  at  Harvard,  where  he  b^ 
lectured  repeatedly.  He  has  also  lectured  in  Jaf^c 
(1892,  1899,  1906),  and  in  India  (as  Haskell  lec- 
turer of  the  University  of  Chicago,  1899-1900i. 
He  has  written:  Prineiplea  of  Church  Polity  {S^ 
York,  1882);  The  Doctrine  of  Sacred  Seripture  il 
vols.,  1884);  EUmenU  of  Phynoloffieal  Psydtolog^ 
(1887);  Whai  is  the  Bttdef  (1888);  Iniroduction  Uj 
Philoeophy  (1889);  Oidlinee  of  Phynoiogical  P^i- 
cAotojfy  (1890);  PhUoeophy  of  Mind  {lS/9\y,  Prim^ 
of  Paydtoiogy  (1894);  Psychology,  DeacripHm  and 
Explanatory  (1894);  Philosophy  of  Ktwwled^ 
(1897);  Outlines  of  DescripUve  Psychology  (18^ 
Essays  on  the  Higher  EdtuxUion  (1899);  A  Thear, 
of  RealUy  (1899);  PhOosophy  of  Conduct  (19CrJ  ; 
Philosophy  (^  Religion  (2  vols.,  1905);  and  h 
Korea  with  Marquis  Ito  (1908).  He  has  also  traix^ 
lated  several  works  of  R.  H.  Lotae,  inc^luding  Ch:- 
lines  of  the  Philosophy  of  Religion  (Boston,  1885). 

LAEMMER,  HUGO:  German  Roman  CathoLr 
b.  at  AUenstein  (65  m.  s.  of  KOnigBberg),  Esf: 
Prussia,  Jan.  25,  1835.  In  his  early  life  a  Luthenc 
he  was  educated  at  the  universities  of  Kdn^sbm 
Leipsic  (Ph.D.,  1854),  and  Berlin  (lie.  theoL,  18orj 
In  1857  he  became  privat-dooent  in  Berlin  ai^i  r 
1857-58  studied  in  Italy.  He  was  received  int. 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church  at  Braiinsberg  in  l^,. 
immediately  entered  the  theological  saninan 
there,  and  in  1859  was  ordained  to  the  prieslhoor: 
after  which  he  continued  his  studies  at  Rome  Ur 
two  years,  being  appointed  missionarius  apostdir^ 
in  1861.  Returning  to  Germany,  he  was  subdir»s 
tor  of  the  Seminary  at  Braunsberg  for  two  yes^^. 
and  then  consultor  to  the  Ck>ngregation  of  the  Pn^- 
aganda  in  Rome  for  a  year.  In  1864  he  was  s> 
pointed  professor  of  moral  theology  at  Braunsberr 
and  later  in  the  same  year,  despite  the  protests  >c 
the  Protestant  faculty,  became  professor  of  doi;- 
matic  theology  in  the  Roman  C!atbolic  faculty  d 
the  University  of  Breslau.  Shortly  afterward,  br 
was  created  oonsistorial  ooimselor,  pros3rnodal  ex- 
aminer, and  episcopal  penitentiary.  He  was  m^v- 
an  honorary  member  of  the  DoktorenooUegium  of 
the  theological  faculty  of  the  University  of  VienBa 
in  1865,  and  in  1882  was  created  a  prothonoUrv 
prelate.  He  is  also  a  privy  counselor  and  is  nov 
professor  of  church  history  and  canon  law  in  Bres- 
lau and  a  canon  of  Breslau.  In  addition  to  edit- 
ing Anselm's  Cur  Dsus  Homo  (Berlin,  1857);  tbe 
"Ecclesiastical  History"  of  Eusebius  (2  vob, 
Schafifhausen,  1859-62);  and  Scriptorum  Greeds 
orthodoxa  IMiotheca  sdeda,  t.  (Freiburg,  1864),  be 
has  written:  Clementis  AlexanMni  de  logo  dodrina 
(Berlin,  1855);  Papst  Nikolaus  der  Ersie  und  d-^ 
hytantinische  Staatskirche  seiner  ZeU  (1857);  Ik 
theologia  romano-cathoHca,  qua  r^ormaiandm  aelale 
viguit,  antelridentina  (1857);  Die  vortridentimsch- 
katholische  Theologie  des  Reformations-ZeitaUers  au£ 
den  QueUen  dargesteUt  (a  translation  of  the  prece- 
ding work,  1858);  Analeda  Romana,  kirdtenge- 
schichUiche  Forschungen  in  rdmischen  BtbUotheken 
und  Archiven  (Schaffhausen,  1861);  Misericordias 
Domini  (an  autobiography,  Freiburg,  1861);  Mon- 
umenta  Vatieana  historiam  ecdesiastioam  saculi 
sexti  decimi  iUustrantia   (1861);     Zur   Kirehaigt- 


807 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


lAotloiniA 
LAvanto 


achichte  det  sechzehtUen  und  nebMehnien  Jahrhun' 
derts  (1863);  De  Leonxs  AUalii  oodieibus  qui  Roma 
in  bibliotheea  Vallicellana  asMTvafilur  (1864);  In 
decreta  concUii  Rvthenorum  Zamo9cieruia  animadr 
versiones  theologuxhcanomcaB  (1865);  Ccdestia  tarhs 
JeruadUm  (1866);  MeUtemaJtum  Bomanorum  man- 
ti89a  (1876);  De  martyrologio  Romano  (1878);  In- 
stihUionen  dea  kaihoUachen  Kirehenrechta  (1886); 
and  De  Casaris  Baronii  literarum  commerdo  (1903). 

LJETKKB  SUNDAY:  The  fourth  Sunday  in 
Lent,  so  called  from  the  first  word  of  the  introit  of 
the  mass,  IcBtare,  **  rejoice  ";  it  is  also  called  Do- 
minica de  roea,  because  the  day  selected  by  the 
pope  for  the  blessing  of  the  Golden  Rose  (q.v.). 

LA6ARDE,  la'^gOrd',  PAUL  ANTOH  DB:  Ger- 
man Orientalist;  b.  at  Berlin  Nov.  2,  1827;  d.  at 
GOttingen  Dec.  22,  1891.  His  family  name  was 
Bdtticher,  for  which  in  1854  he  substituted  La- 
garde,  the  name  of  a  grand-aunt  who  bad  part  in 
his  early  education.  He  studied  at  Berlin  1844-46, 
and  at  Halle  1846-47,  again  at  Berlin  1847-49; 
became  privat-docent  at  Halle  1851;  traveled  in 
the  interest  of  philosophical  studies  to  London 
and  Paris  1852-53;  passed  the  next  jrear  at  Halle; 
taught  school  at  Berlin  1854-66;  under  a  grant 
from  the  king  spent  two  and  a  half  years  in  work 
upon  the  Septuagint;  was  called  as  professor  of 
oriental  languages  to  Gdttingen  in  succession  to 
Ewald  1869,  and  labored  there  till  his  death. 

Judgments  of  Lagarde  have  varied  greatly.  His 
nature  was  undoubtedly  erratic,  and  hardships  and 
misunderstandings  embittered  his  life.  He  has 
been  characterized  as  a  prophet,  who  raised  his 
voice  against  abuses  in  Church  and  State,  educa- 
tion and  worship,  society  and  culture.  It  did  not 
disturb  him  in  the  least  that  his  voice  was  often 
that  of  one  crying  in  the  wilderness.  He  was  also 
a  poet,  and  several  of  his  compositions  have 
found  place  in  popular  collections.  His  political 
activity  may  be  dismissed  with  the  mere  mention, 
though  it  was  by  no  means  least  characteristic. 
But  whatever  may  be  thought  of  his  activity  in 
other  fields,  his  importance  in  the  world  of  scholar- 
ship is  unquestionable.  His  knowledge  of  Oriental 
languages  was  monumental;  he  was  master  of 
Arabic,  Aramaic,  Armenian,  Coptic,  Hebrew,  Per- 
sian, Syriac,  and  other  Eastern  tongues,  and  thus 
was  enabled  to  do  work  in  comparative  linguistics 
which  almost  no  other  has  been  fitted  to  carry  out. 
This  profound  erudition  he  gave  to  the  service  of 
the  Old  and  the  New  Testament  and  to  patristics, 
using  it  in  the  careful  editing  of  texts,  which  he 
carried  through  with  a  thoroughness  producing  in- 
tense satisfaction  among  scholars  and  causing  great 
regret  that  his  life  could  not  have  been  spared  to 
complete  some  of  the  works  which  he  only  com- 
menced. This  is  especially  true  of  his  labors  upon 
the  text  of  the  Septuagint  (Librorum  Veteris  Tes- 
tamenti  canonicorum,  para  t.,  QrtBce^  Gdttingen, 
1883).  He  left  his  property  to  the  Royal  Society 
of  Gdttingen.  A  supplementary  fund  has  been 
raised  to  his  memory,  devoted  to  the  edition  of 
works  belonging  to  the  culture  of  the  Middle  Ages, 
ecclesiastical  texts  and  scholastic  writings,  and 
Semitic  literature.    Through  the  mediation  of  Paul 


Haupt  his  library  was  bought  by  the  University  of 
the  City  of  New  York. 

Lacarde'a  literary  actiyitiM  were  jmrnenee.  R.  J.  H. 
Qottbei]  has  published  an  incomplete  bibliography  {Pro- 
emdino9  of  Qis  American  OrisrUal  Society,  1892,  pp.  ccxi.- 
ecxzix.),  which  includes  297  publications.  Almost  all 
of  Lasarde's  works  were  published  at  his  own  expense. 
Among  those  which  he  edited  or  wrote  the  following  are  note- 
worthy: HormAramaieaB  (Berlin,  1847);  Rudimenta  mytholofficB 
SemiHea  wupplementa  lexici  Aramaiici  (1848);  Arica  (Halle, 
1861);  Epi^lm  Novi  TeetamenH  CopUcB  (1862);  Didae- 
ealia  apoetoUnrum  Syriaee  (Leipsic,  1864);  Zur  UrgetehidUe 
der  Armenier  (1864);  Ae/iguMS  jurU  eceleeioMHci  ardi^ie- 
tiirus  Syriaee,  Orwee  (2  parts,  1866).  Analecta  Syriaca, 
appendix  Arabica  (2  parts,  1868);  Hippolyti  Romani  qua 
feruntur  omnia  Orwee  (1868);  TiH  Boatreni  eontra  Mani- 
ehaot  libri  quatuor  Syriaee  (Berlin,  1869);  TUi  Bottreni 
qua  ax  opere  eontra  Manichaoe  in  Codiee  Hamburgenei 
tervata  eunt  Qrace;  aecedunt  luHi  Romani  epittula  et 
Qregarii  ThaumaJturgi  ^mrk  Mpet  wlene  (1869);  Oeoponi- 
eon  in  mrmonem  Syriacum  verBorum  qua  »uper»uni  (Leip- 
sic, 1860);  Clementit  Romani  recognitione9  Syriaee  (1861); 
lAbri  Veterie  TMHamenti  apoeryphi  Syriaee  (1861);  Con- 
MtUutionea  apoelolorum  Grace  (1862);  Anmerkungen  gur 
orieekieehen  UeberaeUung  der  Proverbien  (1863);  Die  vier 
Evan^fditn  au§  der  Wiener  Handedurift  herauegegeben  (1864); 
Clementina  (1866);  OeaammeUe  Abhandlungen  (1866);  Der 
Pentateuch  Koptiach  (1867);  Materialen  eur  OeechicfUe  und 
KritUe  dee  Penlaieueh  (1867);  Oeneeie  Grace  (1868);  Hier- 
onymi  qweetionee  Hebraiea  in  libro  Geneaie  (1868);  Bei- 
trAge  sur  baktriadien  Lexicographie  (1868);  Onomaetioa  eaera 
((Sdttingen,  1872);  Prophela  Chaldaiee  (Leipsic,  1872); 
Hagiographa  Chaldaiee  (1872);  Pealterium  juxta  Hebraoe 
Hieronymi  (1874);  Peaimi  1-A»  Arahioe  in  ueum  seAofanim 
(1876);  PeaUerii  vereio  Memphitiea  (Gdttingen,  1876); 
Pealterium,  Job,  Proverbia  Arabiee  (1876);  Armeniedie 
Studien  (1878);  Symmida  (2  vols..  1877-60);  Semiiica  (2 
parts,  1878-79);  Deuteche  Sdiriften  (1878;  4th  complete 
ed.,  with  portrait,  1903);  Prater  mieeorum  libri  duo  (1879); 
Orientalia  (2  parts,  1879-80);  Aue  dem  deutechen  Oeldtrten- 
leben  (1880);  Veterie  Teetamenti  ab  Origene  reeeneiti  frag- 
menta  apud  Syroe  eervata  quinque  (1880);  Die  lateiniechen 
Vebereeleungen  dee  Ignatiue  (1882);  AnkUndigung  einer 
neuen  Auegabe  der  griechiechen  Udmreeteung  dee  A.  T. 
(1882);  lAbrorum  Veterie  Teetamenti  eammieorum,  pare  i., 
Gr€Bce  (1883);  luda  Harieii  maeama  Hebraiee  (1883); 
Petri  Hiepani  {Pedro  de  Aleala)  de  lingua  Arabiea  libri  duo 
(1883);  Pereieche  Studien  (1884);  MittheUungen  (4  vols., 
1884-91);  Probe  einer  neuen  Auegabe  der  kUeiniechen  Ueber- 
eeleungen  dee  A.  T.  (1886);  Die  revidierte  LuOterbibd  dee 
haUeeehen  Waieehhaueee,  beeprodien  (1886);  Catena  in 
eeangdia  Jigyptiaea  qua  eupereunt  (1886);  Brinnerungen 
an  Friedrieh  BUekert  (1886);  I^eurGriediieehee  aue  Klein- 
Aeien  (1886);  Juden  und  Indogennanen  (1887);  Purim; 
ein  Beitrag  eur  Geechiehte  der  Rdigion  (1887);  Agathangdue 
und  die  Akien  Oregore  von  Armenien,  neu  herauegegd)en 
(1887);  G.  Bruno,  Opere  italiane,  rietampate  da  P,  de  La- 
garde  (2  vols.,  1888);  UdtereidU  Hher  die  im  AramOiechen, 
Arabiedien,  und  HebrAiedien  Hbliche  BUdung  der  Nomina 
(1889);  Ueber  einige  Berliner  Theologen  und  wae  von  ihnen 
eu  lemen  iet  (1890);  Altee  und  Neuee  fiber  doe  WeihnadUe- 
feet  (1891);  Septuaointa-Studien  (2  parts,  1891-«2);  Bib- 
liotheea Syriaca  (1892).  A  collected  edition  of  his  G^ 
didUe  was  issued  by  his  wife  (Gdttingen,  1897). 

E.  Nkstle. 

Biblioorapht:  Autobiographic  material  is  found  in  his 
MitieUungen,  iii.  34  sqq.;  Symmieta,  I  227-232;  in  hia 
edition  of  the  Greek  O.  T.,  pp.  642-644.  Besides  the 
bibliography  of  Gottheil,  ut  sup.,  8.  R.  Driver  noticed 
several  of  Lagarde'a  works  in  the  Contemporary  Review, 
March,  1889.  Nestle  has  in  hand  a  complete  bibliography 
of  Lagarde'a  writings.  The  one  biography  of  note  ia  by 
hia  wife,  Anna  de  Lagarde,  Paul  de  Laooarde;  Erinnerung- 
en  aue  eeinem  Leben  fOr  die  Freunde,  GAtUngen.  1894. 
The  oration  at  the  burial,  by  U.  von  Wilamowits-Mdllen- 
dorf,  is  reproduced  in  the  latter's  Reden  und  Vortr&ge,  pp. 
90-96,  117,  Berlin,  1901;  a  memorial  oration  by  J.  Weli- 
hausen  is  in  Gdttinger  Gelehrte  NaehridUen,  1894,  pp.  49 
sqq.  Later  aketches  are:  E.  Wolff,  Paul  de  Lagarde, 
Kiel,  1892;  K.  Albrecht.  Paul  de  Lagarde,  Berlin,  1901; 
E.  Platshoff-Lejeune.  Paul  de  Lagarde,  ib.  1903.  Maga- 
sine  articles  are:    A.  Neubauer,  in   Athenaum,  Jan.  9, 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


808 


1802;  O.  F.  HooTO,  in  Andover  Review,  Feb.  1802;  W. 
Muse-Anolt,  in  CknaHan  InitUiffmusmr,  M«reh  2,  1802; 
further  literature  of  this  kind  is  indicated  in  Richardson, 
EneifeUfpasdia,  p.  000. 

LAI1I£Z,  lai-neth'  (LATNEZ),  IA60  (DIBOO): 
Spanish  Jesuit;  b.  at  Almasan  (95  m.  n.e.  of  Ma- 
drid),  Castile,  1512;  d.  at  Rome  Jan.  19,  1565. 
After  graduating  at  the  University  of  Aloila.  he 
went  to  Paris  in  1533,  joined  Ignatius  Loyohi  there, 
and  was  one  of  the  six  young  men  who,  with  Ignar 
tius,  took  the  vows  of  the  society  in  the  church  of 
Montmartre  Aug.  15,  1534.  For  many  years  he 
preached  in  Italian  cities  in  the  interest  of  the  new 
movement,  was  provincial  for  Italy  1552-^54,  and 
on  the  death  of  Ignatius,  in  1556,  he  became  the 
head  of  the  society  as  vicar-genend.  In  1558  he 
was  elected  general.  During  the  eight  yean  of  his 
shrewd  leadership  he  greatly  extended  the  work  and 
influence  of  the  society.  As  the  meet  prominent 
papal  theologian  at  the  Council  of  Trent  he  exer- 
cised a  direct  influence  on  the  history  of  the  Ro- 
man Church  by  his  defense  of  papal  infallibility, 
and  of  papal  views  in  general.  So  important  a 
factor  was  he  in  the  council  that  frequently,  when 
he  was  prevented  by  illness  from  attend^,  the 
sitting  was  postponed  till  he  could  be  present.  In 
1561  he  took  a  leading  part  in  the  Conference  of 
Poissy  between  the  Roman  Catholics  and  the  Hu- 
guenots. He  published  no  important  work.  H. 
Grisar  has  edited  his  DiaputatianeB  Tridentina  (2 
vols.,  Innsbruck,  1886). 

Bibuoobapht:  As  sources  the  early  liTes  by  11.  d'Esne, 
Douai,  1697.  P.  de  Ribadeneira  (in  French).  Douai*  1697 
(and  in  Latin).  Cologne.  1604,  and  by  F.  Dilarino  (pseu- 
donym), Rome,  1672,  are  to  be  consulted.  Modem  lives 
are  by  J.  Boero.  Pkris,  1894;  H.  Mtiller.  Lm  OriffinM  ds 
la  eompaonis  de  Jieue;  Ignace  et  Lainee,  ib.  1898;  cf.  KL, 
vii,  1666-67. 

LATTT:  The  body  of  non-clerical  members  of 
the  Christian  oonununity.  The  designation  is 
foreign  to  the  very  early  Church  (cf.  Gal.  iii.  26- 
28)  [though  the  distinction  between  priests  and 
people  was  clearly  marked  among  the  Hebrews]. 
The  term  arose  when  the  officers  of  the  congr^a- 
tion  became  prominent,  and  when  that  develop- 
ment began  which  culminated  in  the  monarchical 
episcopacy.  The  expression  first  occurs,  as  applied 
to  the  congregation  in  the  First  Epistle  of  Clement 
(ANF,  i.  16),  denoting,  as  in  the  body  politic,  the 
subjects  in  contrast  with  the  rulers,  the  clergy. 
At  the  head  of  the  clergy  stood  the  bishop,  who 
appointed  the  rest  of  the  cleigy,  and  installed  them 
in  office  by  the  act  of  ordination.  All  ceremonial 
functions  were  reserved  for  the  cleigy  and  forbid- 
den to  laymen.  If  these  principles  be  viewed  in 
the  light  of  the  Apostolic  Age,  they  indicate  an 
enormous  innovation,  a  total  revolution  of  condi- 
tions in  the  congregation.  Indeed,  for  a  good 
while  longer  expressions,  views,  and  privileges  still 
appear  that  had  survived  from  the  earlier  age,  and 
were  gradually  weeded  out  as  being  incompatible 
with  the  Church  episcopal.  For  example,  the 
designation  of  the  congregation  as  brotherhood 
(Gk.  addphoU8)f  which  reflects  the  view  of  the 
primitive  Church,  was  long  in  use.  The  right  of 
laymen  to  baptise  was  restricted,  ^even  from  Ter- 
tuUian's  time,  to  baptism  in  case  (k  necessity  (see 
Baptism,  III.  4);    and  sermons  by  laymen  prac- 


tically ceased  in  the  third  century,  though  it  should 
be  added  that  provision  for  lay  preaching  was  made 
by  the  Apostolic  Constitutions  (viii.  32).  For  a 
layman  to  preach  in  the  presence  of  a  bishop  was 
particularly  objectionable  (cf.  Eusebius,  Hitt.  eed,, 
vi.  10).*  The  laity's  distinctive  right  continued  to 
be  the  election  of  the  bishop;  though  this,  too,  be- 
came gradually  circumscribed  through  the  coopera- 
tion of  the  other  bishops  of  the  province,  and 
through  the  rights  of  the  metropolitan.  Similarly, 
the  congregation  originally  had  the  right  to  depose 
the  bishop  in  case  of  grave  shortcomings — a  pre- 
rogative still  exercised  in  Cyprian's  time,  though 
contested  as  early  as  by  the  Roman  Bishop  Calix- 
tus  I.  (d.  222).  The  cleigy 's  battle  against  ancient 
rights  of  laymen  is  shown  in  an  interesting  way  by 
the  Syriac  Dvda&caLia  (cf.  TU^  new  ser.,  x.  2,  pp. 
274  sqq.),  the  particular  issue  here  being  the  right 
of  absolution.  The  same  Didaaoaiia  shows  the 
laity  grouped  in  classes,  having  their  separate  places 
in  public  worship— old  men  and  young  men,  M 
women,  yotmg  women  and  maidens  (TU,  x.  2,  pp. 
68-69).  The  Canonu  HippolyH  (TU,  vi.  4,  p.  110) 
give  special  directions  to  laymen  with  reference  to 
their  behavior  at  the  agape.  H.  Acheus. 

A  word  may  be  added  regarding  lay  representa- 
tion.    Nearly  all  the  Evangelical  parties  in  Europe 

^  In  enewer  to  the  complaint  of  Demetrius  of  Alexmodrie 
the  biihopa  of  Gecaiea  and  Jeniaelem  wrote  that  **  wbea- 
ever  persons  able  to  instruct  the  brethren  are  found,  tfaer 
are  exhorted  by  the  holy  bishops  to  prsadi  to  the  people. 
Thus  in  Laranda  Luelpis  was  asked  by  Neon,  at  looninm, 
Paulinus  by  Celsus,  and  at  Smyrna  Theodore  by  AttictB." 
Missionary  work  was  frequently  undertaken  and  churches 
established  by  laymen,  as  in  Abyssinia  (fourth  century)  by 
Frumentius  and  Aedesius,  younc  Tyrian  capttTes  (SoeratMw 
Hitt.  ecel.,  I  10).  An  imperial  law  (304)  prohibited  lmym*D 
from  disoussinc  religious  questions  in  publia  Pdpe  Leo  L 
sought  to  curb  Nestorian  and  Eutychian  error  by  urvng  the 
exclusion  from  the  teaohing  and  preaching  offiee  of  mooiu 
and  lasrmen  (463).  Frequent  prohibitions  of  lay  pveaehing 
in  the  subsequent  time  indicate  imperfect  obeervmnoe  of 
papal  and  imperial  orders.  (Charlemagne  forbade  even  the 
recitation  of  the  lesson  in  church  by  a  layman.  It  is  probable 
that  most  of  the  prohibitions  of  lay  activity  were  directed 
against  heretical  teaching  and  that  any  sealous  layman  in 
sympathy  with  the  hierarchy  oould  at  any  time  have  aeeured 
permission  to  exercise  his  gifts.  The  multiplicatkm  d 
grades  of  dergy  (subdeacons,  readers,  exordsta.  acolytes 
sextons,  etc.)  resulted  from  the  growth  of  the  saoerdotal 
idea  in  accordance  with  which  even  the  mora  external 
and  mechanical  duties  in  connection  with  church  services 
must  be  performed  by  functionaries  duly  consecrated,  and 
involved  the  exclusion  of  the  laity  from  active  particspattoa 
in  church  work.  With  the  growth  of  monastioism  and  the 
decline  in  the  efficiency  of  the  secular  dergy,  most  of  the 
preaching  and  missionary  work  of  the  medieval  time  was 
done  by  unordained  monks. 

Medieval  Evangelical  parties,  like  the  Waldenses.  insisted 
upon  freedom  of  preaching  and  ***^^*«g  Peter  Waldo  was 
himself  a  layman.  Men  and  women  alike  who  were  received 
into  the  inner  drde  of  the  sodety  fredy  evangelised.  Yet 
when  the  party  completed  its  organisation  there  was  a  dear 
line  of  demarcation  between  the  "  Poor  Men  "  or  Perfect! 
who  renounced  property  and  family  relations  and  devoted 
themselves  excluMvdy  to  evangelism  and  the  *'  Friends '' 
of  the  evangelists  who  lived  in  the  world,  and  supported 
the  latter  in  their  religious  work.  All  the  Evangelicel  par- 
ties of  the  sixteenth  century  (Lutherans,  Zwinglians,  Csl- 
vinists,  and  Anabaptists)  strongly  reasserted  the  doctrine  of 
the  univemal  priesthood  of  bdievere.  and  restriction  was 
put  upon  lay  teaching  and  preaching  only  so  far  as  seemed 
necessary  in  the  interest  of  good  order  and  sound  teaching. 
At  present  the  utmost  freedom  is  given  to  lay  effort  by  all 
Evrjigelical  parties. — A.  H.  N. 


800 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Zialnes 


and  America  now  make  provision  for  lay  represen- 
tation in  their  general  meetings  (synods,  confer- 
ences, conventions,  etc.)<  In  Germany  and  in  Eng- 
land State  control  involves  the  preponderance  of 
lay  authority.  In  the  disestablished  Episcopal 
Church  of  Ireland  lay  representation  is  provided 
for.  In  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the 
United  States  three  lay  del^ates  from  each  church 
participate  in  the  diocesan  conventions,  and  each 
diocesan  convention  sends  four  lay  delegates  to  the 
general  convention  (with  an  equal  number  of  cler- 
ical delegates),  which  legislates  for  the  entire  body. 
The  Reformed  bodies  of  the  Presbyterian  type 
amply  provide  for  lay  representation  in  the  ruling 
elders,  appointed  for  life,  who  participate  with  the 
ministers  in  the  presbytery  and  in  the  graduated 
synodical  meetings  that  culminate  in  the  general 
assembly.  Original  Wesleyanism  made  no  pro- 
vision for  lay  representation.  A  growing  and  in- 
sistent demand  for  it  led  to  controversies  and 
schisms.  It  was  adopted  in  a  limited  measure, 
after  years  of  discussion  and  thorough  testing  of  the 
sentiments  of  the  constituency,  by  the  Methodist 
Episcopal  Church  of  the  United  States  in  1872. 
A  still  more  liberal  representation  (equal  to  the 
ministerial)  had  been  accorded  to  laymen  by  the 
Methodist  Episcopal  Church  South  in  1866  and  put 
in  full  operation  in  1870.  All  the  Anglo-American 
congregational  bodies  (Congregationalists,  Baptists, 
Disciples,  Unitarians,  Universalists,  etc.)  have  al- 
ways accorded  equality  of  privileges  in  general 
meetings  to  laymen. — A.  H.  N. 

Biblioorapht:  E.  Hatch,  Oroaniaation  of  Ae  Early  ChrtB- 
tian  Churehea,  lecture  v.,  London,  1896;  Bingham,  Orio- 
ifiM.  I.,  V  (isives  citations  from  ori^nal  authorities); 
L.  Coleman,  Ancient  ChrittianUy  Exemplifted,  pp.  107- 
109  et  pasom,  Philadelphia,  1869;  H.  B.  Restariok,  Lay 
Readert;  tkeir  Hiatory,  OrganuaHon^  and  Work,  New  York, 
1894;  Schaff.  Ckrigtian  CAurc^  ii.  123-131;  Neander, 
ChriBtian  Church,  consult  Index,  p.  131;  DC  A,  ii.  912- 
916;  and  the  literature  on  the  Didachb  and  the  Apoa- 
TOUGAi.  Ck>N8rnTT7TiON8.  The  development  of  the  dis- 
tinotion  between  clergy  and  laity  is  usually  treated  in 
discussions  of  post-apostolic  Christianity. 

LAMAISM. 

Tibet  (§  1).  Development  into  Tjwnaimn 

Visito  by  Occidentals  (§  2).         (§  4). 
Introduction  of   Buddhism    Characteristics  of  TAm^jaaw 
(»  3).  (»  6). 

Tibetan  Literature  ((  6). 

T^amaiwn  is  the  name  given  to  the  religion  of 
Tibet  and  a  large  part  of  Mongolia.  It  is  a  com- 
posite faith  consisting  of  a  debased  (not  the  clas- 
sical) Buddhism,  which  accommodated  to  itself  ele- 
ments of  the  early  native  "  bon  "  (see  below,  §  3) 
religion  and  of  Hinduism  and  then  developed  its 
own  forms  of  belief  and  of  government.  The  word 
lama  means  a  "  superior,"  and  is  applied  by  cour- 
tesy to  all  monks  above  the  grade  of  novice,  though 
originally  given  only  to  the  abbots. 

Tibet  is  a  region  of  Central  Asia,  bounded  south 
by  the  Himalaya,  north  by  the  Kuen-luen  Moun- 
tains (which  almost  meet  on  the  west), 

X.  Tibet  west  by  Kashmir,  and  east  by  China. 
It  is  a  region  of  high  plateaus  cut 
by  extremely  deep  and  often  precipitous  val- 
leys, divided  by  a  lofty  mountain  range  running 
eflkst  and  west  so  that  geographers  make  two  main 


divisions — the  northern,  inhospitable,  entirely  un- 
known to  occidentals,  intersected  by  parallel  moun- 
tain ranges  running  east  and  west,  between  which 
are  valleys  and  lakes  frozen  eight  months  in  the 
year,  where  the  population  is  sparse;  the  southern, 
richer  in  its  possibilities  and  possessions,  several 
times  traversed  in  whole  or  in  part  by  western 
travelers,  and  containing  the  sources  of  the  Brah- 
maputra, Indus,  Sutlej,  Ganges,  Mekong,  Hoang- 
ho,  Yang-tse-kiang  and  other  important  rivers. 
The  population  is  estimated  at  between  one  and  a 
half  and  three  and  a  half  millions,  of  whom  about 
half  a  million  are  said  to  be  monks.  The  ethno- 
logical affinities,  as  indicated  by  the  language,  are 
with  the  peoples  of  the  Himalayas  and  Assam,  but 
observation  points  to  a  mixing  with  the  Chinese  on 
the  east  and  the  Hindus  on  the  south.  In  the  set- 
tled regions  polyandry  is  the  rule,  among  the  no- 
mads monogamy  prevails,  while  the  wealthy  are 
frequently  polygamous.  The  culture  is  of  mixed 
native,  Qiinese,  and  Indian  origin.  The  principal 
points  of  the  history,  so  far  as  it  is  known,  are  nec- 
essarily related  in  the  story  of  the  religion.  China 
claims  the  region  as  a  part  of  the  empire,  and  a  resi- 
dent at  the  capital,  Lhasa,  is  the  representative  of 
the  suzerain  power. 

The  first  European  visitor  of  record  was  Odoric 
of  Pordenone  (Odoricus  Forojuliensis),  who  in  1330 
led  a  company  of  monks  into  the  country  and 
reached  Lhasa,  which  he  described  (cf.  H.  Cordier, 
Les  Voyages  en  Asie  .  .  ,  du  .  .  .  frbre  Odoric  de 
Pordenone,  Paris,  1891).  Of  the  result  of  his 
preaching  nothing  is  known.  In  1624  the  Portu- 
guese Jesuit  Antonio  D'  Andrada  (q.v.) 
a.  VisitB  went  from  Delhi  to  western  Tibet  and 
by  Ocd-  was  kindly  received  by  the  local  chief 
dentals,  of  Tjaprang.  His  success  as  a  preacher 
was  such  that  the  foundation  of  a 
cathedral  was  laid,  but  the  position  was  abandoned 
when  apparently  all  was  favorable.  Lhasa  was 
again  visited  in  1706  by  the  missionaries  J.  de  As- 
culi  and  F.  M.  de  Torin,  who  stayed  but  a  short 
time.  During  1716-27  Hippolytus  Desiderius  and 
Emanuel  Freyre  resided  in  the  land,  protected  by 
the  local  ruler  against  the  prejudice  <i  the  people, 
in  whom  the  tendency  toward  isolation  was  be- 
ginning to  show  itself.  Other  missionaries  were 
sent  out  in  1719  and  1730,  but  the  opportunity  to 
establish  Christianity  was  lost.  About  1760  the 
isolation  of  the  country  was  brought  about,  and 
thereafter  entrance  was  difficult  to  effect  and  was 
usuaUy  accomplished  only  by  craft.  In  1811  an 
English  physician  reached  Lhasa  dioguised  as  a 
Hindu  and  in  attendance  upon  a  CJhinese  general. 
The  Abb^  E.  R.  Hue  (q.v.)  arrived  there  by  way  of 
Mongolia  in  Jan.,  1846,  but  was  compelled  to  leave 
in  March  of  the  same  year.  In  spite  of  the  policy 
of  exclusion,  reports  from  Hindus,  from  Mongolians, 
and  from  Russian  subjects  have  made  the  situa- 
tion and  appearance  of  Lhasa  and  its  vicinity  well 
known.  From  nearly  all  sides  the  city  has  been 
approached  by  numerous  travelers,  but  access  to 
the  capital  was  strictly  barred  until  the  recent 
British  expedition,  whidi  failed,  however,  to  reach 
the  Lama,  who  retired  as  the  English  drew  near, 
and    finally    went    to    Pekin,   where    he    stayed 


ZiMBAim 

LM&bMrt 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


400 


until  1909,  wheQ  he  was  induoed  to  start  od  hia 
return. 

The  early  faith  oi  the  people  was  the  "  boa  **  re- 
ligion, a  shamanistic  animism,  the  deities  of  which 
were  nature  gods  and  spirits;  ancestor  worship  was 
an  element,  witchcraft  and  magic  were  dominant, 
and  the  idea  of  transformation  was  widely  diffused. 
Legends,  probably  untrustworthy,  as- 
3.  Intro-  cribe  the  introduction  of  Buddhism  to 
dttction  of  descendants  of  Asoka  who  after  defeat 
Buddhism,  took  refuge  in  Tibet.  The  introduc- 
tion of  the  faith  was  probably  due  to 
King  Sron-tsan-gampo  (b.  617  or  629),  who  mar- 
ried a  Chinese  and  a  Hindu  princess,  both  devoted 
Buddhists,  and  at  their  request  summoned  teachers 
and  obtained  books  from  India.  The  progress  of 
the  new  religion  seems  to  have  been  slow  and  the 
opposition  of  the  old  faith  strenuous,  for  about  a 
century  later  a  successor  of  Sron-tsan-gampo  in- 
vited the  noted  Padmasambhava  from  India  to 
complete  the  conversion  of  the  land  (747),  and  he 
is  cdebrated  as  the  founder  of  Lamaism.  His  wri- 
tings appear  to  have  been  the  nucleus  of  a  large  lit- 
erature, of  which,  however,  nothing  is  known.  The 
whole  circle  of  Buddha  legends  was  carried  over  and 
applied  to  him,  with  fantastic  additions  to  the  effect 
that  he  claimed  to  be  a  greater  magician  than 
Buddha,  that  he  overcame  the  magic  and  van- 
quished the  magicians  of  the  bon  religion,  created 
a  magic  draft  which  bestowed  immortality,  and 
had  a  magic  horse  which  carried  him  to  distant 
isles  where  he  preached  his  religion  to  the  demons 
and  magicians.  The  entire  trend  of  the  story  shows 
that  the  practise  of  Buddhism  in  Tibet,  as  else- 
where, was  to  assimilate  what  it  could  not  con- 
quer. Buddhism  had  already  developed  a  series 
of  Buddhas  prior  to  Gautama,  and  now,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  Hindu  doctrine  of  avatars,  it  was 
announced  that  Padmasambhava,  already  regarded 
as  an  incarnation,  would  have  successors  until  the 
new  Buddha  came,  while  the  attainment  of  Bud- 
dhaship  was  to  be  assisted  by  the  practise  of  Yoga. 
For  a  century  and  a  half  the  progress  was  great,  but 
the  reputation  of  the  founder  became  a  menace 
to  the  king  (c.  900),  the  religion  was  proscribed,  and 
the  monks  were  persecuted  and  driven  into  hiding. 
Eventually  this  course  aroused  the  resentment  of 
the  people,  who  rallied  around  the  monks,  King 
Lang-darma  lost  his  life  and  the  kingdom,  the  power 
going  to  petty  chiefs  and  the  abbots,  while  shortly 
after  the  heads  of  the  great  monasteries  came  to 
exercise  a  power  almost  regal.  In  1042  Attisa,  one 
of  these  abbots,  whose  life  marks  an  epoch  in  the 
development,  invited  the  Indian  monk  Vikrasila  to 
Tibet,  a  period  of  great  literary  activity  ensued  and 
of  moral  reformation  of  the  Church.  The  new 
teacher  imited  the  communities  of  monks  and  paved 
the  way  for  a  reunited  Tibetan  Church.  This  was 
first  realized  after  Genghis  Khan  had  united  China 
and  Mongolia  into  one  empire  (1220-1340),  when 
lus  grandson  Kublai  Khan  chose  as  his  spiritual 
adviser  Ragspa,  abbot  of  the  Ssrskya  monastery, 
became  a  convert  to  Buddhism,  made  Tibet  an 
ecclesiastical  state  in  the  empire,  and  appointed  the 
abbot  ruler.  This  condition  continued  under  eight 
reigning  abbots  till  1340.    The  results  were  two- 


fold: the  conversion  to  this  form  of  Buddhism  of 
great  nmnbers  of  the  Mongolians,  and  the  subver- 
sion of  Attisa's  reforms  and  a  rejuvenescence  of 
magic.  When  this  empire  fell,  the  Ming  dynasty 
of  China  gave  precedence  to  the  abbots  of  Digung, 
Phag-dub  and  Tshal,  broke  the  preeminence  of  the 
Sa-skya  monastery  and  made  it  subordinate  to 
Phagdub,  while  the  political  control  was  vested  in 
the  great  monasteries. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  fifteenth  century  a  new 

reformer  arose  who  is  known  only  as  Tsong-kapa, 

"  the  man  of  Tsong-ka."    He  was  a  noted  scholar, 

belonged  to  the  same  sect  as  Attisa,  and  aimed  at 

the  purification  and  unification  of  the 

4.  Devel-    Church.    To   the   monks  he   forbade 

opment      marriage  and  the  use  of  magic,  made 

into        the  yeUow  robe  and  the  begging-bowl 

Tjinuiiinn.  the  badge  of  lus  sect,  took  as  his  three 
guiding  principles  pure  teaching,  stem 
discipline,  and  the  absolutism  of  the  Church,  while 
the  individual's  welfare  was  subjected  to  that  of 
the  oiganization.  He  made  Lhasa  the  center  of  the 
new  movement,  and  founded  there  three  great 
monasteries  in  1407,  1414,  and  1417.  The  religion 
received  as  its  governing  characteristic  the  idea  of 
the  continued  reincarnation  of  the  Boddhisat  in  the 
chief  abbot,  and  this  incarnation  was  made  subject 
not  to  descent,  since  marriage  was  prohibited  to 
the  monks,  but  to  the  choice  of  the  Boddhisat  him- 
self, who  became  incarnate  in  a  babe  bom  after  the 
abbot's  death.  Tsong-kapa  is  reported  to  have 
said  that  he  would  be  continually  reborn  as  Dalai 
Lama.  Alongside  this  official  was  to  be  another, 
the  Tasi  Lama,  the  two  theoretically  equal,  but  in 
fact  the  Dalai  Lama  the  greater  both  by  reason  of 
the  larger  territory  ruled  and  because  he  incar- 
nated Padmapani,  who  is  to  be  the  new  Buddha 
and  savior  of  the  world.  The  succession  of  Dalai 
Lamas  is  traced  to  a  successor  of  Tsong-kapa  who 
in  1439  became  the  head  of  the  Church  and  thus 
gave  to  the  religion  its  decisive  cast.  The  second 
of  these  officials  developed  further  the  organisation 
of  the  (Church,  and  founded  a  body  of  advisers  cor- 
responding closely  to  the  Roman  Catholic  cardinal- 
ate.  Missionary  efforts  continued  among  the  Mon- 
golians, and  the  fourth  Dalai  Lama  came  from  the 
family  of  a  Mongolian  chief.  In  200  years  the 
yellow  Church  became  supreme,  the  red  monks 
sank  to  a  mere  faction,  while  a  national  conscious- 
ness was  awakened  and  bound  up  with  the  ecclesi- 
astical order.  The  Tatar  dynasty  of  China  con- 
firmed the  ecclesiastical  privileges  of  the  order,  but 
since  1750  has  kept  a  representative  at  Lhasa  as  a 
reminder  of  political  dependence,  and  it  is  believed 
that  Chinese  influence  is  potent  in  determining  the 
succession  to  the  chief  office  and  the  emperor  cer- 
tainly has  the  right  of  confirmaticm.  The  Dalai 
Lama  resides  in  the  important  monastery  of  Mt. 
Potala  near  Lhasa;  the  Tasi  Lama  (also  caUed 
''  Pan-chen  ")  lives  at  Kra-shis-lhun-po. 

The  religion  centers  in  the  ''  three  jewels  "  of 
Buddhism,  belief  in  the  Buddha,  the  law,  and  the 
order.  It  is  held  that  prior  to  the  historical  Gau- 
tama there  were  other  Buddhas,  three  of  whom  are 
now  withdraw^n  from  the  world  except  as  guardians 
during  the  intervals  when  no  Buddha  is  incarnated; 


401 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


lAmaiam 


a  fourth  corresponds  to  the  historical  Buddha 
who  is  known  as  Amitabha  and  incarnated  in 
the  Tasi  Lama;  while  the  fifth  is  the 
5.  Charac-  Bodhisat  Padmapani,  the  coming  Bud- 
teristicsof  dha  and  savior  of  the  world,  incar- 
Tjinuiiinn.  nated  recurrently  in  the  Dalai  Lama, 
who  is  therefore  sacred.  The  Bud- 
dhist doctrines  of  heavens  and  hells  is  fully  accepted, 
while  the  saints  of  the  order  are  objects  of  adoration. 
The  principle  of  reincarnation  is  applied  not  only  to 
the  two  heads  of  the  Church  but  to  the  abbots 
and  monks,  and  most  monasteries  claim  to  have  at 
least  one  incarnated  saint.  Syncretism  is  seen  in 
the  worship  of  deities  and  spirits  whose  disguise  as 
Buddhist  saints  is  transparent,  and  in  the  fonnulas 
of  worship  and  ritual  which  retain  elements  from 
the  bon  ceremonial  and  from  Hinduism.  Similar 
traces  of  elementary  religion  are  seen  in  the  mag- 
ical charms  and  the  divination  which  still  remain 
in  use.  Baptism,  confirmation,  and  the  mass  for 
the  dead  are  among  the  rites  of  the  Church,  while 
the  rosary  is  everywhere  foimd.  Especial  efficacy 
attaches  to  the  Buddhist  formula  Ommani  padme 
hum,  "  Oh  the  jewel  in  the  lotus."  Hence  it  is  ever 
on  the  lips  of  the  people,  is  inscribed  on  cylinders 
made  to  revolve  by  hand,  water,  or  wind,  and  on 
flags  which  flutter  in  the  wind,  each  turn  or  wave 
being  regarded  as  a  repetition  of  the  prayer  bring- 
ing merit  to  the  owner  or  maker.  Great  merit  is 
attached  to  the  ascetic  life,  hence  about  one-fifth 
of  the  population  are  in  the  cloisters.  Alongside 
the  reincarnation  of  the  male  saints  are  those  of 
fenuiles,  reflecting  perhaps  the  influence  of  the 
Sakti  religions  of  India.  Of  two  nunneries  the  ab- 
besses are  incarnations  of  deities  probably  derived 
from  the  early  bon  religion.  Politics  has  influ- 
enced the  Church  to  declare  the  emperors  of  China 
and  Russia  incarnations  of  Lamaist  saints;  curi- 
ously, the  king  of  England  is  not  so  regarded,  pos- 
sibly because  it  is  the  heretical  red  monks  who  are 
most  numerous  on  the  Indian  border.  The  acces- 
sion to  the  headship  depends  upon  the  assumption 
that  when  a  Dalai  Lama  dies  the  soul  of  the  Bod- 
dhisat  who  lived  in  him  is  reincarnated  in  an  in- 
fant bom  forty-nine  or  more  days  after  his  death. 
This  infant  is  discovered  in  various  ways — by  the 
use  of  the  lot,  by  divination,  or,  as  in  the  case  of 
the  last  Lama,  by  the  intervention  of  a  monk  of 
pure  life,  who  had  first  to  be  discovered.  When 
found,  the  infant  and  his  parents  are  brought  to  a 
palace  near  Lhasa,  kept  there  till  the  child  is  four 
years  of  age,  when  he  is  entered  as  a  novice;  at 
eight  years  of  age  he  becomes  a  monk,  then  abbot 
and  Dalai  Lama.  In  this  way  the  real  control  of 
the  Church  and  the  direction  of  affairs  is  kept  in 
the  hands  of  the  advisers,  and  the  Dalai  Lama  is 
hardly  more  than  the  living  idol  of  the  population. 
Of  the  literature  of  the  bon  religion  little  is 
known,  but  such  as  has  been  investigated  is  in  a 
native  script  and  dialect,  both  of  early 
6.  Tibetan  date.  The  Lamaist  literature  consists 
Literature,  of  translations  of  the  Buddhist  canon 
and  standard  conomentaries,  and  of 
the  Tibetan  writings  of  the  monks  on  encyclopedic 
subjects.  The  canon  embraces  1,083  titles,  an 
immense  mass  of  writings,  which  exists  in  several 
VI.— 26 


recensions.  The  literature  inchides  rules  for  the 
discipline  of  monks  and  nuns,  metaphysical  trea- 
tises, discourses  of  the  BuddhajB,  legends  from  their 
lives,  treatises  on  magic,  hymns  to  deities,  com- 
mentaries on  the  canon  and  commentaries  on  com- 
mentaries, dictionaries  of  philosophical  terms  and 
phraseology  and  of  language,  and  works  on  philoso- 
phy,  medicine,  astronomy,  and  astrology,  trana- 
lated  from  the  Sanscrit.  Many  of  these  are  diglots 
of  Sanscrit  and  Tibetan,  and  the  literature  has  been 
translated  also  into  Mongolian,  a  large  collection 
of  the  plates  of  which  was  kept  at  Peking  and  des- 
troyed during  the  Boxer  uprising.  The  red  church 
literature  outside  of  the  foregoing  is  by  the  yeUow 
church  held  heterodox,  and  the  principal  work  is 
the  book  of  the  legends  of  Padmasambhava,  exist- 
ing in  many  editions  in  Tibetan,  Lepcha,  and  Mon- 
golian. The  popular  literature  is  also  inunense  and 
various — apocalyptic,  miraculous,  prophetic,  and 
ritualistic.  Noteworthy  are  the  works  of  Milareba 
(1038-1122),  a  story  of  his  life  and  travels,  and  the 
*'  Collection  of  100,000  Songs."  Both  are  valuable 
as  pictures  of  the  language  and  customs  of  the 
times.  Another  monk  of  about  the  same  period, 
Kasarrgyalpo,  wrote  a  huge  epic  on  the  deeds  of 
heroes  assigned  to  the  eighth  century,  which  has  been 
widely  diffused  in  the  Mongolian  and  Kalmuck  lan- 
guages. The  principal  printing-press  is  at  Nartang 
near  Shigatse,  in  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Tasi  Lama. 
Block  printing  is  done  from  wooden  plates,  12x24 
inches  in  size,  each  block  representing  a  page  of 
text. 

The  language,  while  akin  to  the  crude  dialects  of 
the  wild  peoples  of  the  Himalayas,  has  been  so  de- 
veloped by  the  monks  as  to  be  capable  of  expressing 
with  fulness  and  precision  the  sublimest  and  subtlest 
thought  of  India.  The  religion  of  I#amai«m  has  made 
of  Tibet  a  land  of  culture  so  far  as  the  monasteries 
are  concerned,  but  has  not  raised  the  mass  of  the 
population  much  above  the  level  of  animistic  peo- 
ples, so  hedged  about  is  life  with  ritualistic  and 
magical  observances.  Gbo.  W.  Gilmorb. 

Bxblioobapbt:  The  best  account  of  the  religion  available 
in  English  is  L.  A.  Waddell,  The  Btuidhum  cf  Tibet,  Lon- 
don, 1894.  An  excellent  though  oondeneed  account^ 
ooyering  the  literature  and  the  history,  is  A.  Grflnwedel,  in 
Die  KuUur  der  Geoenwart,  I.,  iii  1.  Die  crieniaUe^en  Be- 
Uffionen,  pp.  136-161.  Berlin,  1906,  ef.  his  Mytkologie  dee 
Bvddhiemue  in  Tibet  und  der  Mongolei,  Leipsic,  1900. 
The  account  in  P.  D.  Chantepie  de  la  Saussaye,  Lekrimeh 
der  ReligioneoeediidUe,  ii  113-117,  is  so  abbreviated  as  to 
be  misleading.  Material  is  found  also  in  E.  Scblagint- 
weit.  Buddhiem  in  Thibet,  London,  1863;  idem,  Lebene- 
beeehreUning  dee  Padma  Sambhavtt,  in  Abhandlungen  der 
•  k6niolichen  bajfriechen  Akademie,  Munich,  1899,  1903; 
W.  W.  Rockhill,  The  Lamaiet  Ceremony  eaUed  '*  Making 
of  Mani  Pitte"  in  the  Journal  of  Oie  American  Oriental 
Society,  1890,  pp.  zxii.-xziv.;  idem.  The  Uee  of  SkuUe  in 
Lamaiet  Ceremoniee,  ib.  pp.  xziv.-xxxi.;  Sarachandra 
Dasa,  Journey  to  Lhaea  and  Central  Tibet,  London,  1902. 
Still  of  use  is  B.  H.  Hodgson,  Eeeaye  on  the  Lanouaoee, 
Literature  and  ReUoion  of  Nepal  and  Tibet,  ib.  1874.  For 
travels  consult:  G.  Sandbeig.  The  EzphraHon  cf  Tibet 
ieSS-1004,  Calcutta,  1904;  W.  W.  Rockhill,  The  Land 
of  the  Lamae,  New  York,  1891;  H.  8.  Landor,  In  the  For- 
bidden Land,  London,  1898;  O.  T.  Crosby,  Tibet  and 
Turkeetan,  New  York.  1906;  L.  A.  WaddeU.  Lhaeea  and 
it$  Myeteriee,  with  a  Record  of  the  {BriHeh)  Expedition  of 
190S-04,  London,  1905. 

LAMBERT  LE  BEGUE:  Belgian  ecclesiastic; 
b.  in  the  first  quarter  of  the  twelfth  century  of  a 


Ijambert 
X«ambetli 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


402 


family  of  poor  Walloon  artiBaiiB;  d.  at  Li^  c. 
1177.  Whether  he  bore  the  name  le  B^e  ("  the 
Stammerer  'Of  which  is  by  no  means  peculiar  to 
Lambert,  on  accoimt  of  a  physical  infirmity  is  not 
to  be  ascertained.  As  a  secular  priest  he  first  had 
charge  of  a  church  affiliated  with  the  cathedral 
foundation  at  Li^;  there  he  undertook  the  cure 
of  the  small  chim^h  of  St.  Christopher,  in  a  subiu-b 
of  Li^ge.  At  the  diocesan  synod  of  1166  he  de- 
manded a  moral  reform  of  the  deigy,  especially 
curtailment  of  extravagance  in  dress,  and  the  pro- 
hibition of  admitting  sons  of  priests  to  orders. 
When  subsequently  ecclesiastical  abuses  grew  worse 
he  vehemently  opposed  them  in  the  pulpit.  At  the 
same  time  he  exerted  a  profound  influence  upon 
the  populace  of  Lidge  through  his  penitential  ser- 
mons. To  his  devoted  followers,  the  women  and 
maidens  whom  he  had  led  to  renounce  the  world, 
he  dedicated  a  number  of  religious  poems  in  the 
Walloon  dialect;  also  a  paraphrase  of  the  Acts  and 
a  translation  of  Paul's  epistles.  These  writings  are 
lost;  but  P.  Meyer  believes  he  has  discovered  the 
Latin  Psalter  which  Lambert  used.  In  his  stormy 
zeal  for  winning  the  widest  circles  to  the  thoughts 
of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  and  imitation  of  Christ's 
life  of  poverty,  Lambert  vividly  reminds  of  Francis 
of  Assisi;  stiU  more  so,  of  Waldo  of  Lyons.  In  his 
sermons  he  often  deviated  widely  from  the  doctrine 
and  tradition  of  the  Church.  Thus,  he  ascribed  a 
greater  importance  to  the  devout  mind  and  prac- 
tical love  of  one's  neighbor  than  to  means  of  grace 
and  ecclesiastical  sacraments;  he  characterized  all 
expenditures  for  the  administration  of  sacraments 
and  for  acts  of  consecration  as  simony,  opposed  pil- 
grimages to  Palestine,  and  taught  that  no  obedi- 
ence was  due  to  priests  forgetful  of  duty.  In  1175 
the  clergy  of  the  diocese  of  Li^,  whom  Lambert 
had  vehemently  attacked,  urged  an  accusation  of 
heresy  against  him.  He  was  condemned  and  im- 
prisoned, but  escaped  and  went  to  Italy  on  a  pil- 
grimage to  Pope  Calixtus  III.,  who  permitted  him 
to  return  in  peace  to  Li4ge.  Lambert's  most  ex- 
tensive polemical  tract,  Antiffraphum  Petri,  was 
published  by  A.  Fayen  (in  Campte  rendu  de  s^nces 
de  la  commiasion  royale  d^hitioire,  vol.  Ixviii.,  pp. 
255-356,  Brussels,  1890).  In  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury he  was  numbered  with  the  saints  of  the  Church. 
His  memory  is  perpetuated  especially  by  the  Beg- 
uines,  who  without  doubt  were  founded  by  him. 
At  first  a  nickname,  "  Beguines  "  was  soon  adopted 
by  the  societies  themselves.  See  Beqhards, 
Beguines.  Herican  Hauft. 

Bibuographt:  P.  Coena,  DimptiBiHo  hiMtorioa  de  arioine 
Beffhinarum,  lAigfi,  1629;  BrUl,  in  HUtoire  litUraire  de 
la  France,  ziv.  402-^10;  H.  Delvaux,  in  Biographie  na- 
tumale,  xv.  168-162.  Bnusels,  1891;  Analecta  BoUandiana, 
ziii.  206  aqq.,  Bruaaels,  1894;  P.  Frederioq,  Corpue  docu- 
mentorum  inquieiiionie  hoBretictB  pravitaHe  Neerlandica, 
u.  9-36.  The  Ha«ue,  1896;  P.  Meyer.  Le  PaauHer  de  Lam- 
bert le  Bigue,  in  Romania,  xxix  (1900),  628-645;  A.  Fayen, 
in  Comptee  rendua  dee  eSaneee  de  la  eommieeion  royale 
d*hietoire,  Uviii  (1899),  266-366. 

LAMBERT,  ldn'a)&r',  FRANCOIS:  Reformer  in 
Hesse;  b.  at  Avignon  1486;  d.  at  Frankenberg  (32 
m.  s.w.  of  Cassel),  Prussia,  Apr.  18,  1530.  At  the 
age  of  fifteen  he  entered  the  cloister  of  the  Fran- 
ciscan   Observants    at    Avignon.     His    calling    as 


"  Apostolic  preacher "  gave  him  occasion  to  fa- 
miliarize himself  more  deeply  with  Holy  Scripture, 
and  he  made  a  great  impression  as  a  preacher  of 
repentance  and  castigation.  Under  the  influence 
of  Luther's  writings,  which  found  their  way  to  him 
shortly  after  1520,  he  left  the  cloister  in  the  spring 
of  1522  and  went  to  Geneva  and  Lausanne,  where 
he  was  promptly  suspected  of  heretical  opinions. 
At  Zurich,  in  July  of  that  year,  he  ventured  to  de- 
fend in  public  debate  the  intercession  of  the  saints 
against  Zwingli,  but  finally  declared  himself  van- 
quished. Under  the  assumed  name  of  Johannes 
Serranus  he  now  entered  Germany  to  study  the 
Lutheran  Reformation  at  its  source.  Having  se- 
cured, through  Georg  Spalatin,  credentials  to  Lu- 
ther and  the  elector,  he  went  to  Wittenberg  in 
Jan.,  1523.  His  sojourn  there  lasted  till  Feb., 
1524.  At  Luther's  advice  he  delivered  lectures  on 
the  prophet  Hosea,  the  Gospel  of  Luke,  Ezechiel, 
and  Canticles;  sought  to  advance  the  Reformation 
by  translation  of  reformatory  pamphlets  into 
French  and  Italian;  and  prepued  a  tract  on  the 
subject  of  his  exit  from  the  cloister  and  a  commen- 
tary on  the  Minorite  rule.  He  was  one  of  the  first 
monks  of  the  Reformation  era  to  resolve  on  con- 
tracting matrimony.  In  Mar.,  1524,  he  went  to 
Metz,  whither  he  was  called  by  secret  friends  of  the 
Reformation,  but  was  not  allowed  so  much  as  once 
to  venture  to  speak  publicly.  In  Strasbuig,  whither 
he  turned  in  Apr.,  1524,  he  found  friends,  but  failed 
to  obtain  a  position.  In  spite  of  his  extensive 
literary  activity,  his  outward  status  continued  op- 
pressive. At  last,  in  1526,  there  was  opened  for 
him  the  opportunity  for  work  and  the  prospect  of 
an  assured  living.  Recommended  by  Jacob  Sturm 
of  Strasbuig  to  Landgrave  Philip  of  Hesse,  he  was 
enabled  to  take  the  leading  part  at  the  Hombeiig 
Synod  (q.v.).  In  1527  he  was  made  professor  at 
the  University  of  Marburg,  where  in  company  with 
Adam  Kraft  and  Erhard  Schnepf  he  served  as  one 
of  the  university's  first  theological  teachers.  His 
attachment  to  Zwingli's  theory  of  the  Eucharist 
subjected  him  to  much  suspicion  in  Germany,  and 
his  French  mobility,  pragmatism,  and  easy  elo- 
quence provoked  opposition,  but  as  a  teacher  be 
found  great  acceptance.  His  favorite  branch  was 
exposition  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  although 
his  object  was  not  learned  exegesis,  but  practical 
interpretation  and  application.  Carl  Mirbt. 

Bibuoobapht:  Biographies  are  by:  J.  W.  Baum,  Stia*- 
buns.  1840  (in  German);  F.  W.  Hawrncamp.  Elbafeld. 
1860;  F.  St.  Stieve,  Wratialaw.  1867  (in  Latin);  L.  Buf- 
fet. Paris,  1873  (in  French).  Consult  further:  F.  G. 
Schelhorn,  in  Amemiiaiee  liieranm  iv.  307-^389,  8uppi»- 
ment,  x.  1235  sqq.,  Leipaic.  1730;  F.  W.  Strieder.  He*- 
eieehe  GetehrtenoeeOiidUe,  vii  37»-39«,  ix.  405-«06.  CbsseL 
1787;  F.  W.  Haasencamp,  Heeeiedte  KirekengeethuMt, 
i.  65-76.  Marburs.  1852;  O.  Qemen,  In  ZKO,  sdi  (1901). 
133  sqq.;  ADB,  xviL  548  aqq. 

LAMBERT,  laml)&rt  (LAMPERT),  OF  HSRS- 
FELD:  Medieval  historian;  b.  probably  c.  1025; 
d.  after  1078.  It  is  not  improbable  that  he  was 
educated  at  the  famous  cathedral  school  of  Bam- 
bei^.  He  entered  the  Benedictine  abbey  of  Her&- 
feld  Mar.  15,  1058,  and  was  ordained  priest  at 
Aschaffenburg  in  the  following  September,  aft«r 
which  he  made  a  pilgrimage  through  Hungary  and 


408 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Xiambart 
Lambeth 


Bulgaria  to  the  Holy  Land,  returning  to  Hersfeld  a 
year  later.  The  abbey  school,  which  Lambert  may 
have  conducted,  was  a  very  flourishing  one,  and 
his  works  are  good  evidence  of  the  height  which 
learning  had  reached  there.  The  most  character- 
istic is  his  biography  of  Lullus,  the  reputed  founder 
of  the  abbey,  a  really  masterly  performance,  writ- 
ten between  1063  and  1073.  He  followed  this  with 
a  poem,  now  lost,  on  the  later  history  of  the  abbey, 
and  a  complete  history  to  the  year  1074,  of  which 
only  scattered  sixteenth-century  extracts  remain. 
But  his  most  important  work  was  his  Annalea  from 
the  creation  of  the  world  to  1077.  The  first  part  is 
brief  and  not  original,  but  from  1040  the  narra- 
tive grows  fuller  and  becomes  the  most  extensive 
account  of  Henry  IV.  by  a  contemporary.  In 
opposition  to  his  abbot  and  the  majority  of  his  fel- 
low monks,  Lambert  was  decidedly  against  the  em- 
peror, and  probably  wrote  the  annals  with  the  pur- 
pose of  justifying  the  election  of  Rudolf  of  Swabia 
by  the  Saxon  and  Church  party.  He  shows  little 
of  the  conscientiousness  of  the  true  historian,  but  a 
literary  talent  remarkable  for  his  age,  which  for- 
merly led  to  the  placing  of  too  high  a  value  upon 
his  work.  In  fact,  until  quite  recent  times  it  de- 
termined the  conception  of  the  character  of  Henry 
IV.  taken  by  modem  historians,  and  it  is  still  im- 
portant for  the  laige  number  of  facts  contained  in 
it.  (O.  Holdbr-Eggbr.) 

Bibliography:  The  Opera,  ed.  O.  Holder-Egger,  are  in 
Scriptona  rerum  Oermaniearumt  Hanover,  1894,  where 
mention  ia  made  of  earlier  editions  and  literature.  Con- 
sult: A.  Eisenbrodt,  Lampert  von  Hen/eld  und  die  neuere 
QueUenfcrtdiung,  Cassel,  1896;  idem,  Lampert  von  Here- 
feld  und  die  WortauaUffung,  Leipsic,  1896;  Wattenbaoh, 
DGQ,  ii.  97-109;  Rettbex^.  KD,  I  602;  CeiUier,  Aviewre 
eacrie,  xiii.  399-401. 

LAMBETH,  laml)eth,  ARTICLES:    A  series  of 
nine  articles  drawn  up  in  1595  to  supplement  the 
Thirty-nine   Articles   by  stating   the  doctrine  of 
predestination  in  terms  more  explicit  and  incisive 
than  were  used  in  art.  xvii.  of  1571,  which  admits 
of  both  a  Calvinistic  and  an  anti-Calvinistic  inter- 
pretation.   Toward  the  close  of  Elizabeth's  reign 
Calvinism  had  many  sympathizers  in  England,  not 
only  among  the  Puritans,  but  also  in  the  Estab- 
lished Church.    Calvinistic  theology  was  ably  ad- 
vocated at  Cambridge  by  Thomas  Cartwright,  Will- 
iam Perkins  and  William  Whitaker  (q.v.).     On  the 
other  hand  Peter  Baro  (q.v.)  taught  anti-Calvinism. 
He  found  an  ally  in  William  Barrett,  fellow  of  Gon- 
ville  and  Caius,  who  on  Apr.  29,   1595,  sharply 
attacked  Calvin,  Beza,  Peter  Martyr,  and  others 
in   a  sermon  which  he  preached  for  his  bachelor's 
degree.    A   lively   controversy  followed   at   Cam- 
bridge, Barrett  being  forced  to  recant,  and  the 
matter  was  referred  to  Archbishop  Whitgift.   Whit- 
aker drew  up  nine  articles  strongly  and  harshly 
Calvinistic  as  an  interpretation  of  art.  xvii.  of  the 
Tbirty-nine  Artidee;  and,  after  some  modifications 
of  language  by  the  archbishop,  they  were  signed  by 
Wbitgift,    Bishop    Fletcher    of    London,    Bishop 
Vaughan  of  Bangor,  and  others  at  a  conference 
at     Lambeth   Palace    Nov.    20,  1595.    Archbishop 
Hutton  of  York  later  added  his  assent.     Whitgift 
sent  the  articles  to   Cambridge  as  an  admissible 
interpretation    of  art.    xvii.,   hoping   thereby    to 


allay  the  controversy  and  deal  a  blow  at  Puri- 
tanism by  making  concessions  to  the  Calvin- 
ists  of  the  Church  of  England.  Though  he  was 
moderately  Calvinistic  in  doctrine  he  was  strongly 
opposed  to  the  Geneva  polity,  and  he  was  too  good 
a  diurchman  to  insist  on  the  articles  when  the  queen 
expressed  disapproval,  being  displeased  because  the 
conference  had  been  held  without  her  consent  and 
impatient  with  both  sides  for  stirring  up  contro- 
versy. Consequently  the  articles  were  soon  with- 
drawn— a  measure  rendered  easier  by  the  death  of 
Whitaker  two  weeks  after  the  conference. 

The  Lambeth  Articles  state  in  the  most  explicit 
terms  that  God  from  eternity  has  destined  a  part 
of  the  human  race  for  life,  another  part  for  death, 
and  that  the  "  moving  cause  "  of  "  predestination 
to  life  "  is  nothing  whatever  in  the  individual — 
neither  "  the  foresight  of  faith,  or  of  perseverance, 
or  of  good  works,  or  of  anything  that  is  in  the  per- 
son predestinated  "]  the  cause  is  "  solely  the  good 
will  and  pleasure  of  God."  In  di£Ferent  forms  of 
expression  it  is  declared  that  the  twofold  decree  has 
made  two  distinct  classes  of  men.  But  it  is  not 
said — doubtless  intentionally — ^that  God's  decree 
occasioned  the  Fall;  the  implication  is  rather  in- 
fralapsarian.  At  the  Hampton  Court  Conference 
(q.v.)  in  1604  the  Puritans  asked  in  vain  that  the 
Lambeth  Articles  be  recognized.  They  were  in- 
corporated in  the  Irish  Articles  of  1615  (see  Irish 
Articlbs).  (F.  Eattenbusch.) 

Bxbuoobapht:  Schaff,  Creede,  i.  659-062.  iii.  623-626; 
J.  H.  OTerton,  The  Chunk  in  Bngland,  L  481-483,  Lon- 
don, 1807  (whare  the  utioleaare  giyen);  and  especially 
J.  Strype,  The  Life  and  AeU  of  ,  ,  .  John  Whitgift, 
3  YolB..  Oxford,  1822. 

LAMBBTH  conference  (also  caUed  the  Pan- 
Anglican  Synod):  A  gathering  held  at  Lambeth 
Palace  approximately  every  ten  years  mider  the 
presidency  of  the  archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and 
composed  of  all  the  bishops  of  the  Anglican  Gom- 
mmiion?  The  first  suggestion  of  such  an  assembly 
is  said  to  have  come  from  Bishop  Hopkins  of  Ver- 
mont in  1851,  but  the  earliest  official  action  in  that 
direction  was  taken  by  the  provincial  synod  of 
Canada  in  1865.  The  matter  was  brought  to  the 
attention  of  the  convocation  of  Canterbury  in  the 
following  year,  and  the  first  call  was  issued  by 
Archbishop  Longley  in  1867.  In  September  of  that 
year  seventy-six  bishops  assembled  at  Lambeth 
and  discussed  various  questions  affecting  the  or- 
ganization and  work  of  the  Anglican  Conmnmion 
as  a  whole.  The  second  conference  was  held  in 
1878,  under  the  presidency  of  Archbishop  Tait,  at- 
tended by  100  bishops;  the  third  in  1888,  with  145 
in  attendance,  presided  over  by  Archbishop  Ben- 
son; the  fourth  in  1897,  under  Archbishop  Temple, 
with  194  bishops;  and  the  fifth  in  1908.  The  bish- 
ops carefully  disclaim  any  legislative  or  synodical 
authority,  but  their  deliberations  and  resolutions 
have  a  wide  and  increasing  effect  upon  the  action 
of  the  various  national  churches  represented.  The 
largest  general  interest  attaches  to  the  step  taken 
by  them  in  1888,  when  they  sanctioned,  with  some 
final  modifications,  the  statement  as  to  the  basis 
of  a  possible  reunion  of  Christendom  put  forth  by 
the  general  convention  of  the  American  Episcopal 


lABilimsoliliii 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


404 


Church  m  1886;  for  the  text  of  the  statement, 
oommonly  known  tm  the  Chicago-Lambeth  Quadri- 
Uteral,  see  Fundamental  Doctbins8  or  Chbibti- 

ANITT,  I  4. 

BiBuooaAnrr:  R.  T.  DftTkbon.  The  Lambed  CamSmMmem 
of  ia$7,  1878,  and  1888,  wiA  tiU  Official  tUporta,  new  ed., 
London.  18M;  idem,  Oriffin  ami  HiaL  of  tiU  Lambtik 
CimUrmum  of  1887  and  1878,  ib.  1888.  The  aneydienl 
tottera  and  leporto  are  publiahed  in  timet  form  by  the 
8.  P.  C.  K..  London:  Lambeth  Coitforoneot/ 1907,  hoodou, 
1907;  Cemforonee  of  Biokopo  of  tiU  AnfUioaa  Communion 
.  .  .  1008,  .  .  .  Bneydietd,  ib..  1906. 

LAMBRUSCHmi,  lOm-brtla-ki'nt,  LUI6I:  Car- 
dinal and  statesman;  b.  at  Genoa  Hay  6,  1776;  d. 
at  Rome  May  8,  1864.  He  early  entered  the  Bar- 
nabite  Order,  and  rose  to  high  rank  in  his  order, 
afterward  in  ecclesiastical  diplomacy.  With  Ercole 
Consalvi  (q.v.)  he  represented  the  Curia's  intei^ 
ests  at  the  Congress  of  Vienna  in  1818,  and  after 
his  return,  as  secretary  of  the  Congregation  for 
Extraordinary  Affairs,  he  conducted  negotiations 
over  concordats  with  Bavaria  and  Naples  (see 
CoNOOBDATB  AND  Deumitino  Buuis,  VI.  2,  {  2; 
VI.  3).  In  1819  he  was  made  archbishop  of 
Genoa;  and  in  1823  he  was  sent  as  papal  nuncio  to 
Paris,  where  he  successfully  labored  to  make  Ul- 
tramontanism  (q.v.)  dominant  in  France,  and  this, 
too,  upon  the  fundamental  ground  of  legitimacy. 
In  1831  he  was  made  cardinal  by  Gregory  XVI., 
and  in  1836  secretary  of  state  for  foreign  affairs. 
It  was  in  Lambruschini  that  the  reaction  now  cen- 
tered. Wherever  measures  were  devised,  or  where 
efforts  were  forward  which  reflected  the  tendency 
of  the  modem  era,  he  perceived  revolution.  Hence, 
too,  he  strictly  opposed  the  strivings  toward  unity 
and  freedom  within  the  States  of  the  Church;  the 
prisons  were  filled,  and  previously  granted  conces- 
sions were  set  at  nought.  In  the  Prussian  govern- 
ment's conflict  with  the  Curia,  1836-38  (see  Droste- 
ViBCHSBiNO),  Lambruschini  vindicated  the  stand- 
point of  the  Curia  and  drafted  the  state  papers 
against  Prussia  (Rome,  1838;  German  text,  Augs- 
burg, 1839).  When  ultimately  the  government 
of  Gregory  XVI.  became  extremely  odious  Lam- 
bruschini had  to  bear  the  blame  for  it.  Although 
he  bad  seen  to  it  that  only  his  adherents  should  be 
admitted  to  the  college  of  cardinals,  so  strong  be- 
came the  feeling  against  him,  that  when  it  came  to 
electing  a  successor  to  Gregory  XVI.,  he  received 
only  ten  votes.  Under  Pius  IX.  he  adorned  high 
positions,  but  never  regained  his  influence. 

K.  Ben  RATH. 

BiBuooBArBY:  Lambnuohini  was  the  author  of  Opore 
ojnrUuali,  Rome.  1836  (an  aaoetio  work);  8uU*  immaeo- 
laio  concepimento  di  Maria,  ib.  1843,  Eng.  traoal.,  A  Polemi' 
eed  DiuertaUon  on  the  Immaculate  Conception  of  the  moH 
Bleeeed  Virgin  Mary,  London,  1866.  Consult:  L.  C.  Farini, 
Lo  Stato  romano  1816-1860,  i.  78  sqq.,  Turin.  1850;  F.  Gual- 
terio,  Qli  vUimi  rivolgimenti  iUUiani,  vol.  i.,  Florence.  1860; 
H.  Reuchlin,  OeechicfUe  ItaUene,  vol.  I,  Leipeic,  1860;  F. 
Nippold.  The  Papacy  in  the  19th  Century,  pp.  98-116,  New 
York.  1900. 

LAMENNAIS,  la^'men^'n^",  HUGUES  FBLICITB 
ROBERT  DE:  A  prominent  French  Roman  Cath- 
olic theological  author,  of  an  increasingly  liberal 
type;  b.  at  Saint-Malo  (on  the  English  Channel, 
200  m.  w.  of  Paris)  July  19,  1782;  d.  in  Paris  Feb. 
27,  1854.    His  childhood  was  marked  by  piety  of 


the  strict  Breton  type  and  great  devotion  to  study. 
In  1808  he  appeayred  as  a  defender  of  the  papal 
authority  in  his  Riflexiona  stir  rHat  de  Vigfite  en 
France  pendant  le  XVIIIme  eihie  el  aur  la  eitua- 
Hon  aduelUf  which  Napoleon's  goremment  at- 
tempted to  siq)press.  In  1811  he  enta«d  the 
seminary  of  Saint-Malo  to  study  for  the  priesthood. 
In  the  Tradition  de  Vigliee  aur  rinatitutian  da 
Mquea  (Paris,  1814),  written  jointly  with  his 
brother,  he  exulted  over  Napoleon's  downfall,  and 
on  the  return  from  Elba  sought  safety  in  England 
during  the  "  hundred  days."  In  1816  he  was  or- 
dained, and  continued  to  write  articles  in  the  Ro- 
man Catholic  and  l^timist  papers,  especially 
against  deism.  In  1817  appeared  the  first  volume 
of  his  principal  work,  the  Eaaai  aur  Vindifffrence  en 
mature  de  reUgion  (Eng.  transl.,  Eaaay  <m  Indiffer- 
ence in  Mattera  of  Religion,  London,  1895),  intended 
to  do  the  work  of  combating  the  prevalent  in- 
difference to  religion  and  arousing  interest  in  the 
Christian  cause.  Three  more  volumes  (1820-24) 
stirred  up  much  excitement,  and  called  forth  bit- 
ter accusations  on  the  part  of  the  Jesuits,  while 
the  Galilean  bishops  and  the  Sorbonne  were  luke- 
warm in  their  approval  In  1824  Lamennais 
visited  Rome,  and  declined  the  offer  of  a  cardinal's 
hat  made  by  Leo  XII.  His  treatise  De  la  religion 
eonaidirie  dana  aea  rapparia  avee  Vordre  politique  ei 
civil  (1826)  was  still  more  displeasing  to  the  Gal- 
ilean party  and,  in  spite  of  the  eloquence  of  his 
advocate,  Berryer,  suffered  a  judicial  condemna- 
tion. He  now  became  more  and  more  disaffected 
to  the  Bourbons,  whose  fall  he  predicted  in  his 
next  work,  Dea  progrka  de  la  revolution  et  de  la 
guerre  contre  Vigliae  (1829).  In  this  he  advocated 
the  separation  of  the  Church  from  the  State  which 
oppressed  and  fettered  it,  and  more  freedom  for 
the  people  as  well  as  for  the  Church.  After  the 
July  revolution  of  1830  he  b^gan  to  publish  UAvemr, 
a  newspaper  whose  motto  was  "  God  and  freedom; 
the  pope  and  the  people."  The  bishops  now  be- 
gan to  bring  formal  charges  against  Lamennais;  \se 
went  to  Rome  with  Lacordaire  and  Montalemberi 
in  1832,  but  found  little  support,  and  their  ideas 
were  condemned  by  the  new  pope,  Gregory  XVI., 
in  his  encyclical  of  Aug.  15.  The  publication  of 
VAvenir  was  abandoned.  Lamennais  retired  to 
La  Ch6naie,  and  gave  way  to  the  logical  develc^ 
ment  of  his  libend  principles,  marking  a  definite 
breach  with  Rome  by  the  publication  of  Paroles 
d*un  croyant  (1834;  Eng.  transL,  The  Worda  of  a 
Believer,  London,  1834, 1845, 1848, 1891),  which  wad 
condenmed  by  a  fresh  encyclical  of  July  7,  but  made 
a  deep  impression  on  the  people,  whom  he  addressed 
in  its  glowing  words  of  hope  and  love.  His  Livre  du 
peuple  (1837;  Eng.  transl.,  The  Book  of  the  People, 
London,  1838)  reminds  them  not  only  of  their 
rights  but  of  their  duties  in  the  tone  of  an  inspired 
prophet.  This  was  followed  by  a  number  of  fugi- 
tive writings  of  democratic  tendency,  of  which  Le 
Paya  et  le  gouvemement  cost  him  a  fine  of  two  thou- 
sand francs.  He  attempted  to  bring  his  new  ideas 
into  harmony  with  lus  original  prindplea  in  the 
Eaquiaae  d'une  phUoaophie  (4  vok.,  1841-46),  ac- 
cording to  which  the  truth  is  determined,  not  as  in 
his  first  book  by  the  Church,  but  by  human  reason, 


406 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lambniachinl 


examining,  judging,  and  confirming.  The  revolution 
of  1848  brought  him  fresh  hopes  and  fresh  disap- 
pointments. He  was  elected  to  the  National  Assem- 
bly, and  laid  before  it  the  project  of  a  constitution 
which  was  considered  beautiful  but  impracticable. 
After  the  coup  d'etat  (1851)  he  spent  the  short  re- 
mainder of  his  life  in  retirement.  He  had  a  noble 
and  active  natiu«,  never  content  unless  at  work. 
His  unselfish  piety  and  hmnility  were  unquestioned; 
hut  the  failure  of  all  his  plans  so  embittered  a  pos- 
itive and  passionate  disposition  as  to  lead  him  far 
away  from  the  principles  with  which  he  began  his 
life,  into  a  position  which  his  early  associates  consid- 
ered little  short  of  apostasy.  His  (Euvres  compUtea 
were  issued  in  twelve  volumes  at  Paris,  1836-37;  six 
volumes  of  (Euvrea  pasthumea  appeared  in  1855- 
1859  and  two  of  (Euvres  iniditea  in  1866. 

(C.  Pfbndbr.) 
BiBUOOBArBY:  Biographical  material  may  be  found  in: 
A.  Blaise,  J?Mai  hioffraphique  mix  hamennaii^  Paris,  1858; 
J.  M.  Peign^,  Lamennais,  sa  vie  inHme  h  la  Chinais,  Paris, 
1804;  £.  Dowden,  in  Fortnightly  Review,  xi  (1809),  pp. 
1-26;  C.  Beard,  in  Theological  Review,  x  (1873).  341  sqq., 
xi  (1874),  70  sqq.;  G.  J.  Harney,  in  Open  Court,  v  (1891), 
2959-62;  H.  Gibson,  UAbb€  de  Lamennaie,  London,  1899; 
C.  Boutard,  Lamennaie,  ea  vie  et  tea  doctrines,  vols,  i.-ii., 
Paris.  1905-08.  For  study  of  his  thought  oonsxilt :  T.  Passa. 
£tude  9ur  Lamennaie,  Paris,  1856;  M.  Lami,  Philoeophie 
de  Lamennaie,  ib.  1867;  O.  Bordage,  La  PhUoeophie  de 
Lamennaie,  Strasburg,  1869;  P.  Janet,  La  Phiioeophie  de 
lamennaie,  Paris,  1890;  E.  Spuller,  Lamennaie;  itude 
d'hiaioire  politique  et  religieuee,  ib.  1892;  F.  Bruneti^re, 
Nouveaux  eeeaie  eur  la  littirature  eontemporaine,  ib.  1895; 
A.  Molien  et  F.  Deune,  Lamennaie;  .  .  .  ses  idiee,  ib.  1899. 

LAMMAS-DAY:  The  English  name  for  the  fes- 
tival of  St.  Peter's  Chains,  Aug.  1,  which  com- 
memorates the  imprisonment  and  miraculous 
deliverance  of  the  apostle  (Acts  xii.  3-19).  The 
ancient  vernacular  English  name  is  derived  from 
the  custom  in  England  of  celebrating  at  that  time 
a  thanksgiving  for  the  wheat-harvest,  and  offering 
the  "  first-fruits  "  in  the  form  of  loaves  of  bread; 
whence  the  Middle  English  lammaaae,  from  the 
Anglo-Saxon  KLammtBSBe,  "  loaf-mass." 

LAMPS,  lam'pe,  FRIBDRICH  ADOLF:  Ger- 
man Reforaied  theologian;  b.  at  Detmold  Feb. 
19,  1683;  d.  at  Bremen  Dec.  8,  1729.  He  studied 
in  Bremen  1698-1702,  and  at  the  University 
of  Franeker  1702-03.  In  1703  he  was  called  as 
preacher  to  Weeze  near  Cleves,  in  1706  to  Dui»- 
burg,  and  in  1709  to  the  church  of  St.  Stephen  in 
Bremen.  From  1720  to  1727  he  was  professor  of 
dogmatics  and  church  .  history  at  Utrecht;  and 
from  1727  till  his  death  he  was  pastor  of  St.  Ans- 
^ar's  and  professor  at  the  gymnasium  in  Bremen. 
From  his  schools  in  Bremen  and  Utrecht  proceeded 
a.  great  number  of  men  who  exerted  a  salutary  in- 
fluence in  all  spheres  of  life  in  the  Reformed  Church. 
Lampe's  theology  was  essentially  Biblical;  and  it 
was  his  great  merit  to  further  Bible  study  in  the 
Reformed  Church,  and  to  revive  the  federal  theol- 
ogy (see  CoccEius,  Johanni»).  His  most  im- 
portant work  is  Geheimms  des  Onadenbundea,  dem 
grasaen  Bundeagott  zu  Ehren  und  alien  heUbeffierigen 
Seelen  zur  Erbauung  gedffnet  (6  vols.,  Bremen, 
1712  seq.;  Dutch  transl.,  1727).  The  first  volume 
treats  of  the  ''  nature  of  the  covenant  of  grace  " 
and  entirely  follows  the  fimdamental  conceptions 


of  Cocoeius.  The  following  volumes  trace  the 
church  of  God  historically  through  the  threefold 
economy  of  the  covenant  of  grace  under  the  prom- 
ise (voL  ii.),  the  law  (vols.  iii.  and  iv.),  and  the 
Gospel  (vols.  V.  and  vi.).  Lampe  adopted  the  sys- 
tematic form  which  Frans  Burmann  had  given  to 
the  federal  theology.  In  this  framework  the 
whole  content  of  theology  is  presented,  but  only 
in  its  results  for  practical  Christian  life,  and  in  a 
form  intelligible  to  all  persons  versed  in  the  Bible. 
It  is  owing  to  Lampe's  peculiar  union  of  theory 
and  practise  that  lus  spirit  as  that  of  no  other  theo- 
logian entered  the  congregations,  while  the  history 
of  theological  science  took  little  notice  of  him.  In 
the  doctrine  of  the  order  of  salvation  Lampe  gave 
to  Calvinism  and  Cocceianism  a  new  and  peculiarly 
Pietistic  turn,  by  emphasizing  the  Pietistic  atten- 
tion to  the  inner  life  of  the  individual  and  the  pres- 
sure of  personal  decision,  but  the  fimdamental  view 
of  Calvinism  guarded  him  against  all  excesses  of 
Pietistic  individUialism.  The  Church  was  for  him 
a  divine  institution,  and  he  was  averse  to  all  sepa- 
ratistic  tendencies.  Very  popular  have  been  his 
catechisms:  Milch  der  Wahrheit,  nach  ArUeiiung 
dea  Heidelberger  KaUchiamua  (1718);  Einleitung  zu 
dem  Oeheimnia  dea  Onadenbundea;  Erate  WahrheiU- 
milch  /Or  Sduglinge  am  Alter  und  Veratand;  also 
his  excellent  book  on  communion,  Der  heUige 
Brautachmuck  der  HochzeitrGdale  dea  Lammea  an 
aeiner  Bundeata/d  (Bremen,  1720).  He  also  wrote: 
CommerUariua  analytico-eosegeticua  in  Evangdium 
aecundum  Johannem  (3  vols.,  Amsterdam,  1724- 
1726;  Germ,  transl.,  2  vols.,  Leipsic,  1729);  De- 
lineatio  theologicB  acHvce  (Utrecht,  1727,  Germ, 
transl.,  Frankfurt,  1728),  the  first  system  of  ethics 
of  the  federal  theology;  and  Diaaertationum  .  .  . 
ayrUagma  (Amsterdam,  1737).  Together  with  C. 
van  Hase  the  yoimger  Lampe  edited  the  Bibliotheca 
hiatorico-philologicaF4heologica  (Bremen,  1718-27). 
He  also  took  a  prominent  position  among  hynm- 
writers  in  the  Reformed  Church. 

(E.  F.  Earl  MCllbr.) 
Bxbijoobapht:  O.  Thelemann,  Friedrieh  Adolf  Lampe, 
Bielefeld,  1868;  H.  L.  J.  Heppe,  Oeachichte  dee  PieHemue, 
pp.  236  aqq.,  479-480,  Leyden,  1879;  A.  Ritschl,  Oe- 
echu^Ue  dee  Pietiemua,  i.  427  aqq.,  Bonn,  1880.  An  index 
to  his  own  writini^s  and  to  earlier  literature  about  him  is 
in  A.  J.  van  der  Aa,  Biograj^iach  Woordenbock,  der  Nedef 
landen,  xi.  83,  Harlem,  1862  sqq. 

LAMPBTIARS.    See  Messalianb. 

LAMY,  la''mi',  BERNARD:  French  Roman 
Catholic;  b.  at  Le  Mans  (130  m.  s.w.  of  Paris), 
June,  1640;  d.  at  Rouen  Jan.  29,  1715.  He  en- 
tered the  Congregation  of  the  Oratory  in  1658,  and 
became  professor  of  philosophy  in  Saumur  in  1671, 
afterwaitl  at  the  University  of  Angers.  On  ac- 
count of  lus  Cartesian  views  he  was  deposed  from 
his  chair  at  Angers  in  1675  and  driven  from  the 
city.  Through  the  favor  of  Cardinal  Le  Camus  he 
was  soon  given  the  chair  of  theology  in  the  semi- 
nary at  Grenoble,  and  in  1686  was  recalled  to  Paris 
as  professor  of  theology  in  the  seminary  of  St.  Mag- 
loire.  For  publishing  a  book  without  proper  per- 
mission he  was  transferred  to  the  Oratory  at  Rouen 
in  1690.  His  principal  works  are:  L'ari  de  parler 
(Paris,  1675);    Entretiena  aur  lea  aciencea  (Brussels, 


lAnoa,  Th«  Holy 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


406 


1684);  AppanUu8adlnbl%a$acraiGnnMe,  1686;  Fr. 

transL,  Lyons,  1709;  Eog.  transL,  Apparatus  BtbU- 

CU8,  London,  1723);  Harmoma  aeu  eoneordia  quahior 

EvangeUttarum  (Pftris,  1689;   enlarged  ed.,  2  vols., 

1699);  and  the  posthumouB  I>«  iabeniaeulofiBd«rU,de 

9aneta  eivUaU  Jeruaalum  a  de  templo  (1720),  upon 

which  he  worked  for  thirty  years. 

Bibuoobaprt:    KL,   vU.  1372-74;    J.   Pot^  iloffm  kiMto- 

riqum,  Le  lUna.  1817;     B.  Haurteu,  HUi.  UiUrain  du 

AfaiiM.  U.  117  aqq.,  Pttfii,  1844;   Liehtanberier.  BSR,  vii. 

70IK710. 

LANCE,  THE  HOLT:  The  instrument  with 
which  the  side  of  Christ  was  pierced  after  his  death 
upon  the  cross  (John  xix.  31).  It  was  believed  to 
have  been  found,  with  the  other  instruments  of  the 
passion,  by  Helena,  the  mother  of  Constantine  (see 
Helena,  Saint,  1),  and  in  the  time  of  Bede  was 
said  to  be  preserved  at  Jerusalem.  The  metal  head 
was  carried  by  the  Emperor  Heradius  to  Constan- 
tinople, and  later  to  Antioch,  where  it  was  discov- 
ered by  the  crusaders  in  1098.  Baldwin  II.  pledged 
it  to  the  Venetians,  from  whoin  Louis  IX.  of  France 
obtained  it  in  1239  and  brought  it  to  Paris.  Here 
it  was  preserved  and  venerated  in  the  Sainte  Cha- 
pelle,  together  with  the  crown  of  thorns;  but  since 
1796  it  has  disappeared.  The  larger  portion  re- 
mained in  Constantinople  until  1492,  when  Ba- 
jaset  presented  it  to  Innocent  VIII.;  since  then  it 
has  been  preserved  in  St.  Peter's.  A  second  lance 
was  venerated  in  the  Middle  Ages  among  the  sacred 
treasures  of  the  empire.  According  to  some  au- 
thorities it  was  the  lance  of  Constantine,  contain- 
ing some  of  the  nails  of  the  cross,  while  others  main- 
tained that  it  was  the  actual  lance  of  the  crucifixion. 
The  Roman  Catholic  Church  has  never,  even  when 
sanctioning  lituigical  devotion  to  these  relics,  pro- 
nounced upon  their  genuineness.  For  the  so-called 
**  Holy  Lance  "  used  in  the  Eastern  Church  in  the 
celebration  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  see  Eastern 
Church,  {  19. 

Bibuoobapbt:  Benedict  XIV.,  De  ,  .  .  eanonigatUme, 
eheps.  XXV..  xxxi..  4  toIb.,  Bonon*.  1734-38;  C.  Rohault 
de  Fleury.  Mhnoin  tw  Ua  in$irumenit  de  la  poMton,  Paris, 
1860;  KL,  vii.  1410-22. 

LANCELOTTI,  lOn^'chMetaf,  GIOVANNI  PAOLO: 
Professor  of  canon  law  at  Perugia,  where  he  died 
in  1590,  and  known  as  the  author  of  the  InaiUvr 
tianes  juris  oatumici  which  are  appended  to  not  a 
few  editions  of  the  Corpus  juris  oanonici.  The 
thought  of  writing  a  text-book  of  canon  law  on  the 
model  of  Justinian's  "  Institutes  "  had  already  occu- 
pied Lancelotti  for  some  time  when  in  1557  Pope 
Paul  IV.  commissioned  him  to  undertake  it.  The 
work  was  not,  however,  formally  approved  by  the 
pope,  and  appeared  in  1563  as  a  private  publication. 
It  was  first  adopted  by  Petrus  Matthaeus  in  his  edi- 
tion of  the  Carpus  juris  f  1591.  The  value  of  Lan- 
celotti's  Institutiones  lies  in  the  fact  that  from  them 
it  is  easy  to  become  acquainted  with  the  law  in 
force  prior  to  the  Council  of  Trent,  and  with  the 
practise  of  that  age.  The  later  editors  have  care- 
fully printed  out  in  their  notes  the  differences  in- 
troduced by  the  newer  legislation.      E.  Sehlino. 

Bxbuoosaprt:  O.  B.  Vennislioli,  Bioffrafla  degli  teriticri 
Perugini,  ii.  40  eaq^  Penicia.  1820;  J.  F.  Ton  Schulte, 
Oeaehichie  der  Quetten  und  LUeraiur  dee  eanonuehen  Rechia, 


iu.  451  aqq..    Stuttcvt.  1880;  KL,  viL  1378;    Ltobten- 
berger.  ESR,  vii  718-710. 

LANDELSi  WILLIAM:  British  Baptist;  b.  near 
Berwick,  Scotland,  Apr.  25,  1823;  d.  at  Kirkcaldy, 
Scotland,  July  7,  1899.  His  father  was  an  Auld 
Kirk  farmer  and  fisherman.  Converted  (c.  1841) 
under  Primitive  Methodist  influence,  he  was  en- 
couraged by  the  Morisonians  to  enter  the  ministry, 
and  in  1843  began  a  course  of  study  under  James 
Morison  at  Kilmarnock,  with  whom  he  spent  three 
sununers.  He  was  ordained  in  1844  and  became 
pastor  of  a  small  Morisonian  church  at  Darvel.  He 
seems  to  have  come  under  Baptist  influence  at 
about  this  time,  and  when  called  upon  as  pastor  to 
baptise  infants,  his  scruples  led  him  to  examine  the 
question  of  infant  baptism.  Having  become  con- 
vinced that  it  was  without  Scriptural  warrant,  he 
received  believers'  baptism  at  the  hands  of  T.  Mac- 
lean, of  Dunbar,  and  soon  afterward  became  pas- 
tor at  Cupar  (July,  1846).  From  1850  to  1855  he 
was  pastor  in  Birmingham.  His  most  important 
work  was  in  Regents  Park  Chapel,  London  (1855- 
1883),  where  his  eloquence  attracted  large  audiences 
and  where  he  had  as  members  and  colaborers  Sir 
Morton  Peto,  Lord  Justice  Lush,  Principal  Angus, 
and  other  eminent  Baptists.  From  1883  to  1895 
he  was  pastor  of  the  Dublin  Street  Church,  Edin- 
burgh, his  last  pastorate.  He  published  about 
twenty-five  vohunes,  mostly  sermons;  among  the 
most  important  are:  The  Oospd  in  Various  Aspects 
(London,  1856) ;  The  Message  of  Christianity  (1856) ; 
The  Unseen  (1859);  Woman* s  Sphere  and  Work 
(1859);  True  Manhood  (1861);  The  Path  of  Life 
(1862);  Seed  for  Springtime  (1863);  Everyday  Re- 
ligion (1863);  and  The  Cross  of  Christ  (1864). 

Bibuookapht:   T.  D.  Landeb,  Memoir  of  WiUiam  LandeU, 
London.  1000  (by  hk  eon):  Baptiat  Handbook,  ib.  1000. 

LANDBRBR,  lOnd'er-er,  MAXIMILIAN  ALBERT 
VON:  One  of  the  most  important,  though  not 
best  known,  representatives  of  the  Vermittlung»- 
theologie;  b.  at  Maulbronn  (23  m.  n.w.  of  Stutt^ 
gart)  Jan.  14,  1810;  d.  at  Tubingen  Apr.  13,  1878. 
From  1823  to  1827  he  studied  in  Maulbronn,  and 
then  went  to  the  theological  seminary  of  Tu- 
bingen, just  at  the  time  when  Baiu*  had  begun  his 
academic  career,  and  the  transition  from  the  su- 
pernatural theology  of  the  older  Tubingen  school 
to  the  Hegelianism  which  characterised  the  later 
was  under  way.  After  the  completion  of  his  studies 
in  1832,  he  became  assistant  to  his  father,  who  was 
pastor  of  Walddorf,  then  a  teacher  at  Maulbronn, 
and  in  1835  in  Tilbingen.  Four  years  later  he  was 
appointed  first  deacon  at  GOppingen,  and  in  1841 
professor  at  Tubingen. 

Landerer  considered  it  his  task  to  mediate  be- 
tween the  negative  tendency  of  Baur  and  the  or- 
thodox theology  of  Beck.  He  tried  to  show  that 
the  fundamental  principles  of  the  traditional  faith 
might  be  maintained  without  essential  rejection 
of  the  results  of  historical  criticism  or  clear  and 
scientific  method.  In  opposition  to  Hegel's  abso- 
lute knowledge,  Landerer  upheld  experience  in  the 
ethico-religious  sphere  as  well  as  that  of  natural 
science.  But  the  facts  of  the  ethico-religious  con- 
sciousness are  inseparable  from  the  revelation  of 


407 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lanoe,  The  Holy 
Lanfirano 


Scripture,  which  again,  in  its  historical  develop- 
ment, connects  itself  with  the  individual  conscious- 
ness. The  central  principle  of  dogmatics  he  con- 
sidered to  be  the  unity  of  the  divine  and  human  by 
the  perfect  union  of  God  and  man  in  the  person 
of  Jesus,  which  proves  the  Christian  religion  to  be 
absolute.  He  deviated  from  the  teachings  of  the 
Church  in  his  anthropooentric  construction  of 
Christology;  yet,  though  placing  the  center  of 
Christ's  personality  in  his  humanity,  he  sought  to 
bring  out  the  other  side  by  emphasizing  the  abso- 
lute sinlessness  and  supernatural  birth  of  Christ 
and  the  concrete  facts  of  revelation.  On  the  whole, 
the  results  of  Landerer's  dogmatic  teachings  were 
of  a  positive  nature,  although  not  in  the  sense  of 
orthodox  exdusiveness.  He  always  kept  his  mind 
open  for  the  results  of  modem  science  and  criti- 
cism— to  such  an  extent  that  it  was  exceedingly 
difficult  for  him  to  arrive  at  final  results,  and  he 
could  never  make  up  his  mind  to  publish  a  dogmatic 
system.  His  contributions  to  the  second  edition 
of  the  RE  show  his  talents  in  the  sphere  of  theol- 
ogy; his  article  on  Melanchthon  especially  made 
a  remarkable  impression.  Not  less  important  is 
that  on  the  relation  of  grace  and  freedom  in  the 
communication  of  salvation  in  the  JahrbUcher  fur 
deuUcke  Theclogie,  which  he  helped  to  foimd.  After 
his  death  his  pupils,  P.  Buder  and  H.  Weiss  pub- 
lished two  university  lectures  under  the  title  Zur 
Dogmatik,  with  his  memorial  address  on  ^rdinand 
Christian  Baur  (Tttbingen,  1879);  P.  Lang  edited 
a  collection  of  his  sermons  (1880);  and  P.  Zeller  a 
third  posthmnous  work,  NeueUe  Doffmengeschichie 
von  Semier  hia  auf  die  Gegenwart  (1881). 

(H.  SCHMIDTf.) 
Bibuoorapht:    Worle  der  Erinnerung  an  Dr.  Max  Albert 
Landerer,  TQbiogen,  1878;    JakrhQeher  fUr  deuttehe  Theo- 
loffie,    1878,    part  3;     O.    Pfleiderer,    in    ProtsatantUche 
Kird^enMeUunOt  1878*  no.  20. 

LAITDO:  Pope  Aug.,  913-Mar.,  914.  His  pon- 
tificate fell  within  the  period  during  which  the  Ro- 
man nobles  ruled  both  the  city  and  the  papal  see, 
so  that  no  details  of  his  administration  are  known. 

(A.  Hauck.) 
Bibuographt:    Liber  ponUficalie,  ed.  L.  Duchesiie,  i.  148. 

Paris,  1886;   Bower.  Popee,  ii.  308. 

LAITDO,  ATHANASIO.    See  Agapios  Monachob. 

LANFRANC. 

Early  Life,  to  1042  (f  1). 
At  Beo  and  Gaen,  1042-70  (f  2). 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  107O-89  (§  3). 
Writings  (I  4). 

Lanfranc,  prior  of  Bee  and  archbishop  of  Can- 
terbury, was  bom  at  Pavia,  Italy,  about  the  be- 
ginning of  the  eleventh  century  (1005?);  d.  at 
Canterbury  May  24,  1089.  Details  of  his  life  are 
scanty,  for  he  himself  left  no  memoirs,  nor  was  any 
biography  of  him  written  until  forty  years  after 
his  death.    He  appears   to  have  been  of  noble 

parentage,  and  was  educated  in  rhet- 

I.  Early  Life,  oric  and  Roman  law.    After  his  father's 

to  1042.     death,  he  left  Pavia  for  a  time,  and 

according  to  some  doubtful  accounts 
continued  his  legal  studies  at  Bologna.  Returning 
to  his  native  city  a  master  of  Lombard  law,  he  be- 


came one  of  the  three  chief  jurists  of  the  Pavian 
school.  Probably  banished  as  an  adherent  of  the 
nobility  in  the  social  and  political  struggles  which 
raged  in  the  Lombard  cities  from  1035  to  1043,  he 
suddenly  left  Pavia  and  settled  at  Avranches  in 
Normandy  as  a  teacher.  Finding  little  favor  there, 
he  soon  determined  to  go  to  Rouen,  the  capital  of 
Normandy,  but  on  his  way  is  said  to  have  been 
attacked  by  robbers  and  left  bound  and  blind- 
folded in  the  forest.  In  the  terror  of  the  night,  he 
vowed  to  dedicate  himself  to  God,  if  he  should  be 
freed,  and  in  the  morning,  when  released  by  pass- 
ing travelers,  he  applied  for  entrance  at  the  abbey 
of  Bee,  near  the  place  where  he  had  been  attacked. 
The  abbey,  founded  a  few  years  previously  by 
an  old  warrior  named  Herluin  (see  Bec,  Abbey  of), 
was  both  poor  and  ill-governed,  and  Lanfranc 
quickly  determined  to  leave  it.  Herluin,  however, 
persuaded  him  to  remain  and  in  1045  or  1046  made 
him  prior.  In  1049  he  went  to  Reims, 
2.  At  Bec  probably  to  call  the  attention  of  the 
and  Caen,  Curia* to  the  uncanonical  marriage  of 
1042-70.  William  the  Conqueror  with  Matilda 
of  Flanders,  and  accompanied  Leo  IX. 
to  Rome.  There,  at  Easter,  1050,  he  received  the 
hostile  letter  of  Berengar  oif  Toiurs  (q.v.),  and  at 
the  command  of  the  pope  detailed  his  own  views 
on  the  Eucharist  before  the  Lateran  Council,  gain- 
ing both  their  approval  and  the  favor  of  Leo,  who 
sent  him  to  the  Coimcil  of  Veroelli  as  papal  theo- 
logian, thus  enabling  him  to  score  a  second  triumph 
over  Berengar.  Equally  crushing  was  his  victory 
over  his  opponent's  adherents  in  Normandy,  who 
were  finally  expelled  from  the  ooxmtry*  by  Duke 
William. 

Meanwhile  Lanfranc's  school  was  steadily  in- 
creasing both  in  numbers  and  prestige,  and  enjoyed 
the  special  favor  of  Popes  Nicholas  II.  and  Alexan- 
der II.,  so  that  Lanfranc  became  the  greatest  teacher 
and  dogmatic  authority  of  the  West.  This  pros- 
perity was  interrupted  at  the  end  of  1058  or  the 
beginning  of  1059  by  William,  who,  censured  by 
the  Curia  for  his  marriage  with  Matilda,  banished 
Lanfranc  from  his  dominions  as  his  chief  antago- 
nist. But  the  latter  appeased  the  duke  by  going  to 
Rome  and  winning  the  papal  sanction  to  the  mai^ 
riage.  The  result  of  this  diplomacy  so  impressed 
William  that  he  made  his  former  opponent  Mb  chief 
councilor,  thus  inaugurating  a  new  period  in  Lan- 
franc's  life.  The  exact  extent  of  his  influence  is 
uncertain,  but  William's  alliance  with  Alexander 
II.  in  1066  was  evidently  due  to  him,  and  the 
grateful  duke  made  him  abbot  of  the  new  monas- 
tery of  St.  Stephen  in  Caen.  In  August  of  the  fol- 
lowing year  William  offered  him  the  vacant  arch- 
diocese of  Rouen,  but  this  was  declined  by  the 
abbot  who,  in  1068,  went  to  Rome  as  the  con- 
queror's envoy  to  secure  a  papal  embassy  to 
reorganize  ecclesiastical  affairs  in  England.  This 
embassy  entered  England  early  in  1070  and  in  the 
summer  appeared  in  Normandy  and  announced 
to  the  abbot  of  Caen  that  he  had  been  chosen  to 
succeed  the  deposed  Stigand  as  archbishop  of 
Canterbury. 

On  Aug.  29,  1070,  Lanfranc  was  enthroned  as 
archbishop  of  Canterbury,  where,  after  a  vain  re* 


Laafnae 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


408 


quest  to  Alexander  11.  to  be  permitted  to  resign, 
he  triumphed  both  over  the  disorganization  of  his 
archdiocese  and  such  powerful  enemies  as  Odo  of 
Bayeux  (half-brother  of  the  king).  His  difficulties 
arose  from  two  problems,  the  questions  of  the 
primacy   and   the   cathedral   monas- 

3.  Arch-    teries.     During  the  last  few  decades 

biabop  of  the  archbishc^ric  of  York  had  not  only 
CAnterbofy,  claimed  independence  in  the  north  of 

1070-^  England,  but  had  asserted  jurisdiction 
over  the  dioceses  of  Worcester,  Lich- 
field, and  Dorchester.  Lanfranc,  after  consider^ 
able  controversy,  exacted  personal  submission 
from  Thomas,  the  new  archbishop  of  York,  but 
was  obliged  to  prove  the  ancient  and  legal  inferior- 
ity of  York  to  Canterbury  to  secure  the  continued 
supremacy  of  Canterbury.  In  1071,  when  both 
archbishops  appeared  at  Rome  to  receive  the  pal- 
lium, Alexander  II.,  declaring  himself  unable  to 
solve  the  problem,  referred  the  matter  to  an  Eng- 
lish council,  at  the  same  time  appointing  Lanfranc 
his  vicar.  The  question  was  considered  at  Win- 
chester at  Easter,  1072,  but  the  historic  suprem- 
acy of  Canterbury  was  denied.  At  the  same  time 
an  attempt,  aimed  at  Lanfranc  himself  as  a  monk, 
was  initiated  to  transform  all  cathedral  monasteries 
in  England  into  secular  cloisters,  and  the  leaders  of 
this  scheme  found  themselves  able  to  win  the  royal 
support.  In  this  juncture  Lanfranc,  who  feared 
that  a  double  defeat  would  annul  all  his  influence 
in  Church  and  State,  forged,  or  had  forged,  ten 
papal  briefs,  as  well  as  a  legend  and  three  canons 
of  a  council,  which  he  produced  at  Windsor  in  Whit- 
suntide, 1072,  thus  gaining  an  easy  victory,  which 
won  him  recognition  as  primate  and  metropolitan. 

After  this  victory  Lanfranc  energetically  began 
to  reform  and  reorganize  the  ecclesiastical  condi- 
tion of  England,  beginning  with  Canterbury.  He 
transferred  episcopal  sees  from  villages  to  cities, 
secured  the  independence  of  the  ecclesiastical 
coiirts,  and  introduced  continental  canon  law,  at 
the  same  time  gradually  filling  the  monasteries 
with  continental  monks  and  increasing  the  sevei^ 
ity  of  their  rule.  Yet  he  was  no  radical,  as  is  seen 
by  his  attitude  on  the  celibacy  of  the  clergy.  Him- 
self an  advocate  of  this  principle,  he  obliged  only 
the  cathedral  staff  to  put  away  their  wives,  though 
he  directed  that  henceforth  each  of  the  clergy,  on 
taking  deacon's  orders,  should  make  the  vow  of 
celibacy.  Despite  his  exclusion  of  the  English 
from  Ugh  positions  in  churches  and  monasteries, 
for  which  he  seems  in  every  case  to  have  had  good 
reason,  he  regarded  himself  as  an  Englishman;  and 
in  tins  spirit  he  promoted  the  cult  of  national  Eng- 
lish saints  and  opposed  all  unnecessary  harshness 
toward  the  conquered.  Since  his  victory  at  Wind- 
sor, he  was  the  mightiest  man  in  England  save  the 
king,  whose  chief  councilor  he  was  and  who  en- 
trusted him  with  the  administration  of  the  king- 
dom during  his  own  absences  on  the  continent. 

Yet  even  this  power  was  insufficient  for  him, 
and  in  1072  he  asserted  the  primacy  of  Canterbury 
over  Ireland  as  well  as  all  Britain,  actually  gaining 
it  permanently  in  Ireland  and  Wales,  and  for  a 
time  in  Scotland.  But  the  higher  he  rose,  the 
cooler  were  his  relations  with  the  Curia.    From  the 


very  first  Gregory  VII.  was  scarcely  in  sympathy 
with  Lanfranc,  who  doubtless  encouraged  William 
in  refusing  to  take  the  oath  of  allegiance  to  Greg- 
ory; while  the  archbishop  seems  only  to  have  been 
waiting  for  a  favorable  <^portunity  to  break  with 
the  papal  court.  This  chance  came  with  the  con- 
quest of  Rome  by  Henry  lY.,  when  Lanfranc  en- 
tered into  negotiations  with  Hugo  the  Wise,  the 
leader  of  the  Guibertines,  but  Ids  plans  came  to 
nought,  and  England  remained  neutraL  His  great 
friend,  William  the  Conqueror,  died  Sept.  7,  1067, 
and  William  II.  repaid  the  archbish<y's  loyalty 
and  energy  with  ingratitude,  so  that  death  came  &s 
a  kindly  friend  to  save  him  from  deeper  sorrows. 

As  in  character,  so  as  an  author  Lanfranc  was  far 
inferior  to  his  pupil  and  sucoess(»>  Ansefan  of  Can- 
terbury (q.v.).  His  few  works,  which  are  almost 
entirely  occasicmal  treatises,  are  as  follows:  Ltber 
de  carport  et  Mmguine  Domini  contra  Berengarium, 

which  consists  of  two  parts,  one  re- 

4.  Wri-     futing   Berengar's   attacks   on  Hum- 

tingB.       bert  of  Moyenmoutier  and  the  Roman 

Church,  and  the  other  defending  the 
usual  Roman  Catholic  doctrine  of  the  sacraments, 
the  author's  only  advance  over  his  predecessors 
being  his  assumption  that  the  body  and  blood  ci 
Christ  are  received  even  by  the  unworthy.  The 
treatise  is  really  identical  with  the  letter  addressed 
by  Lanfranc,  while  abbot  of  Caen,  to  Berengar, 
and  was  imposed  in  1069  or  1070.  A  portion  of 
Lanfranc's  correspondence  during  his  primacy  hss 
been  preserved  as  Decrdales  epishda.  The  Scrip- 
turn  de  ardinaJtume  tua  was  written  between  1075 
and  1087  and  treats  of  his  conflict  with  Thomas, 
archbishop  of  York.  The  iStahito,  or  ConstiJtutumes, 
of  the  cathedral  monastery  of  Canterbury,  com- 
posed before  1084,  fall  into  two  parts,  one  contain- 
ing the  agenda  and  remarkably  similar  to  the  Coi^ 
cordia  regularis  of  Athelwold  of  Winchester,  thus 
presupposing  an  English  source;  and  the  second 
discussing  the  administration  of  the  monastery  and 
corresponding  in  part  word  for  word  with  the  Ordo 
Cluniacenns  of  St.  Bernard.  Brief  and  unimpor- 
tant works  are  his  LCbdlus  de  cektnda  confessione, 
sermo  sive  sententia,  and  AnnoUUiunctdcg  (glosses 
on  Cassian's  Collationee).  The  Oratio  in  condlio 
habita  and  the  Eluddariumf  printed  in  editions  of 
Lanfranc^s  works,  are  not  his,  and  the  authenticity 
of  his  glosses  on  the  Pauline  epistles  is  questioned, 
although  it  may  be  regarded,  on  good  manuscript 
evidence,  as  genuine.  The  following  works  as- 
cribed to  Lanfranc  are  lost:  De  eacramentis  ex- 
communicatorum;  NonnuUa  scripta  contra  Berenr 
garium;  Laudes,  triumpki  ei  res  geetm  WOhdm 
comitis  (possibly  identical  with  the  work  of  Guido 
of  Amiens);  and  Hisloria  ecdenasHca  (probably 
the  same  as  the  Scriptum  de  ordinatione  sua).  The 
influence  of  Lanfranc  was  more  potent  as  teacher 
than  as  author,  although  he  neither  founded  nor 
could  found  a  theological  school.  Even  his  most 
important  theological  scholar,  Ansefan,  quickly 
marked  out  ways  of  his  own,  in  method  following 
Berengar  rather  than  Lanfranc,  who  probably 
taught  primarily  as  a  jurist.  There  is  some  evidence 
that  he  lectur^  on  canon  law  in  Bee,  where  Ivo 
of  Chartres  (q.v.)  was  his  pupil;  and  it  is  accordingly 


400 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lanfrano 
Iianv 


possible  that  to  Lanfranc  is  really  due  the  solution 

of  the  problem  of  investiture,  through  which  Ivo 

achieved  his  fame.  (H.  B6hmbb.) 

Biblioobapht:    The  Opera  were  edited  by  L.  d'Acbery, 

Paris,  1648,  and  (inefficiently)  by  Giles  in  PEA,  2  vols., 

Oxford,  1844,  from  both  of  which  they  were  republished 

in  MPL,  cl.     Some  of  Lanfranc's  letters  are  in  D.  Wil- 

kins.  Concilia  Magna  Britannia^  vol.  i.,  London,  1767. 

Sources  for  a  life  are  the  Vita  by  Eadmer,  in  ASB,  May, 
vi.  848-952;  another  life  with  commentary  is  in  the  same, 
pp.  832-847,  also,  with  Mabillon's  text  and  D'Achery's 
notes,  in  MPL,  d.;  Eadmer 's  HxBtaria  novorum  in  Ano- 
lia,  ed.  M.  Rule,  in  RotU  Seriea,  no.  81,  pp.  20  sqq.,  Lon- 
don, 1884;  William  of  Malmesbury.  Geata  pontificum 
Anglorum,  ed.  N.  E.  S.  A.  Hamilton  in  Rolls  Series,  no. 
52,  pp.  37  sqq.,  ib.  1870;  Ouilelmus  Fictavensis,  Oetta 
GuiUlmi  II.,  ed.  J.  A.  Giles,  in  SeriptoreM  rerum  .  .  .  Wil^ 
helmi,  ib.  1845.  Modem  lives  are  by:  A.  Gharma,  Paris, 
1849  (not  to  be  neglected);  W.  and  M.  Wilks,  The  Three 
Archbi^iopa  Lanfranc,  Aneelm,  A  Becket,  London.  1858; 
J.  de  Crosal,  Pftris,  1877;  P.  Moiraghi,  Pavia,  1889;  E. 
Languemare,  Paris,  1902.  Further  material  is  found  in 
E.  A.  Freeman,  Norman  Conqueet,  vols.  ii.-iv.,  London, 
1879;  idem.  WiUiam  Rufue,  i.  1-140,  ii.  359-360.  ib. 
1882;  idem.  WiUiam  the  Conqueror,  pp.  141-146,  ib.  1888 
(all  valuable);  T.  Wright,  Biographia  Britannica  Uieraria, 
ii.  1-14.  ib.  1846;  E.  Churton.  HUt.  qf  the  Early  Engliah 
Church,  chap,  xv.,  London.  1850;  W.  F.  Hook.  Livee  of 
the  ArMnahopg  of  Canterbury,  vol.  ii.  chap,  ii.,  ib.  1862; 
M.  Rule,  Life  and  Timea  of  St.  Anaelm,  i.  163-181,  ib. 
1883;  J.  H.  Overton,  The  Church  in  England,  i.  161-169, 
173-175  et  passim,  ib.  1897;  H.  Bfihmer,  Kirehe  und 
Stoat  in  England  und  in  der  Normandie,  Leipsie.  1899; 
idem,  Die  FMschungen  Lanfranke  von  Canterbury,  ib., 
1902;  W.  R.  W.  Stephens.  The  Engliah  Church  {1060- 
IfgJB),  passim.  London.  1901;  Geillier,  Avieure  eacrie* 
xiii.  165-175,  290-295.  440-459;  Hialovre  liXUraire  de  la, 
France,  viii.  260-305;  SchafT,  Chrietian  Church,  iv.  554- 
572;  DNB,  xxxii.  8^89  (where  references  to  other  litera- 
ture are  given);  and  the  literature  under  Berenoab. 

LANG,  long,  AUGUST:  German  Reformed;  b. 
at  Huppichteroth  (near  Gummersbach,  24  m.  e.  of 
Cologne)  Feb.  26,  1867.  He  studied  in  Bonn 
(1886-88,1889-90;  Th.  Lie,  1890)  and  Berlin  (1888- 
1889),  and  since  1893  has  been  cathedral  preacher  in 
Halle;  since  1900  he  has  also  been  privat^ocent  for 
church  history  at  the  university  of  the  same  city. 
He  has  written  Wurttembergs  Gemeinschaften  (Bar- 
men, 1892);  Daa  hduasliche  Leben  Johann  Calvina 
(Munich,  1893);  Die  Bekehrung  Johann  Ccdvins 
(Leipsie,  1897);  Der  Evangdienkommenlar  Martin 
Bvizera  und  die  Grundzuge  seiner  Theologie  (1900); 
Die  Bedeutung  der  reformierten  Theologie  fUr  die  re- 
ligiose Lage  der  Gegenwart  (Neukirchen,  1905);  Der 
HeidelbergerKatechismus  und  vier  verwandie  Katechis- 
men  (Leo  Juds  und  Microns  Jdeine  Katechismen,  sowie 
die  beiden  Vorarbeiten  Ursin's)  whet  einer  kistorisch- 
theologischen  Einleitung  (Leipsie,  1907) ;  and  Johan- 
nes Calvin,  Ein  L^bewinld  zu  seinem  4OO,  Gebwrts- 
tag  (1909). 

LANG,  COSMO  GORDON:  Church  of  England, 
archbishop  of  York  and  primate  of  England; 
b.  at  Aberdeen,  of  Presbyterian  parentage,  Oct.  31, 
1S64.  He  was  educated  at  Glasgow  University 
and  BaUiol  College,  Oxford  (B.A.,  1885),  and  then 
studied  law,  but  suddenly  determined  to  take  or- 
ders and  pursued  theological  studies  at  Cuddes- 
don,  being  ordered  deacon  in  1890  and  advanced 
to  the  priesthood  in  the  following  year.  He  was 
fellow  of  All  Souls',  Oxford,  in  1888-93,  curate  of 
Leeds  in  1890-93,  fellow  of  Magdalen  College,  Ox- 
ford, and  dean  of  divinity  in  1893-96,  vicar  of  St. 


Mary  the  Viigin  (the  university  church),  Oxford, 
in  1894-96,  and  vicar  of  Porteea,  as  well  as  chap- 
lain of  the  Kingston  prison,  in  1896-1901.  He  was 
also  examining  chaplain  to  the  bishop  of  Lichfield 
in  1894-96  and  to  the  bishop  of  Oxford  in  1894- 
1901,  honorary  chaplain  to  Queen  Victoria  in  1899- 
1901,  and  select  preacher  at  Oxford  in  1896  and 
Cambridge  in  1897.  In  1901  he  was  consecrated 
suffragan  bishop  of  Stepney,  and  in  1908,  on  the 
resignation  of  Archbishop  W.  D.  Maclagan  (q.v.), 
was  appointed  archbishop  of  York.  He  has  writ- 
ten: Miracles  of  Jesus  as  Marks  of  the  Way  of  Life 
(London,  1900);  Thoughts  on  Some  of  the  Parables 
of  Jesus  (1905);  Opportunity  of  the  Church  of  Eng^ 
land  (1905);  and  Principles  of  Religious  Education 
(1906). 

LANG,  HEINRICH:  Advocate  of  liberalism  in 
Switzerland  and  Germany;  b.  at  Frommem,  near 
Balingen  (38  m.  s.w.  of  Stuttgart),  WUrttemberg, 
Nov.  14,  1826;  d.  at  Zurich  Jan.  13,  1876.  He 
entered  the  University  of  Tubingen  at  the  age  of 
eighteen,  and  there  came  strongly  under  the  influ- 
ence of  Hegelianism.  Nevertheless,  he  did  not  go 
to  the  radical  extremes  of  the  Neohegelians,  being 
restrained  by  the  tenets  of  Schleiermacher;  yet  in 
the  great  theological  struggle  precipitated  by 
Strauss,  Baur,  and  their  school  at  Ttlbingen,  he 
took  a  decided  stand  on  the  side  of  unfettered  in- 
vestigation. Like  Strauss,  he  accepted  the  nega- 
tive results  of  philosophical  and  historical  criticism 
concerning  miracles  and  supernatural  dogmas; 
while,  like  Baur,  he  held  primitive  C^istian  Utera- 
ture  and  the  history  of  Christian  dogma  to  be  a 
necessary  and  continuous  process,  whereby  C!hri»- 
tian  consciousness  seeks  to  explain  its  absolute 
content  in  the  formulas  given  it.  Despite  his  un- 
restricted investigations,  Lang  retained  his  inter- 
est in  practical  religion,  but  shortly  after  passing 
lus  theological  examination  in  Aug.,  1848,  a  speech 
in  favor  of  the  abrogation  of  the  Frankfort  Parlia- 
ment and  the  establishment  of  a  German  republic 
exposed  him  to  the  danger  of  legal  proceedings,  and 
he  accordingly  fled  to  Wartau,  in  the  Swiss  canton 
of  St.  Gall,  where  he  was  pastor  1848-63.  In  this 
pastorate  he  first  published  a  small  collection  of 
sermons  (St.  Gall,  1853),  to  prove  that  the  liberal 
theologian,  while  still  maintaining  his  position, 
may  preach  in  edifying  and  popular  manner,  and 
may  be  equally  devoted  to  his  pulpit  and  his  studies. 
His  own  theological  investigations  were  set  forth 
in  his  Versuch  einer  chrisUichen  Dogmatic  (Berlin, 
1858;  2d  ed.,  1868),  showing  that  the  religious 
principle  of  Christianity  must  be  revised  on  the 
basis  of  modern  science,  this  principle  itself  being 
none  other  than  spirituality  as  contrasted  with  the 
pagan  religions  of  nature,  and  childlike  dependence 
on  God  as  opposed  to  Jewish  legalism.  This  work 
is  particularly  characterized  by  its  theories  of  the 
atonement  and  C!hristology,  in  which  the  person  of 
C!hrist  is,  relatively  speaking,  eliminated. 

With  Lang's  next  work,  Ein  Gang  durch  die 
chrisUiche  Welt,  Studien  fiber  die  Entvnckelung  des 
christlichen  Geistes  in  Briefen  an  einen  Laien  (Ber- 
lin, 1859),  tracing  the  evolution  of  Christian  re- 
ligious teaching  and  ethics  from  their  beginning  to 


Xianr 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


410 


the  present,  he  won  a  hftaring  among  the  laity,  and 
in  the  same  year  assumed  editorial  control  d  the 
liberal  ZeMxmmen  auM  der  rrformierien  Kirche  der 
Sehweie,  which  he  directed  until  1872,  and  then 
imder  the  title  Rrfarm,  until  his  death.  Despite 
his  open  expression  of  radical  views,  his  eagerness 
to  promote  true  Christianity  on  the  basis  of  his 
modem  conception  of  the  univeFse  is  shown  in  his 
Siunden  der  Andaehi  (2  vols.,  Winterthur,  1862-65) 
and  also  in  his  lUiig%if9e  Charaktere  (1862),  in 
which  he  traces  the  lives  and  characters  of  such 
divergent  men  as  St.  Paul,  Zwingli,  Lessing,  and 
Schleiermacher. 

In  1863  Lang  was  called  to  the  pastorate  of 
Meilen  on  the  Lake  of  Zurich,  where,  without  being 
the  nominal  leader  of  the  party,  he  gradually  be- 
came the  guiding  spirit  of  the  movement  for  the 
reform  of  Qie  Swiss  Church.  In  1870  he  published 
at  Berlin  his  Martin  Luther,  ein  reltgideeB  Charak- 
terhUd,  with  the  aim  of  aiding  the  German  people 
to  secure  independence  of  orthodoxy.  In  1871  he 
was  called  to  St.  Peter's,  Zurich,  as  deacon,  and 
shortly  afterward  became  pastor.  Here  his  abil- 
ity as  a  preacher  first  gained  full  recognition  and 
activity,  both  in  the  increased  attendance  at  his 
services  and  also  in  the  approval  shown  his  Re- 
hgi/iee  Reden  (2  vols.,  Zurich,  1873-75).  Here  too 
he  was  chosen  a  member  of  the  Evangelical  church- 
council  of  the  Canton  of  Zurich,  and  during  this 
period  published  two  addresses  Ztar  kirchlichen 
Situatian  der  Oegenwart  (Zurich,  1873).  In  the 
first  of  these  he  set  forth  the  struggle  of  modem 
society  with  the  Roman  Catholic  hierarchy,  and 
in  the  second  the  position  between  the  conflicting 
extremes  of  orthodoxy  and  materialism.  Hence- 
forth his  battle  was  waged  against  the  latter,  and 
in  this  spirit  he  wrote  in  R^orm  against  Strauss, 
Von  Hartmann,  and  Albert  Lange;  while  his  two 
contributions  to  the  Deutsche  Zeit-  und  Streitfragen 
of  Holtsendorff  and  Oncken:  Daa  Ld>en  Jeeu  und 
die  Kirche  der  Zukurrft  (Berlin,  1872),  and  Die  Re- 
ligion im  Zeitalter  Darwine  (1873),  were  equally  de- 
signed to  maintain  religion  in  its  proper  place  in 
modem  society.  (P.  CHRisTf.) 

Bibuoorapvt:    A.  E.  BiedAnnann.  Hnnri^  Lane,  Zurich, 

1876;  K.  E.  Mayer,  Htinriek  Lane,  Bmael,  1877. 

LANG,  lang,  JOHK  DUNMORE:  Scotch  Presby- 
terian; b.  at  Greenock  (20  m.  w.n.w.  of  Glasgow), 
Aug.  25, 1790;  d.  at  Sydney,  New  South  Wales,  Aug. 
8, 1878.  He  studied  at  Glasgow  (M.A.,  1820;  D.D., 
1825),  was  ordained  in  1822,  and  founded  the  Scots' 
Chiux^  in  Sydney  the  following  year.  He  was  the 
first  minister  of  the  C^ivch  of  Scotland  in  Aus- 
tralia. At  a  time  when  every  increase  to  the  pop- 
ulation was  of  the  utmost  consequence,  he  was  the 
means  of  bringing  out  many  thousands  of  excellent 
emigrants  from  Great  Britain  to  the  new  colonies, 
as  fdso  ministers  and  teachers  for  the  work  of  the 
Church.  He  represented  Port  Philip,  Moreton 
Bay,  and  Sydney  successively  in  the  legislative 
assembly,  and  was  instrumental  in  securing  the 
separation  and  independence  of  Victoria  and 
Queensland  from  New  South  Wales.  He  founded 
and  edited  at  Sydney  at  various  times  several  secu- 
lar weekly  papers,  and  also  published  several  works, 
the  chief  of  which  is  his  Hiatarical  and  Stalietical 


Account  (^  New  South  Wales  (2  vols.,  London,  1834; 

4th  ed.  revised,  2  vols.,  1874). 

Biblioobaprt:  Consult  his  Brief  Skeldi  of  my  Parliamen' 
tary  lAfe,  Sydney,  1870;  G.  B.  Barton,  PoeU  and  Proae  o/ 
New  South  Walee,  ib.  1866;  DNB,  nodi  8»-«0. 

LANG,  JOHK  MARSHALL :  Church  of  Scotland ; 
b.  at  Glassford  (12  m.  s.e.  of  Glasgow),  Lanark- 
shire, May  14,  1834;  d.  at  Aberdeen  May  2,  1909. 
He  stud^  at  the  University  of  Glasgow  (M.A., 
1856),  and  became  minister  of  St.  Nicholas  (East), 
Abenieen  1856;  Fyvie,  Aberdeenshire,  1859;  Ander- 
ston  Church,  Glasgow  1866;  Momingside  Parish, 
Edinburgh  1868,  and  Barony  Parish,  Gla^w  1873. 
After  1900  he  was  vice-chancellor  and  principal  of 
the  University  of  Aberdeen.  He  was  moderator 
of  the  Church  of  Scotland  in  1893,  president  of  the 
Alliance  of  Reformed  Churches  in  1899,  and  Baird 
Lecturer  in  1900-01 .  In  theology  he  described  him- 
self as  "  holding  the  great  Christian  verities;  liberal 
in  attitude  as  to  cre^,  criticism,  and  matters  not 
entering  into  the  substance  of  the  faith. "  He  wrote : 
Heaven  and  Home  (Edinburgh,  1879);  The  Laet  Sup- 
per of  Our  Lord  (1881);  Ltfe:  Is  it  Worth  Living  f 
(London,  1883);  Qideon  and  the  Judges  (1890);  The 
Expansion  of  the  Christian  Life  (Duff  lectures,  ESdin- 
burgh,  1897);  and  The  Church  and  its  Social  Mission 
(Baird  lectures,  1902),  besides  contributing  The  Re- 
ligions rf  Central  America  Xoihi^  St.  Giles  Letturee  for 
1881  (Edinburgh,  1881)  and  The  Anglican-Church  to 
the  same  series  for  1883  (1883),  and  preparing  the 
homiletic  sections  on  Luke  for  The  Pulpit  Commen- 
tary (London,  1889). 

LANGE,  lOng'e,  JOACHIM:  German  Lutheran 
and  leader  of  the  Halle  Pietists;  b.  at  Gardelegen 
(86  m.  w.  of  Berlin)  Oct.  26,  1670;  d.  at  Halle 
May  7,  1744.  After  a  youth  of  poverty,  he  b^gan 
his  university  career  at  Leipsic  in  1689,  where  he 
came  under  the  personal  influence  of  A.  H.  Francke 
and  C.  Thomasius.  In  1690  he  accompanied 
Francke  to  Erfurt  and  thence,  in  1691,  to  Halle. 
On  completing  his  theological  studies  in  1693,  he 
went  to  Berlin,  where  he  became  private  tutor  in 
the  house  of  F.  R.  von  Canitz,  whose  poems  he 
later  edited  under  the  title  Nebenetunden  unter- 
schiedener  QedichU  (Berlin,  1700).  At  the  same 
time  he  came  in  close  contact  with  Spener  and 
other  leading  Pietists.  In  1696  he  was  called  to 
Ctelin  as  rector  of  the  gymnasium  there,  but  two 
years  later  he  returned  to  Berlin  as  head  of  the 
Friedrichswerdersches  Gymnasium,  and  was  also 
pastor  of  the  Friedrichstadt  Church  from  1699. 
From  1709  until  his  death  he  was  first  adjunct  and 
then  full  professor  in  the  theological  faculty  of 
Halle,  of  which  he  was  rector  in  1721-22  and  1731- 
1732.  Despite  the  learning,  piety,  and  discipline  he 
had  evinced  at  Berlin,  and  notwithstanding  the 
immense  popularity  of  his  earlier  yeen  at  Halle, 
he  had  few  pupils  after  1730.  His  lectures,  though 
chiefly  on  dogmatic  and  moral  theology,  also  in- 
cluded exegetics  and,  for  a  time,  ascetics. 

Lange's  literary  activity  was  more  potent  and 
lasting  than  his  academic  work,  but  of  his  long  list 
of  writings  (even  an  incomplete  catalogue  number- 
ing ninety-five)  only  those  most  important  for  the- 
ology can  be  mentioned  here.  He  b^gan  his  career 
as  an  author  by  his  Idea  iheotogim  pseudorthodoxa, 


411 


REUGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Ltokgvk 


apeciaiim  Schdvigiana  (Berlin,  1706),  first  as  an 
appendix  to  J.  W.  Zierold's  Synopna  veritaHSf  and 
in  the  following  year  as  a  separate  work.  He  then 
assailed  the  Unschiddige  Nachrichien^  edited  by 
V.  £.  LOscher,  the  orthodox  leader,  after  1702, 
with  his  Attfrichtige  Nachricht  von  der  UnechtkeU 
der  aogenantUen  Unschvldigen  Nachrichten  (5  vols., 
Leipsic,  1707-14).  His  chief  attack  on  the  oi^ 
thodox,  however,  was  his  ArUibarbaruB  orthodoxicB 
cU)ffmaiieo-hermeneiUicua  (4  parts,  Berlin,  170^-11); 
while  in  his  RichJtige  MitteUtraase  (4  vols.,  Halle, 
1712-14)  he  sought  to  combat  the  errors  and  ex- 
travagances of  his  fellow  Pietists.  He  again  at- 
tacked LOscher  in  the  name  of  the  theological 
faculty  of  HaDe  with  his  Die  GesUdt  des  Kreuz- 
reicha  Christi  in  seiner  Unschtddf  etc.  (Halle,  1713); 
and  when  his  opponent  sought  peace  with  Halle 
in  1716  and  1719,  it  was  Lange  whose  stubborn 
attitude  prevented  any  reconciliation.  Lange  now 
engaged  in  a  controversy  with  the  philosopher 
Christian  Wolfif  (q.v.),  who  had  been  appointed 
professor  at  Halle  in  1706.  Wolfif's  prorectorial 
address  on  the  moral  philosophy  of  the  Chinese 
(July  12,  1721),  declaring  that  unaided  himian 
reason  could  attain  to  moral  truths,  was  bitterly 
ofiFensive  to  the  theological  faculty,  and  Lange,  not 
only  by  using  his  court  influence  to  brand  Wolfif's 
determinism  and  atheism  as  perilous  to  the  State, 
but  especially  by  his  Caiua  Dei  aavereus  atheiemum 
et  pa^idophHoaophiam  praaertim  Staicam,  Spinozi- 
anam  et  Wolfianam  (Halle,  1723),  secured  his  oppo- 
nent's banishment  in  1723.  Yet  despite  this  tri- 
umph, which  was  followed  by  a  series  of  polemics, 
such  as  the  Kurze  DarsUUung  der  GrundMze  der 
Wolff'echen  Philoaophie  (Halle,  1736),  could  not 
prevent  Wolff's  return  in  1740,  while  Lange  was 
prohibited  from  making  further  attacks. 

Lange's  writings,  though  highly  esteemed  by 
his  contemporaries,  have  now  only  a  historical 
value.  His  works  on  church  history,  systematic 
theology,  and  exegesis  are  exemplified  by  his  Hie- 
ioria  ecdeeiaetica  Velerie  et  Novi  Teetamenti  (Halle, 
1722);  (Economia  ealutie  evangdique  dogmatica  et 
moralia  (1728);  and  Hermeneutica  sacra  (Berlin, 
1733),  and  his  two  comprehensive  works  on  the 
Bible,  BibUsches  Licht  und  Recht  (7  vols.,  Halle, 
1729-^),  and  HautMbd  (2  vols.,  Leipsic,  1743). 
As  an  author  of  pietistic  hymns  he  is  best  known 
by  his  O  Jesu,  sUsses  Licht,  nun  ist  die  Nacht  t«r- 
gangen,  and  Herr,  wann  wirst  Du  Zion  hauen  f 

(Georg  MOllbr.) 
Bibliookaprt:  The  chief  iouroe  ia  the  autobiofcraphy, 
Halle.  1744.  GoDBult  further:  C.  W.  F.  Waloh,  Hittarie 
tUr  Kttatnitn  .  .  .  und  ReliifianMHreiiigkeUen^  i.  844  aqq., 
Leipeic.  1762;  A.  Ritaohl,  OeBchidUe  deM  PietiamuB,  I  280- 
560,  Bonn,  1884;  W.  Schrader,  GetthidUe  der  Friedridf- 
UniveniUi  tu  HaUe,  I  133-136,  200-212,  307-320.  Ber- 
lin, 1894. 

LANGE,  JOHAHN  PETER:  Crerman  theologian 
and  ezegete  of  the  Evangelical  school;  b.  on  a 
farm  in  the  parish  of  Sonnbom,  near  Elberfeld, 
Prussia,  Apr.  10,  1802;  d.  at  Bonn  July  8,  1884. 
His  father  was  a  farmer  and  wagoner  and  brought 
his  son  up  in  the  same  occupations,  but  allowed 
him  to  indulge  his  passion  for  reading.  He  stud- 
ied at  the  gymnasium  in  Dfisseldorf  1821-22  and 
the  University  of  Bonn,  where  he  waa  particularly 


influenced  by  Nitzsch,  1822-25.  He  became  assist- 
ant minister  at  Langenberg,  near  Elberfeld,  1825; 
Reformed  pastor  of  Wald,  near  Solingen,  1826;  of 
Langenberg,  1828;  and  of  Duisbuig,  1832.  At 
Duisbuig  he  attracted  attention  by  hiis  articles  in 
Hengstenberg's  Evangelische  Kirchenzeitung  and 
other  periodicals,  by  his  poems,  and  by  his  book 
Ueber  den  geschichUichen  Charakler  der  kanonischen 
Evangelienf  inabesondere  der  Kindheitsgeschichte 
Jesu;  mit  Beziekung  at/  "  das  Lthen  Jesu  von  D, 
F.  Strauss"  (Duisburg,  1836).  In  1841,  after 
Strauss  had  been  prevented  from  taking  his  pro- 
fessorship of  theology  at  Zurich  (see  Strauss, 
David  Friedrich),  Lange  was  called  to  the  posi- 
tion. Here  he  elaborated  his  Ld)en  Jesu  nach  den 
Evangelien  (5  vols.,  Heidelberg,  1844-47;  Eng. 
transl.,  6  vols.,  Edinburgh,  1864,  4  vols.,  Phikulel- 
phia,  1872),  a  positive  refutation  of  the  famous 
work  of  Strauss,  which  had  a  wide  circulation  and 
a  marked  effect  upon  the  subsequent  literature  on 
the  subject.  In  1854  he  succeeded  Domer  as  pro- 
fessor of  dogmatic  theology  at  Bonn.  In  1860  he 
became  consistorial  councilor. 

Lange  was  small  of  stature,  had  a  strong  consti- 
tution, a  benignant  face  and  bright  eye.  He  was 
simple  in  habits,  genial,  full  of  kindness,  wit,  and 
humor,  and  was  always  fully  alive  to  the  religious, 
literary,  and  social  questions  of  the  day.  He  was 
a  poet  as  well  as  a  theologian,  his  mind  teeming  with 
new  ideas,  often  fanciful,  but  always  interesting 
and  suggestive.  Some  of  his  compositions  have 
gone  into  the  hymn-book.  As  theologian  he  was 
one  of  the  most  original  and  fertile  authors  of  the 
nineteenth  century.  His  theology  is  Biblical  and 
Evangelical — catholic.  His  Theologisch-homiletisches 
Bibetwerk  (16  parts  on  the  New  Testament,  Biele- 
feld, 1857-71,  20  parts  on  the  Old  Testament, 
1865-76)  in  its  English  form  (ed.  Philip  Schaff,  25 
vols,  including  an  additional  vol.  on  the  Apocrypha 
by  E.  G.  Bissell,  New  York  and  Edinburgh,  1864- 
1874  new  ed.  1886)  made  his  name  familiar  in 
England  and  America.  He  originated  the  plan, 
en^iged  about  twenty  contributors,  and  commented 
himself  on  Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus,  Numbers, 
Haggai,  Zechariah,  Malachi,  Matthew,  Mark,  John, 
Romans,  and  Revelation,  giving  original  and  bril- 
liant homiletical  hints.  Other  works  worthy  of 
mention  are:  Biblische  Dichtungen  (2  vols.,  Elber- 
feld, 1832-34);  Das  Land  der  Herrlichkeit  (MOrs, 
1838);  VermischU  Schriften  (4  vols.,  1840-41;  new 
series,  3  vols.,  Bielefeld,  1860-64);  ChrisUiche  Dog- 
matik  (part  i.,  PhUosophische  DogmaOk,  Heidelberg, 
1849;  part  ii..  Positive  Dogmatik,-  1851;  part  iii., 
Polemik  und  Irenik,  1852);  Vom  Oelberge,  geistliche 
Dichtungen  (Frankfort,  1853);  Das  apostolische 
Zeitalter  (2  vols.,  Brunswick,  1854);  Grundriss 
der  theologischen  EncykhpOdie  (Heidelberg,  1877); 
Grundriss  der  biblischen  Hermeneutik  (1878) ;  Grund- 
riss der  chrisUichen  Ethik  (1878);  Grundriss  der 
Bibelkunde  (1881). 

(Philip  ScHAFFfO   D.  S.  Schaft. 
Biblioorapht:  P.  Bchaff,  Oermany;  it§  UniveniiUB,  The- 
ology and  Relioian,  pp.  381-388,  New  York,  1867;    WorU 
der  Erinneruno  an  .  ,  ,  J.  P,  Lange,  Bonn,  1884. 

LANGEN,  Idng'en,  JOSEPH;  German  Old  Cath- 
olic;  b.  at  Cologne  June  8,  1837;  d.  at  Bonn  July 


lAnffttn 
Ziaiiffu«t 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


419 


13,  lOOl,  He  studied  in  Bonn,  and  was  ordained 
to  the  Roman  Catholic  priesthood  in  1859.  After 
being  curate  in  Wervelinghoven,  near  Neuss,  for  a 
year,  he  was  chaplain  and  lecturer  at  the  Roman 
Catholic  theological  institute  at  Bonn  imtil  1861, 
when  he  became  privat-docent  for  New-Testament 
exegesis  in  the  university.  He  was  appointed  pro- 
fessor extraordinary  in  1864,  and  full  professor  in 
1867.  Before  his  break  with  Roman  Catholicism 
in  1870,  he  published  Die  deuUrokatumischm  StUdce 
des  Bwhes  Esther  (Freiburg,  1862);  Die  letzten 
Libenalage  Jem  (1864);  Dae  JuderOum  in  Pald^ 
tina  twr  Zeii  Chrieti  (1866);  and  Grundriee  der  Eirir 
leUung  in  doe  Neue  Testament  (1868).  In  the  latter 
work  the  author's  divergence  from  the  rising  ultra- 
montane school  became  manifest,  and  the  second  edi- 
tion, though  essentially  identical  with  the  first,  could 
no  longer  appear  at  Freiburg,  but  was  published 
at  Bonn  in  1873.  It  was  natural  that  Langen  should 
join  the  protest  against  Ultramontanism  (q.v.)» 
and  with  his  colleagues  at  Bonn  he  was  suspended 
and  excommunicated  by  the  archbishop  of  Cologne 
in  1872.  He  took  an  active  part  in  the  oiganiza- 
tion  of  the  Old  Catholic  Church,  drew  up  the  Old 
Catholic  catechism  and  the  Leitfaden  fur  den  Re- 
ligiansunterricht  an  den  hoheren  Schiden,  and  was 
president  of  the  committee  appointed  for  the  theo- 
logical interpretation  of  the  question  of  union  with 
the  Greek  Church.  When  the  fifth  Oki  Catholic 
synod  in  1878  annulled  the  obligation  of  celibacy, 
he  retired  from  pastoral  activity  and  thenceforth 
took  part  in  Old  Catholic  church-life  only  on  special 
occasions. 

Becoming,  through  stress  of  circumstances,  a 
historian  instead  of  an  exegete,  Langen  now  wrote 
the  book  which  was  to  be  at  once  the  scientific 
basis  of  Old  Catholicism  and  the  justification  of 
opposition  to  Vaticanism,  Das  vatikanische  Dogma 
van  dem  Universal-Episkopat  und  der  Utrfeklbar- 
keit  des  Papstea  in  seinem  VerhOUnis  sum  Neuen 
Testament  und  swr  hirchlichen  Ueberlieferung  (3 
parts,  Bonn,  1871-73).  To  this  same  period  be- 
longs Die  Kirchenvdter  und  doe  Neue  Testament 
(1874);  but  the  chief  work  of  his  later  life  was  his 
Oeechichte  der  rdmischen  Kirche,  quettenmdssig  dor- 
gestelU  (4  vols.,  1881-03),  which  extends  to  the 
death  c^  Innocent  III.  (1216)  and  forms  the 
historic  counterpart  of  his  more  theoretical  VaH- 
kanisckes  Dogma,  He  promised  also  a  supple- 
mentary volume  which  should  contain  a  r6sum^ 
of  the  history  of  the  papal  power  from  the  death 
of  Innocent  to  modem  times,  but  this,  though  it 
probably  exists  in  manuscript,  has  never  appeared. 
In  his  studies  on  the  development  of  the  papacy 
Langen  wrote  also  Die  Klemensromane  (Gotha, 
1890),  while  as  an  advocate  of  imion  between  the 
Old  Catholics  and  the  Greek  Church  he  wrote 
Die  trinitarische  Lehrdifferenz  twischen  der  abend- 
l&ndischen  und  mergenldndischen  Kirche  (Bonn, 
1876)  and  Johannes  von  Damaskus  (Gotha,  1879). 

Although  opinions  upon  Langen's  scholarship 
differ,  in  great  part  because  of  the  fundamental  di- 
vergence of  the  points  of  view  of  Evangelical  and 
Old  Catholic  thought,  he  was,  at  all  events,  an  in- 
spiring teacher,  despite  the  fact  that  personally 
he    was    solitary,    strongly    pessimistic,  and    fre- 


quently over^evere  in  his  judgment  of  men  and 
conditions.  (L.  K.  Goan.) 

BiBuoaaAPBT:  Contnlt  the  litenture  under  Ou>CATBoucm. 

LANGTON,  STEPHEN:  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury; b.  in  England  (probably  in  Lincolnshire)  c 
1150;  d.  at  SUndon  (60  m.  s.w.  of  London),  Sus- 
sex, July  9,  1228.  He  studied  at  the  Umversity  of 
Paris  and  lectured  there  on  theolpgy  till  1206, 
when  Innocent  III.,  with  whom  he  had  formed  a 
friendship  at  Paris,  called  him  to  Rome  and  made 
him  cardinal-priest  of  St.  CluTsogonus.  His  piety 
and  learning  had  already  won  him  prebends  at 
Paris  and  York  and  he  was  recognised  as  the  fore- 
most English  churchman.  On  the  death  of  Hu- 
bert Walter,  archbishop  of  Canterbury  (1205), 
some  of  the  younger  monks  elected  to  the  see 
Reginald,  the  subprior,  while  another  faction  under 
pressure  from  King  John  chose  John  de  Grey, 
bishop  of  Norwich.  Both  elections  were  quashed 
on  appeal  to  Rome  and  sixteen  monks  of  Christ 
Church,  who  had  gone  to  Rome  empowered  to  act 
for  the  whole  chapter,  wore  ordered  to  proceed  to 
a  new  election  in  presence  of  the  pope.  Langton 
was  chosen  and  was  consecrated  by  the  pope  at 
Viterbo  June  17,  1207. 

There  followed  a  struggle  between  John  and  In- 
nocent III.  (q.v.)  which  brought  great  misery  upon 
unhappy  England.  The  king  proclaimed  that  any 
one  who  recognised  Stephen  as  archbishop  should 
be  treated  as  a  public  enemy,  and  expelled  the 
Canterbury  monks  (July  15,  1^7),  who  were  now 
tmanimous  in  support  of  Stephen.  In  Mar.,  1208, 
Innocent  placed  England  under  the  interdict  and 
at  the  close  of  1212,  after  repeated  negotiations  had 
failed,  he  passed  sentence  of  deposition  against 
John,  committing  the  execution  of  the  sentence  to 
Philip  of  France  in  Jan.,  1213.  In  May  John 
yielded  and  in  July  Stephen  (who  since  his  con- 
secration had  lived  at  Pontigny  in  France)  and  his 
fellow  exiles  returned  to  England.  His  first  epis- 
copal act  was  to  absolve  the  king,  who  swore  that 
unjust  laws  should  be  repealed  and  the  liberties 
granted  by  Henry  I.  should  be  observed — an  oath 
which  he  almost  immediately  violated.  Stephen 
now  became  a  leader  in  the  struggle  against  John 
and  none  of  the  barons  did  more  than  he  to  rescue 
England  from  John's  tyranny.  At  a  council  of 
churchmen  at  Westminster,  Aug.  25, 1213,  to  which 
certain  lay  barons  were  invited,  he  read  the  text 
of  the  charter  of  Henry  I.  and  suggested  a  demand 
for  its  renewal.  In  the  sequel,  largely  through 
Stephen's  efforts,  John  was  forced  to  grant  the 
Great  Charter  (June  15,  1215).  Since  John  now 
held  his  kingdom  as  a  fief  of  the  Holy  See  the  pope 
espoused  his  cause  and  exconmiunicated  the  barons. 
For  refusing  to  publish  the  excommunication  Ste- 
phen was  suspended  from  all  ecclesiastical  f unctioDS 
by  the  papal  commissioners  and  on  Nov.  4  this  sen- 
tence was  confirmed  by  the  pope,  although  Stephen 
appealed  to  him  in  person.  He  was  released  from 
suspension  the  following  spring  on  condition  that 
he  keep  out  of  England  till  peace  was  restored  and 
he  remained  abroad  till  May,  1218.  Meanwhile 
both  Innocent  and  John  died  and  all  parties  in 
England  rallied  to  the  support  of  Henry  III. 


413 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


I«anffaet 


Stephen  continued  his  work  unremittingly  and 
efifectively  for  the  political  and  ecdesiastioftl- inde- 
pendence of  England.  In  1223  he  again  appeared 
as  the  leader  and  spokesman  of  the  barons,  who 
demanded  of  Henry  the  confinnation  of  the  char- 
ter. He  went  to  France  to  demand  for  Henry 
from  Louis  VIII.  the  restoration  of  Normandy, 
and  later  he  supported  the  king  against  rebellious 
barons.  He  obtained  a  promise  from  Pope  Hono- 
rius  ni.  that  during  his  lifetime  no  resident  legate 
should  be  again  sent  to  England,  and  won  other 
concessions  from  the  same  pontiff  favorable  to  the 
English  Church  and  exalting  his  see  of  Canterbury. 
Of  great  importance  in  the  ecclesiastical  history  of 
England  was  a  council  which  Stephen  opened  at 
Osney  Apr.  17,  1222;  its  decrees,  known  as  the 
Constitutions  of  Stephen  Langton,  are  the  earliest 
provincial  canons  which  are  still  recognized  as 
binding  in  English  church  courts. 

Stephen  was  a  voluminous  writer.  Glosses, 
commentaries,  expositions,  and  treatises  by  him 
on  almost  all  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  and 
many  sermons,  are  preserved  in  manuscript  at  Lam- 
beth Palace,  at  Oxford  and  Cambridge,  and  in 
France.  The  only  one  of  his  works  whidi  has  been 
printed,  besides  a  few  letters  (in  The  HisUmad 
WarkB  of  Oervaae  of  Canterbury,  ed.  W.  Stubbs,  ii. 
London,  1880,  RoUs  Series ,  no.  71,  appendix  to 
preface)  is  a  TradaJtue  de  tranalatione  Beati  Thomce 
(in  J.  A.  Giles's  Thomas  of  Canterbttry,  Oxford, 
1845),  which  is  probably  an  expansion  of  a  sermon 
he  preached  in  1220,  on  occasion  of  the  translation 
of  the  relics  of  St.  Thomas  (Thomas  Becket);  the 
ceremony  was  the  most  splendid  which  had  ever 
been  seen  in  England.  He  also  wrote  a  life  of 
Richard  I.,  and  other  historical  works  and  poems 
are  attributed  to  him.  It  was  probably  Stephen 
Langton  who  first  divided  the  Bible  into  chapters 
(see  BiBLB  Text,  IIL,  §  1). 

Bibuoobaphy:  Sources  for  a  life  are  a  Canterbury  Chron- 
icle in  Stttbbs's  OervoM  of  Canterbury,  ut  sup.;  Rofer  of 
Wendover,  ed.  H.  O.  Coxe,  5  vols.,  London,  1841740;  the 
works  of  Matthew  of  Paris  (edited  in  RoUa  SeriM);  Ralph 
of  Coggleshall,  De  moiibuM  Anglicanu§  titb  Johanne,  in 
Bouquet,  ReeueU,  xviii.  59-120;  and  the  life  of  Inno- 
•  cent  III.  in  MPL,  ccziv.-ccxr.  Modem  sketches  (a  com- 
plete Life  is  still  lacking)  are:  M.  Pattison,  in  lAvtB  of 
Bnglith  Sainta,  ed.  J.  H.  Newman,  vol.  x.,  London,  1845; 
W.  F.  Hook,  in  Lives  of  Oie  Archbiahop$  of  CanUHmry,  ib. 
1860-76;  C.  E.  Maurice,  London,  1872;  R.  C.  Jenkins, 
Canierbury,  ib.  1880  (on  the  supremacy  of  Canterbury); 
F.  Phillips,  in  FaOierM  oftheBnoliah  Churdi,  1  ser.,  ib.  1891; 
and  DNB,  xxxii.  122-128.  (}onsult  also  J.  H.  Orerton, 
The  Church  in  Englani,  i.  220-231.  London,  1897;  W.  R. 
W.  Stephens,  The  Bngluh  Church  {1066-1979),  ib.  1901; 
and  in  general  the  works  on  the  history  of  England  dealr 
ing  with  his  period. 

LANGUET,  IdDf'g^',  HUBERT:  French  diplomat 
and  Refonner;  b.  at  Viteaux  (21  m.  w.  of  Dijon), 
1518;  d.  at  Antwerp  Sept.  30,  1581.  He  entered 
the  University  of  Poitiers  in  order  to  study  law, 
but  he  was  interested  also  in  theology,  history,  and 
natural  and  political  science.  He  visited  the  uni- 
versities of  Padua  and  Bologna,  and  traveled  in 
ItAly  and  Spain.  He  was  greatly  influenced  by 
Melanchthon's  Loci  theologici,  which  put  an  end  to 
his  doubts.  In  1549  Languet  went  to  Wittenberg, 
where  he  was  kindly  received  by  Melanchthon  as 
a  guest,    frequently   accompanying   him   on   his 


travels  and  being  on  intimate  terms  with  his  friends. 
Expelled  from  France  by  the  persecutions  of  the 
Protestants,  he  settled  at  Wittenberg,  spending  the 
winters  there,  but  making  extensive  journeys  in 
the  summer  and  fall.  In  1559  Languet,  on  the 
recommendation  of  Melanchthon,  entered  the  serv- 
ice of  the  elector  of  Saxony  as  diplomatic  agent, 
which  position  he  held  until  1577.  The  elector  sent 
him  to  various  courts:  to  Paris,  Vienna,  Prague, 
Frankfurt,  Cologne,  and  the  Netherlands.  As  a 
friend  of  Melanchthon  he  opposed  the  growing 
party  of  strict  Lutherans;  but  still  he  did  every- 
thing in  his  power  to  reconcile  the  opposing  par- 
ties, even  trying  to  effect  the  recognition  of  the 
French  Huguenots  at  the  diet  of  Frankfurt  in 
1562,  but  without  success.  In  May,  1561,  he  went 
to  France  in  order  to  bring  about  a  closer  connection 
between  the  German  princes  and  the  French  Protes- 
tants, and  was  present  at  the  Religious  Conference  of 
Poissy  (q.v.).  In  1562  he  was  in  Antwerp;  the 
following  years  were  spent  in  diplomatic  journeys 
to  France  and  back  to  Saxony.  In  1571  the  elec- 
tor sent  him  together  with  the  ambassadors  of  other 
Protestant  princes  of  Germany  to  King  Charles  IX. 
of  France  to  congratulate  him  on  the  peace  of  St. 
Germain.  On  this  occasion  Languet  advocated  the 
equal  recognition  of  both  confessions,  but  the  an- 
swer was  the  night  of  St.  Bartholomew;  having 
narrowly  escaped  death,  he  left  France  in  Oct., 
1572,  and  returned  there  only  once  more,  shortly 
before  his  death.  From  1573  to  1576  he  was  at  the 
court  of  Emperor  Maximilian  U.,  whom  he  accom- 
panied on  his  various  journeys.  With  the  death  of 
Maximilian  II.  in  1576  his  connection  with  the 
court  of  Vienna  was  dissolved.  The  bitter  feelings 
against  him  as  the  friend  of  Melanchthon  and  a 
Calvinist  caused  him  to  ask  for  dismissal  from  the 
court.  The  elector  granted  his  desire,  but  con- 
tinued his  salary.  In  1577  he  went  to  Cologne  in 
order  to  be  nearer  to  the  Netherlands,  as  he  was 
greatly  attracted  by  William  of  Orange. 

The  leading  idea  of  his  diplomacy  was  that  of 
religious  and  civil  liberty  for  the  protection  and 
expansion  of  Protestantism.  He  did  everything 
in  his  power  to  advance  the  union  of  the  Protestant 
churches.  The  correspondence  with  the  Elector 
August  of  Saxony  and  with  Mordeisen  were  edited 
by  T.  P.  Ludovicus  under  the  title  Arcana  seadi 
xvi,  (Halle,  1690).  Other  collections  of  letters  are 
EpistoUB  politiccB  et  historiccB  ad  P.  Sydnaeum 
(Frankfort,  1633);  Epistoks  ad  J.  Camerarium, 
Patrem  et  filium  (GrOningen,  1646).  His  chief 
work  is  VindicicB  contra  tyrannos  (Edinburgh 
[Basel?],  1579).  The  book  is  divided  into  four 
parts,  each  of  which  proposes  and  answers  a  ques- 
tion: (1)  Must  God  in  a  case  of  dispute  be  obeyed 
rather  than  a  ruler?  (2)  May  a  ruler  who  violates 
the  law  of  God  and  devastates  the  Church,  be  op- 
posed? (3)  How  far,  and  with  what  right  may  it 
be  allowed  to  oppose  a  ruler  who  suppresses  or  des- 
troys the  state?  (4)  Have  neighboring  rulers  a 
right  to  aasist  a  ruler  oppressed  by  his  subjects? 
(Paul  Tschackebt.) 
Bxblxoobaprt:   Accounts  of  the  life  have  been  written  by 

Philibert  de  la  Mare,  ed.  T.  P.  Ludovicus,  Halle,  1700; 

Treitschke,    Leipsio,    1846;     H.    Chevreuil,    Paris,    1866; 

J.  Blasel,  Bxeslau,  1872.    Consult  further:  G.  von  Polens, 


lApsad 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


414 


(htduehi§  <Ut  /miwdiMcA^n  Calviniimu;  iiL.  Beili«0  0, 
pp.  434  sqq..  6  voli..  Gotha,  1867-W;  J.  F.  A.  Gillet.  Crofo 
mm  CmfOmm,  Frankfort,  I860:  O.  Seholi.  HvUrt  Lan^ 
gutl  aU  kwrwiUhn^ektr  Bmehi&nkM&r  und  OMandim'  in 
Fnnkniek  1660-79,  Halle.  1876. 

LAHIGAH,  lan'i-gon,  JOHH:  Irish  Roman  Cath- 
olic; b.  at  Cashel  (13  m.  e.n.e.  of  Tipperary)  1758; 
d.  at  Finglas  (3  m.  n.n.w.  of  Dublin)  July  7,  1828. 
After  a  brilliant  career  at  the  Irish  College  in  Rome 
he  became  professor  of  Hebrew,  ecclesiastical  his- 
tory, and  divinity  at  the  University  of  Padua  in 
1789,  but  returned  to  Ireland  in  1706  and  secured 
the  chair  of  sacred  history  and  Hebrew  in  the  Rojral 
College  of  St.  Patrick,  Maynooth.  A  dispute  with 
the  bishop  of  Cork,  who  suspected  him  of  being  a 
Jansenist,  soon  resulted  in  his  resigning  his  pro- 
fessorship. He  was  then  engaged  by  the  Royal 
Dublin  Society  as  assistant  librarian,  and  was  later 
promoted  to  the  post  of  librarian  and  general  liter- 
ary supervisor.  In  1813  he  began  to  show  symp- 
toms ol  cerebral  decay,  and  in  1821  he  was  removed 
to  a  private  asylum  at  Finglas.  Hb  principal 
works  are  the  unfinished  IrutitutioneB  Biblica  (vol. 
i.,  Paria,  1793);  and  An  EcdeaiatHcal  HuUrry  of 
Irdand  .  .  .  to  the  Beffinning  of  the  Thirteenth 
Century  (4  vols.,  Dublin,  1822;  2d  ed.,  1829). 
BiBUOoaAFHT:  W.  J.  Fitspatriek.  Iriah  Witt  and  WoiihiM, 

inehiding  Dr,  Lanitfon,  Am  Lifa  and  TimM,  Dublin,  1873; 

DSB,  zxjdi.  13^136. 

LAHSDBLL,  HEHRT:  Church  of  England;  b. 
at  Tenterden  (17  m.  s.e.  of  Maidstone),  Kent,  Jan. 
10,  1841.  He  studied  at  St.  John's  College,  High- 
bury, 1865-67,  and  became  curate  of  Greenwich 
in  1867,  metropolitan  associate  secretary  of  the 
Irish  Church  Missionary  Society  in  1869,  and  was 
curate  of  St.  Germans,  Blackheath,  1880-82.  He 
was  honorary  secretary  of  the  Church  Homiletical 
Society  1874-86,  curate  of  St.  Peter's,  Eltham, 
1885-86,  and  lecturer  at  St.  James',  Plumstead, 
1890-91.  Since  1892  he  has  been  chaplain  of  Mor- 
den  College,  Blackheath,  London.  He  has  been 
an  extensive  traveler,  not  only  touring  the  world, 
but  also  penetrating  deeply  into  Central  Asia,  and 
has  done  amateur  missionary  work  in  northern 
Europe,  Hungary,  and  Armenia.  He  has  written: 
Thnmgh  Siberia  (2  vols.,  London,  1882);  Ruenan 
Central  Asia,  induding  Kuldja,  Bokhara,  Khiva, 
and  Merv  (2  vols.,  1885);  Through  Central  Ana 
(1887);  Chinese  Central  Aeia  (2  vols.,  1893);  and 
The  Sacred  Tenth:  or,  Studies  in  Tithe-Giving,  An- 
cient and  Modem  (1906). 

LAODICEA,  16-od''iHrf'o,  SYHOD  OF:  A  Phryg- 
ian synod  held  about  360,  its  acts  being  placed 
between  those  of  Antioch  in  341  and  Constantinople 
in  381.  The  date  may  be  somewhat  more  closely 
defined  by  the  seventh  canon,  which  mentions  the 
Photinians  between  the  Novatians  and  the  Quar- 
todecimans;  compare  the  eighth,  which  alludes  to 
the  Montanists.  The  number  of  those  present  is 
not  given,  but  Gratian  speaks  of  thirty-two  bish- 
ops, and  names  as  the  chief  author  of  the  canons 
Theodosius,  who  is  rightly  identified  with  a  Euno- 
mian  or  Semiarian  bishop  of  the  Lydian  Philadelphia 
in  363-364  according  to  Philostorgius  (viii.  3)  and 
in  359,  according  to  Epiphanius  (Haer.  bcxiii.  26). 
The  Tiiiodioean  canons  are  concerned  with  penance 


(i.-ii.),  the  conditions  and  requirements  of  the 
clerical  office  (iii.-v.;  cf.  xi.-xii.,  xl.-xliv.,  liv.- 
iviii.),  relations  with  heretics  (vi.-x.,  zzzi.-zxziv.), 
divine  worship  (xiii.-xxviii.),  preparation  for  bap- 
tism and  fasting  before  Easter  (xlv.-lii.),  and  the 
relation  of  Christians  to  Jews  and  Gentiles  (xxix.- 
TTYJT.).  The  mention  of  female  elders  in  the 
seventh  canon  and  of  "  visitors  '*  in  the  fifty- 
seventh  is  also  noteworthy.  The  repetitions  in  the 
canons  (cf.  xxxi.  with  x.,  xxxiii.  with  vi.,  xliiL 
with  xxii.,  and  zzxiv.  with  ix.)  show  that  they  are 
a  compilation  or  compend  of  an  older  collection. 
(Edgar  Henneckb.) 

Bxbliookaprt:  Hefele,  ConeiliengeaehiehU,  i.  746  aqq.,  Eng. 
trand.,  ii.  206  aqq.;  T.  Zahn,  OaachidUs  de»  neuUatameni- 
liektn  Kanona,  ii  103  aqq..  Leipnc  103  aqq.;  DCA,  n. 
028M»0. 

LAOS.    See  Siam. 

LAO-TSZE,  la'6''-t8e^':  The  reputed  founder  of 
the  Chinese  religion  called  "  TAoism.''  He  was 
bom  about  604  b.c,  near  the  present  Kwei-te,  in 
Ho-nan  province,  China;  d.  at  an  unknown  place 
and  time,  probably  at  a  great  age.  In  517  b.c.  he 
met  Confucius,  so  that  he  was  alive  at  that  time. 
He  was  keeper  of  the  archives  at  the  court  of  Ch&u, 
and  it  was  to  learn  something  about  the  ancient 
rites  and  ceremonies  of  ChAu  that  Confucius  came 
to  him.  Foreseeing  the  downfall  of  ChAu,  L&o  re- 
tired to  a  far  country,  stopping,  however,  long 
enough  with  Yin  Hs6,  the  warden  of  the  gate,  t-o 
write  for  him  the  remarkable  volume,  in  five  thou- 
sand characters,  on  the  subject  of  TOo  (the  "  Way  ") 
and  Teh  ("  Virtue  "),  called  TOo  Teh  King.  Lao 
was  a  philosopher,  as  his  name  ("  the  Old  Philoso- 
pher ")  implies.  His  great  work,  Tdo  Teh  King,  is 
translated  in  Legge's  Chinese  Classics,  in  Chalmer's 
Speculations  of  the '^  Old  Philosopher  "  Laurtsze,  and 
in  Cams'  Lao  Tsxe,  It  is,  however,  not  through- 
out intelligible  even  to  native  Chinese  scholars, 
much  less  to  other  readers.  It  may  be  briefly  de- 
scribed as  an  ethical  treatise,  in  which  the  duties 
of  the  individual  and  the  State  are  set  forth.  It 
lays  great  stress  upon  humility  and  upon  gentle- 
ness, and,  in  one  sentence  at  least,  approaches 
Christian  ethics.  "  It  is  the  way  of  TAo  not  to  act 
from  any  personal  motive,  to  conduct  affairs  with- 
out feeling  the  trouble  of  them,  to  taste  without 
being  aware  of  the  flavor,  to  account  the  great  as 
small,  and  the  small  as  great,  to  recompense  in- 
jury with  kindness."  L&o  seems  to  stand  for  ex- 
treme simplicity,  even  for  the  restriction  of  learn- 
ing, since  when  people  have  too  much  knowledge 
they  are  difficult  to  govem;  even  the  use  of  knotted 
cords  as  means  of  record  seemed  better  than  writ- 
ten characters.  His  connection  with  Taoism  is 
supposititious.  The  founders  of  that  religion  sim- 
ply used  his  name  and  part  of  the  title  of  his  book 
to  give  their  ideas  and  practise  currency.  See 
China,  I.,  2. 

Bibuoobafht:  8.  Julien,  Le  Livn  de  la  vote  ei  de  la  Verlu, 
Paru.  1842;  J.  Chalmera,  Tka  Specuiationa  an  MHa- 
phynea.  Polity  and  Morality  of  the  "  Old  Pkiloaopker,'' 
London*  1868;  T.  Walters,  Lao-TaBa,  a  Study  in  Chineae 
P^hiloaophy,  Hong  Kong,  1870;  P.  Oanu.  Lao  Taaa,  Chi- 
cago, 1903;  I.  W.  Heysinger.  Lao  Tata,  the  lAght  af  China, 
PhUadelphia.  1903. 

LA  PLACB,  JOSUE  DE.    See  Placexts,  Josua. 


415 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


lafculgan 


LAPPS:  A  people  of  Finno-ugric  race,  who 
from  very  early  time  have  wandered  in  the  north- 
em  parts  of  Norway,  Sweden,  Finland,  and  Rus- 
sia. In  the  middle  of  the  thirteenth  century 
Christianity  began  to  be  propagated  among  those 
in  Norway,  most  of  whom,  however,  long  retained 
their  heathen  customs.  More  effective  measures 
for  their  conversion  were  taken  in  the  seventeenth 
century  by  Erik  Bredal,  bishop  of  Trondhjem 
(1643-72),  and  at  the  beginning  of  the  eighteenth 
by  Thomas  von  Westen  (d.  1727;  see  Wbstbn, 
THOMAS  von),  called  the  apostle  of  the  Lapps. 
Toward  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  the  mis- 
sion declined,  but  new  interest  was  awakened  by 
the  work  of  Niels  Stockfleth  (d.  1866),  who  trans- 
lated the  New  Testament  into  Lappish  (1840). 
The  religious  and  moral  life  of  the  Lapps  improved 
much  from  this  time. 

In  Sweden  (q.v.)  the  Lapps  came  in  contact  with 
Christianity  during  the  late  Middle  Ages.  Several 
of  the  Vasa  kings  took  much  interest  in  the  attempt 
to  Christianize  them,  especially  Charles  IX.  (1604- 
1611),  who  laid  the  foundation  of  an  ecclesiastical 
oiganization  in  Lapland.  In  the  records  of  the 
riksdags  during  the  eighteenth  centiuy  debates 
on  the  Lappish  missions  are  often  met  with.  By 
royal  ordinance  of  Oct.  3,  1723,  it  was  enacted 
that  all  the  clergy  in  Lapland  should  know  the 
native  language,  that  a  school  should  be  opened 
near  all  the  larger  churohes,  and  that  books  should 
be  printed  in  Lappish  at  public  expense.  In  1739  a 
special  board  was  created  to  adniinister  the  Lap- 
pish mission.  Liberal  grants  from  the  riksdag 
and  private  donations  furnished  a  solid  foundar 
tion.  About  1740  several  itinerant  missionaries  were 
appointed  to  teach  the  Lapps  in  their  homes. 
One  of  the  first  missionaries  was  Per  HdgstrOm 
(d.  1784).  Per  FjellstrOm,  pastor  at  Lycksele  (d. 
1764)  published  a  catechism  (1738),  a  church  man- 
ual and  hymo-book  (1744),  and  the  New  Testa- 
ment (1755)  in  Lappish.  As  early  as  1735  a 
special  school-law  for  Lapland  was  enacted.  The 
zealous  missionary  work  among  the  Lapps  of  Swe- 
den during  the  eighteenth  century  bore  good  fruit 
in  better  religious  and  moral  conditions  and  an  ad- 
vance in  civilization.  Of  the  clergymen  who 
worked  in  Lapland  during  the  nineteenth  century, 
the  brothers  Petrus  LsBstadius  (d.  1841)  and  Lars 
Levi  LflBstadius  (d.  1861)  are  best  known.  New 
regulations  for  the  churoh  organization  in  Lapland 
were  made  Apr.  14,  1846,  and  Jan.  31,  1896.  The 
entire  Bible  was  published  in  Lappish  in  1811. 

What  has  been  said  of  the  Lapps  in  Sweden  ap- 
plies also  in  essentials  to  those  in  Finland.  Until 
1809  the  Kemi  Lapps  were  subject  to  the  Swedish 
crown.  Missionaries  of  the  Greek  Church  began  to 
work  among  the  Lapps  in  Russia  in  the  sixteenth 
oentiuy  and  continued  in  the  foUowing  centiu'ies. 
Most  of  the  Russian  Lapps  have  adopted  the  Greek 
faith,  but  their  Christianity  often  consists  merely 
in  an  outward  observance  of  the  ceremonies  of  the 
Church.  Elof  Haller. 

Bibuoorapht:  A.  Meylan,  HiH.  de  Vivanoilt»ation  des 
Lapovu,  Paris,  1863;  J.  Vahl,  Lappeme  og  tUn  lapdie  MiB- 
man,  Gopenhagen,  1866;  G.  Soott.  TeUrtrOm  and  Lap- 
land .  .  .  triih  ItOroductory  Sketch  of  the  Stockholm  Mu- 
Hon,  London,   1868;    A.   H.  Keane,   The  Lappa;    their 


Origin  and  Cualome,  ib.  1886;  E.  Haller.  Sven^ea  Kyrkane 
mieeion  i  Lappmarken,  Stockholm.  1806. 

LAPSED:  In  the  broadest  sense,  Christians  who 
have  fallen  into  mortal  sin  and  are,  therefore,  lia- 
ble either  to  excommunication  or  to  penance. 
Commonly,  however,  the  term  is  restricted  to 
Christians  (or  catechumens)  who,  in  periods  of  per- 
secution, either  disavowed  their  faith  publicly  and 
expb'citly,  or,  by  means  not  recognized  by  Chris- 
tian morals,  eluded  their  duty  of  profession.  There 
were  different  opinions  in  the  ancient  Church  both 
with  respect  to  the  definition  of  the  act  itself,  and 
with  respect  to  its  disciplinary  treatment.  The 
question  ran  through  a  long  development  and  was 
not  finally  decided  until  long  after  the  time  of  Dio- 
cletian, but  the  controversy  reached  its  climax  in 
the  third  centiuy,  especially  in  the  years  of  the 
Decian  and  Valerian  persecutions. 

Open  profession  is  demanded  in  the  Gospels, 
and  a  verdict  of  condemnation  is  pronounced  against 
such  as  disavow  their  faith  (Matt.  x.  33;  Mark 
viii.  38;  Luke  ix.  26,  xii.  9).  The  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  and  the  First  Epistle  of  Peter,  as  well  as 
the  messages  to  the  seven  churches  in  the  Apoc- 
alypse, exhort  to  constancy  under  the 

Apostasy  sufferings  of  persecution.  During  the 
under  first  century,  however,  the  danger  of 
Persacatun.  relapses  into  paganism  or  Judaism 
was  not  great.  Christian  apologists 
after  Justin  state  that,  in  general,  the  Christians 
continued  faithful;  and  Roman  and  Greek  writers 
of  the  second  century,  such  as  Marcus  Aurelius, 
Lucian,  Celsus,  and  others  often  speak  of  the  fanat- 
ical contempt  of  death  evinced  by  the  Christians. 
Indeed,  a  passion  for  martjrrdom  grew  up  in  the 
congregations,  but  was  regarded  with  dissatisfac- 
tion by  the  more  sober  and  self-controlled  mem- 
bers. That  martyrdom  might  become  a  duty  was 
generally  accepted  throughout  the  Church,  the  only 
difference  of  opinion  being  with  respect  to  the 
point  at  which  the  duty  b^^an.  Some  considered 
it  legitimate  to  flee  from  persecution  and  martyr- 
dom, while  the  Montanists  declared  that  every 
true  Christian  should  seek  martjrrdom.  It  must  be 
borne  in  mind  that  during  the  second  and  third 
centuries  the  danger  of  relapse  was  augmented. 
Many  fell  away,  and  their  munber  increased  with 
each  new  persecution.  The  Shepherd  of  Hermas 
contains  many  striking  illustrations  of  the  effect 
which  the  persecutions  of  Trajan  and  Hadrian  had 
on  the  congregation  of  Rome,  enumerating  the 
various  motives  of  apostasy,  and  noting  that  re- 
lai>ses  also  occurred  in  perfectly  quiet  times.  The 
persecutions  of  Antoninus  Pius  and  Marcus  Aure- 
lius  likewise  had  their  lapsed,  while  Tertullian's 
Defuga  in  peraectdianef  De  corona,  and  other  works 
were  written  with  special  reference  to  the  perse- 
cution by  Septimius.  What  a  disorganising  influ- 
ence the  Decian  and  Valerian  persecutions  exer- 
cised is  apparent  from  the  letters  of  Cyprian  (q.v.) 
and  his  treatise  De  lapeis,  Eusebius  throws  a  veil 
over  the  lapsed  in  the  persecution  of  Diocletian, 
yet  it  is  evident  that  the  number  of  apostates  was 
laige,  and  denial  was  only  too  frequent  in  the  last 
persecution,  instituted  by  Julian,  although  the 
lapsed  were  soon  permitted  to  reenter  the  churches. 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


416 


After  260,  different  classes  of  lapsed  were  dis- 
tinguished: Bocrificati,  who  had  sacrificed  to  the 
gods;  thwrificati,  who  had  burned  incense  to  them; 
libdlaHci,  who  by  bribery  had  procured  a  certifi- 
cate showing  that  they  had  already 
Classes  of  fulfilled  all  requirements;  and  tradv- 
the  Lapsed,  tores,  who  had  either  actually  surren- 
Treatment  dered  their  sacred  books  and  vessels, 
of  Them,  or  had  pretended  to  do  so  by  substi- 
tuting others  for  them.  At  the  same 
time  a  change  took  place  in  the  disciplinary  treat- 
ment of  the  lapsed.  In  the  second  century  it  was 
generally  accepted  throughout  the  Church  that  a 
Christian  who  had  relapseid  into  idolatry  could  not 
be  readmitted  to  the  congregation.  The  most  sin- 
cere repentance  was  not  sufficient;  only  open  pro- 
fession under  a  new  trial  and  martyrdom  could  blot 
out  the  guilt.  In  the  middle  of  the  third  century 
milder  views  were  adopted.  In  250  Cyprian  and 
the  Roman  clergy  still  felt  uncertain  about  the 
question,  but  gradually  a  more  lenient  practise  pre- 
vailed in  the  churches  of  Carthage,  Rome,  Alexan- 
dria, and  Antioch,  and  between  251  and  325  a  com- 
plete system  of  penitential  rules  was  elaborated  by 
the  bishops.  Not  only  was  a  distinction  nuMie  be- 
tween saerificati  and  libellaHci,  but  regard  was  paid 
to  the  individual  circumstances  of  each  case,  thus 
gradually  transforming  the  penitential  system  into 
one  of  casuistry.  The  oldest  and  most  important 
of  such  penitential  decisions  are  the  Liber  de  pceni- 
tentia  of  Petnis  Alexandrinus,  the  first  foiu*  canons 
of  the  Synod  of  Elvira  (306),  the  first  nine  of  the 
Synod  of  Ancyra  (314),  the  thirteenth  of  the  Synod 
of  Aries  (314  or  316),  and  the  tenth  to  the  four- 
teenth of  the  Council  of  Nicsa  (325). 

(A.  Habnack.) 
Bxblioobapht:  C.  Wessely,  Lm  PIvm  Andeiu  MonumenU  du 
ehriatianume  ieriU  but  papjfnut  Fluia,  1908  (oontains  at 
the  beginniiig  a  serieaof  documents  of  tlie  highest  value  for 
this  subject) ;  J.  Marinus,  De  diaciplina  in  adminutraiionB 
aacnunerUi  p<xnitenHm,  Paris,  1651;  H.  Klee,  Die  BeiehU, 
Frankfort,  1827;  M.  J.  Routh,  ReKqwrn  •acrm,  iv.  21-22. 
116-lie,  256,  256,  5  vols..  Oxford.  1846-48;  J.  Langen. 
Oeediichie  der  rOnUeehen  Kirdte,  i.  279  sqq.,  300  sqq., 
Bonn.  1881;  J.  H.  Kurts.  Church  Hietary,  I  82-^83,  New 
York,  1889;  Hefele,  ConeUiengeachidUe,  and  Eng.  transl., 
vol.  i.  passim;  Neander.  Chrietian  Church,  I  226-246; 
Schaff.  CkrieHan  Church,  u.  60  sqq.,  76  sqq.;  KL,  i.  87-91. 

LARDNER,  lOrd'ner,  NATHANIEL:  English 
nonconformist;  b.  at  Hawkhurst  (42  m.  s.e.  of 
London),  Kent,  June  6,  1684;  d.  there  July  24, 
1768.  He'  studied  in  London,  Utrecht,  and  Ley- 
den,  and  in  1716  toured  France,  Belgium,  and  Hol- 
land as  the  tutor  of  the  son  of  Lady  Treby,  whom 
he  instructed  from  1713  to  1721.  After  the  death 
of  his  patroness  in  1721  he  remained  without  a 
position  until  1729,  his  delivery  being  too  dry  and 
lifeless  to  gain  him  the  pulpit  which  he  desired. 
In  1729,  however,  he  became  assistant  minister  in 
a  Presb3rterian  chapel  in  London,  and  remained 
there  until  1751,  when  total  deafness  obliged  him 
to  retire.  The  rest  of  his  life  was  passed  in  seclu- 
sion, although  he  maintained  an  active  correspond- 
ence with  scholars  at  home  and  abroad. 

Lardner's  theological  position  may  be  defined  as 
rationalistic  supematurahsm,  since  it  recognized 
both  the  justification  of  reason  and  the  necessity 
of  revelation.    Believing  that  the  original  simplic- 


ity of  Evangelical  doctrines  had  been  obscured  by 
useless  speculations,  he  sought  to  return  to  plain 
and  primitive  truth.  His  primary  object  was  the 
proof  of  the  truth  of  Christianity  by  historical  criti- 
cism, this  being  the  basal  concept  of  his  chief  work, 
TheCredHnlUy  of  the  Gospel  History  (17  vols.,  Lon- 
don, 1727-57).  This  book,  at  once  profound  and 
unbiased,  is  divided  into  two  parts,  with  a  supple- 
ment as  a  third.  The  first  division  contains  those 
facts  mentioned  in  the  New  Testament  which  are 
confirmed  by  contemporary  writers,  while  in  the 
second  portion,  which  is  much  the  longer,  the  tes- 
timonies of  the  Church  Fathers  of  the  first  four 
centuries  are  collected  and  carefully  weighed,  be- 
sides being  subjected  to  a  thorough  criticism  which 
investigates  their  authenticity  and  determines  their 
date.  The  supplement  discusses  the  canon  of  the 
New  Testament,  which  Lardner  believed  to  have 
been  settled  long  before  the  Synod  of  Laodioea. 
He  dated  the  synoptic  Gospels  and  Acts  in  64  and 
the  Johannine  Gospel  in  68,  the  latest  book  being 
Revelation,  which  he  placed  in  96.  The  date  of 
the  Epistles  was  relatively  late,  since  they  were 
written  after  the  Gospel  had  been  widely  promul- 
gated. The  Gospel  of  the  Hebrews  was  a  tran»> 
lation  of  the  Greek  Matthew.  Among  his  other 
works  special  mention  may  be  made  of  the  follow- 
ing: A  Vindication  of  Three  ofowr  Blessed  Saviour's 
Miracles  (1729);  The  Circumstances  of  the  Jewish 
People  (1743);  A  Large  Collection  of  Ancient  Jeuy 
ish  and  Heathen  Testimonies  to  the  Truth  of  the 
Christian  Religion  (4  vols.,  1764-67);  and  particu- 
larly A  Letter  concerning  the  Logos  (1759),  which 
brought  upon  him  the  charge  of  Socinianism. 
BzBUoaRAPHT:  The  basal  work  on  the  life  is  the  anonym 
mous  Memoire  of  Lardner,  London,  1769  (by  J.  Jennings 
Consult  further  the  Life  by  A.  Kippis*  in  voL  L  of  the 
Worke  of  Lardner,  London,  1788;  L.  Stephen,  HiaL  ^ 
Engli^  Thouoht,  passim.  New  York,  1881;  and  notion 
listed  in  DNB,  xzzii  147-161. 

LA  ROCHSLLE,  COHFBSSION  OF.  See  Gal- 
LiCAN  Confession. 

LARRABEE,  lar'a-bt,  WILLIAM  HENR7: 
Methodist  Episcopal;  b.  at  Alfred,  Me.,  Sept.  20, 
1829.  He  studied  at  Indiana  Asbury  (now  DePauwj 
University  (B.A.,  1845),  and  was  admitted  to  the 
bar,  although  he  never  practised.  After  having  been 
a  teacher  (1846-^2),  farmer,  and  clerk  in  the  office  of 
the  superintendent  of  public  instruction  in  Indiana, 
he  engaged  in  literary  and  editorial  work.  He  was 
assistant  editor  of  The  Methodist  (New  York  City) 
1862-65  and  1870-77,  of  The  Brooklyn  DaUy  Union 
1865-70,  and  of  The  Popular  Science  Monthly  1880- 
1901.  Since  1880  he  has  conducted  the  department 
on  "  Life  in  the  Churches  "  in  The  Christian  Ad- 
vocate. He  has  likewise  contributed  to  various  en- 
cyclopedias, particularly  to  Bishop  M.  Simpson's 
Cycl&pedia  of  Methodism  (Philadelphia,  1878),  and 
has  written  Education  through  the  Agency  c/  Religioiu 
Organizations  (St.  Louis,  1904);  How  the  World  lou 
Made  (Plainfield.  N.  J.,  1906);  and  Volcanoes  and 
Earthquakes  (1906). 

LA  SALLE,  JEAH  BAPTISTE  DE.    See  Chbis^ 

TIAN  BrOTHEBS. 

LASAULX,    la''85l',    AMALU    VON:    German 

Sister  of  Charity  known  as  **  Sister  Augustine  '*; 


417 


Religious  encyclopedia 


XiAPMd 


b.  St  Coblenz  Oct.  19,  1815;  d.  at  Vallendar  (3  m. 
n.n.e.  of  Coblenz)  Jan.  28,  1872.  She  entered  the 
mother-house  of  the  Sisters  of  Charity  at  Nancy 
1838,  served  in  the  hospital  of  Aix-larChapelle 
1842-49,  and  was  mother-superior  of  the  Hospital 
of  St.  John  at  Bonn  1849-71.  During  the  wars  of 
Prussia  with  Denmark  (1864),  Austria  (1866),  and 
France  (1870-71)  she  cared  for  the  woimded  and 
displayed  no  slight  organizing  ability.  Her  theo- 
logical instruction  was  received  from  disciples  of 
Georg  Hermes  (q.v.),  and,  like  certain  of  the  Bonn 
professors,  she  refused  to  accept  the  decrees  of  the 
Vatican  Coimcil  in  1870;  she  was  deposed,  1871, 
and  transferred  to  Vallendar;  when  she  died  the 
usual  burial  rites  were  denied  to  her  remains. 

Biblxoobapht:  Her  life  has  been  written  by  J.  H.  Reinkena, 
Bonn,  1878,  and  H.  Lecoultre,  Paris,  1879,  Eng.  trand., 
London,  1880.  Consult  also:  Erinnerunoen  an  Amalie 
von  Lataulx,  Gotha,  1878,  Eng.  transl..  Sitter  Aii^iMline, 
London,  1880. 

LAS  CASAS,  lOs  ca'sOs,  BARTOLOME  DE: 
Spanish  missionary  in  the  West  Indies;  b.  at  Se- 
ville 1474;  d.  at  Madrid  Jidy  31,  1566.  He  studied 
the  humanities  and  law  at  the  universities  of  Se- 
ville and  Salamanca,  and  in  1502  accompanied  the 
Governor  Ovando  to  Hispaniola.  He  remained 
there  eight  years,  administering  the  allotment  (re- 
partimiento)  which  had  fallen  to  his  father,  till 
1510,  when  he  entered  upon  the  priest's  vocation. 
While  in  Cuba  in  1512  he  became  familiar  with  the 
harshness  of  the  conquistadares,  and  even  then,  as 
throughout  his  life,  he  appeared  as  the  protector  of 
the  natives.  That  he  might  better  fulfil  this  part, 
he  returned  to  Spain  in  1515  and  obtained  a  com- 
mission drawn  up  in  the  name  of  the  king  empower- 
ing him  to  **  watch  over  .  .  .  the  liberty,  the  good 
and  proper  treatment,  the  bodily  and  the  spiritual 
weal  of  the  Indians  "  (text  in  Fabi6,  p.  58),  along 
with  the  title  of  protector  universal  de  todoa  loa 
Indios.  Repeated  opposition  compelled  him  to 
frequent  journeys  to  Spain.  From  the  University 
of  Salamanca  he  received  a  pronouncement  to 
the  effect  that  it  is  capital  heresy  to  deny  the  In- 
dians' capacity  for  conversion.  He  himself  won 
the  Indiajis'  confidence  to  such  a  degree  that  at 
his  word  alone  they  often  voluntarily  did  what  the 
Spanish  lords  could  not  achieve  by  force.  Las 
Casas  wrought  subsequently  as  bishop  of  Chiapa 
in  Mexico  1544-47.  Since  his  efforts,  supported  by 
ecclesiastical  means  of  discipline,  encroached  far 
too  deeply  upon  affairs  as  the  oonquMtadores  had 
shaped  them  to  suit  themselves,  opposition  to  Las 
Casas  increased;  and  at  home  it  was  even  led  by 
the  historian  Sepulveda,  in  the  atrocious  tract,  De 
justia  belli  cattsie  (prohibited  in  Spain,  but  printed 
in  Rome).  Against  this.  Las  Casas  retorted  with 
Brevieima  relacion  de  la  destruccion  de  las  Indicia 
(Seville,  1552).  With  more  detail  he  treats  the  ex- 
periences of  his  own  life  in  his  main  work,  Hietoria 
de  las  Indicts  (first  printed  in  Collection  de  doccvr 
mentos  iniditos  para  la  historia  de  EspafiOf  vols. 
Ixii.-lxvi.,  Madrid,  1875-76).  It  is  not  open  to 
proof  that  Las  Casas  is  involved  in  the  responsi- 
bility for  the  introduction  of  negro  slavery  into 
America  (cf .  Apologie  de  B.delas  Casas  in  Mimoires 
de  la  dasse  des  sciences  morales  ,  .  .  de  VInstitiU 
VI.— 27 


de  France,   vol.   iv.   (5  vols.,   Paris,    1798-1804). 

There  is  an  incomplete  edition  of  his  works,  with 

a  sketch  of  his  life,  by  J.  A.  Llorente  (2  vols.,  Paris, 

1822).  K.  Benrath. 

Biblioobapht:    The  life  of  Las  Casae  has  been  written  by 

M.  Pio,  Bologna,  1618;   by  Llorente  as  an  introduction  to 

the  (Euvrea  de  Lot  Caaas,  Paris,  1822;   A.  Helps,  London, 

1868;    C.  Outierres,  Madrid,  1878;    R.  Baumstark,  Frei. 

burg,  1879;  A.  M.  Fabie,  in  CoUecHon  de  doeumentoe  iriedi- 

toB^  with  an  appendix  of  hitherto  unprinted  writings  of 

Las  Oasas,  Madrid,  1879-80;  F.  A.  Mao  Nutt,  Bartholomew 

La$  Caetu:   hia  Life,  ApoHoUUe,  and  Writinot,  New  York. 

1909;  KL,  vii.  1437-1441.    Consult  also  W.  H.  Preecott, 

Conqueet  cf  Mexico,  book  ii.,  ohap.  viiL,  appendix.  New 

York,  1843  and  often. 

LASCO,  Ids'oO,  JOHANNES  A  QAN  LASKI): 
Polish  reformer;  b.  probably  at  Lask  (90  m.  s.w. 
of  Warsaw),  Poland,  1499;  d.  at  Pinczow  (120  m. 
s.  of  Warsaw),  Poland,  Jan.  8,  1560.  In  1510, 
probably,  the  archbbhop  of  Cracow,  his  uncle,  re- 
ceived him  into  his  home,  giving  him  an  oppor- 
tunity for  pursuing  humanistic  studies  at  that 
time  flourishing  in  Cracow.  Li  1513  he  accom- 
panied the  archbishop  to  Rome  where  a  council 
was  to  be  held.  He  then  entered  the  University 
of  Bologna,  devoting  himself  to  the  study  of  the- 
ology. In  1518  he  returned  to  Poland  where  in 
1521  he  was  consecrated  priest  and  became  dean 
at  the  metropolitan  church  in  Gnesen.  But,  per- 
ceiving with  dissatisfaction  the  deficiencies  of  his 
church,  in  1523  he  gladly  followed  his  brother  on  a 
diplomatic  mission  which  led  them  to  Basel  and 
Paris.  In  1524  he  settled  for  some  time  at  Basel, 
where  he  became  an  intimate  friend  not  only  of 
Erasmus,  but  also  of  other  prominent  men,  who, 
seized  by  the  new  intellectual  and  spiritual  move- 
ment, sooner  or  later  joined  the  Reformation.  He 
became  an  enthusiastic  humanist,  seeing  plainly 
the  deep-rooted  defects  of  the  Church  and  con- 
vinced of  her  need  of  a  thorough  reform;  but  like 
Erasmus  he  hoped  that  this  might  proceed  from 
within.  During  his  absence  the  Reformation  had 
invaded  Poland.  By  the  king's  order  in  1526 
Luther's  writings  were  confiscated,  and  all  men 
suspected  of  importing  them  were  seized.  At  this 
critical  time  Lasco  was  called  back  to  Poland;  but 
he  labored  ten  years  in  vain,  to  bring  order  into 
the  confused  conditions  of  the  Church,  until  he 
finally  broke  completely  with  the  Roman  Church, 
resigning  his  offices  and  leaving  the  coimtry.  He 
went  first  to  Louvain  and  thence  to  Emden  where 
Countess  Anna,  the  regent  of  the  country,  en- 
trusted him  with  the  government  of  all  the  churches 
in  the  coimtry  (1542).  Lasco  succeeded  in  im- 
pressing upon  the  East  Frisian  Church  the  stamp 
of  his  personality  in  such  a  way  that  Friesland  for 
a  long  time  was  called  the  northern  Geneva.  His 
influence  was  felt  also  in  neighboring  territories,  at 
Wesel  and  thence  up  the  Rhine  to  Heidelberg. 
Although  his  success  was  obstructed  by  the  vio- 
lent opposition  of  the  Lutherans,  he  remained  true 
to  his  convictions  concerning  the  truth  of  the  Gos- 
pel. A  few  years  later,  in  1548,  the  Interim  in- 
duced him  to  leave  Friesland.  In  1550  he  came  to 
England  where  the  duke  of  Somerset,  the  lord- 
protector,  and  Archbishop  Cranmer,  the  primate, 
took  a  decisive  stand  on  the  side  of  the  Reforma- 
tion.   Soon  his  influence  was  felt  in  the  Evangel- 


lASOO 

lAtliner 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


418 


ical  development  of  the  Church  of  England.  The 
king  entrusted  Laseo  with  the  organisation  of  a 
congregation  of  all  foreign  Protestants  in  London. 
It  was  acknowledged  as  a  congregation  independ- 
ent from  the  government  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, Lasco  being  its  superintendent,  assisted  by 
four  clergymen.  He  wrote  a  confession  {Confessio 
Londinensia)  intended  as  a  strong  defense  against 
the  sectarian  tendencies  of  the  foreigners,  and  this 
was  to  be  signed  by  every  new  member;  for  the 
instruction  of  youth  he  used  a  catechism  which  he 
had  compiled  in  Emden  and  was  not  without  in- 
fluence upon  the  Heidelberg  catechism.  Lasco  ex- 
ercised a  decisive  influence  upon  the  English  Church, 
as  well  as  upon  his  own,  also  by  his  highly  impor- 
tant work  on  the  sacraments,  Brevis  ei  dUucida  de 
aacramentis  ecclesicB  Christi  tradatio  (London,  1552). 
But  with  the  early  death  of  Edward  VI.  in  1553 
the  whole  work  of  Lasco  broke  in  pieces.  Mary 
dissolved  the  congregation  of  foreigners  and  ex- 
pelled them  from  the  country.  They  wandered 
from  place  to  place,  finding  no  rest,  owing  to  the 
dissensions  between  the  adherents  of  the  Refor- 
mation. Even  in  Emden  Lasco  found  no  home. 
He  went  to  Frankfurt,  where  a  part  of  the  fugitive 
congregation  obtained  an  asylum,  always  and 
everjrwhere  taking  pains  to  alleviate  the  dreary  lot 
of  the  fugitives'  way  to  Basel,  to  defend  the  con- 
fession of  his  brethren  as  well  as  their  legal  status 
within  the  Church  of  the  Reformation,  and  to  warn 
the  whole  assembly  of  Evangelicals  to  unite  against 
their  oonmion  foe,  the  Roman  Church.  On  an 
urgent  request  from  Poland  he  returned  thither  in 
Dec.,  1556,  with  the  intention  of  devoting  the  rest 
of  his  life  to  the  service  of  the  Evangelical  Church 
of  his  native  country.  During  his  eighteen  jrears' 
absence  the  Reformation  had  made  rapid  progress 
among  the  nobility,  not  so  much  from  Wittenberg 
as  from  Geneva  since  the  Calvinistic  system  of  the 
congregation  and  of  the  church  government  met 
more  readily  the  peculiar  conditions  of  Poland. 
But  there  was  no  prominent,  eneigetic  theologian 
to  bring  order  into  the  confused  conditions  of  the 
Evangelical  congregations.  Lasco,  the  fittest  man, 
was  in  exile.  So  it  happened  that  the  Evangelicals 
of  Poland  at  the  Synod  of  Kozminek  in  1555  united 
with  the  Bohemian  Brethren,  adopting  their  con- 
fession and  church  order.  In  1556  Lasco  arrived 
in  Poland.  He  immediately  perceived  that  the 
Evangelical  Church  in  Poland  needed  her  own  in- 
dependent development  in  order  to  guard  herself 
against  the  Roman  Church  in  the  country,  and  he 
spared  no  efforts  to  destroy  the  connection  with 
the  Moravians  and  to  lead  the  Evangelical  Church 
of  his  country  into  genuinely  Evangelical  paths. 
Until  the  last  moment  of  his  life  he  had  to  strug- 
gle against  great  difficulties,  on  the  one  side  from 
a  hostile  party  within  the  Church  of  the  Reforma- 
tion herself,  and,  on  the  other  side,  from  the  Uni- 
tarians who  had  gained  considerable  ground  in 
Poland.  His  works  were  collected  in  two  vols,  by 
Kuyper  (Amsterdam,  1886).  (H.  Dalton.) 

BnuooBAPHT:  His  life  was  written  by  P.  Bartels,  Elber- 
Md,  1860;  H.  Dalton.  CSotha,  1881;  G.  Poaoal.  1804. 
OoDSult  further:  M.  Qoebel,  GetehiehU  dsa  chmtficftm 
LtbenB  in  der  rhfeinitehHwe^tfoUachen  Kirche,  I  324-368, 
Coblents,    1862;     H.    Dalton«    La^eiana,    Berlin.    1898; 


idem*  MUeeOanea,  ib..  1905;  Kniske.  Jahaam  a  La»eo  umd 
der  SokrarngfOattreil,  Leipnc  1901. 

LASICIUS,  la''8i-si'us,  JOHANIfES  QAN  LASI- 
CB3):  Polish  noble  and  author;  b.  in  Great  Po- 
land or  in  Lithuania,  1534;  d.  shortly  after  1599. 
Of  his  life  little  is  known,  but  about  1557  he  was 
in  Switzerland,  where  he  left  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church  for  the  Reformed.  He  traveled  extensively, 
not  only  as  a  private  tutor  and  private  scholar, 
but  also  as  a  diplomat,  being  appointed  rojral  en- 
voy by  King  Stcphan  Bathory.  Later  he  seems 
to  have  returned  to  his  native  country,  where  he 
occupied  himself  with  teaching  and  literary  work. 
He  took  an  active  part  in  the  extension  of  Protes- 
tantism, the  tmion  of  the  Lutherans,  Reformed,  and 
Bohemian  Brethren,  and  the  war  on  Polish  Jesuit- 
ism and  Unitarianism.  In  consequence  of  his  in- 
terest in  the  Bohemian  Brethren  he  wrote  his  De 
origine  H  xnstiiulU  Fratrum  Christianorum  qui  tunt 
in  Prussia,  PoUmxa^  Boemia,  et  Moravia  (written 
in  1568),  later  expanded  into  his  De  origine  et  re- 
Ims  gesiis  Fratrum  Bohemorum  .  «  .  Ubri  odo  (writ- 
ten after  1575).  Neither  of  these  have  been  pub- 
lished, nor  are  even  their  manuscripts  complete, 
though  the  eighth  book  of  the  latger  work  was  ed- 
ited, with  a  summary  of  the  other  books,  by  J.  A. 
Comenius  (lissa,  Poliuid,  1649).  His  main  source  was 
J.  Camerarius's  Historica  narratio  (Heidelberg,  1605: 
written  in  1573).  The  woik  of  Lasidus  is  still  not 
without  value,  since  much  of  the  material  at  his 
disposal  is  now  lost.  He  also  wrote  De  Rusaomm, 
Moscovitarum  ei  Tarlarorum  rdigione,  saerificiui, 
nuptiarum  et  funerum  ritu  e  diversis  striptorStnu 
(Speycr,  1582),  which,  like  his  De  diis  Samagitarum 
ccBteroTumque  Sarmatarum  eifalaorum  ChritHanarum 
(published,  with  his  De  rdigione  Armeniorumt  in 
Michalanit  Lituani  de  moribus  Tariarorumj  IMuanih 
rum  ei  Moscharum  fragmina  decern,  ed.  J.  Grasser. 
Basel,  1615;  also  ed.,  W.  Mannhardt,  Riga,  186S\ 
is  of  great  value  as  one  of  the  few  sources  for  a 
knowledge  of  the  pagan  religion  of  the  Balto-Slavic 
peoples.  (Joseph  Mt^LLER.) 

Bibliogbapht:    J.  liukasMwios.  GeM^tdkfa  der  r^onmrics 

Kvrdkt  in  I/Osuen,  ii.   182  aqq..   Leipmc«    1850;    E.  W. 

CrOger.    OMcAic^  dtir  aUen  BrUderkirche,    u,    100  sqq.. 

Qnadau.  1866;    J.  Goll,  Qudlen  und  Untenwku^toen  nr 

OeadkicAte  der  bokmuehen  Bmder,  I  74  aqq.,  Pzague,  187S; 

H.  Usener.  Gdttemamen,  p.  82,  Bonn,  1806. 

LAST  THINGS.    See  Eschatoloot. 

LATERAH    CHURCH    AND    COUNCILS:    The 

church  of  St.  John  Lateran  in  Rome  and  the  coun- 
cils held  in  the  palace  connected  with  it.  The  pal- 
ace was  the  official  residence  of  the  popes  for  o%Tr 
a  thousand  years.  It  was  originally  the  property 
of  the  rich  patrician  family  of  Plautius  Lsiteranus, 
but  was  confiscated  by  Nero,  and  later  became  an 
imperial  residence.  A  portion  of  it,  bestowed  by 
Maximian  on  his  daughter  Fausta,  second  wife  d 
Constantino,  became  Imown  as  the  Domus  F&ustc. 
and  she  lived  there  until  her  husband  beheaded 
her.  Constantine  then  gave  it  (312)  to  Pope  Mel- 
chiades,  confirming  the  donation  to  Sylvester,  in 
whose  pontificate  the  first  basilica  was  built  here 
and  consecrated  in  324.  It  was  overthrown  by  an 
earthquake  in  896,  and  rebuilt  by  Sergius  III.  (904- 
911).    This  second  church  was  destroyed  by  fire 


410 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Xasoo 


itlmor 


in  1306,  and  a  third  in  1360.  The  fourth  was 
erected  by  Urban  V.  (136^70),  and  still  contains 
remnants  of  the  fourth- and  tenth-oentury  build- 
ings. The  church  of  St.  John  Lateran  is  properly 
speaking  the  cathedral  of  the  Roman  diocese;  here 
the  pope  is  bishop  of  Rome,  while  St.  Peter's  is 
the  seat  of  his  universal  jurisdiction.  Hence  the 
inscription  on  the  west  front,  designating  it  '*  the 
mother  and  head  of  all  the  churches  of  the  city 
and  the  world." 

Of  the  numerous  councils  and  synods  convened 
in  the  Lateran  basilica  five  are  designated  as  ecu- 
menical by  the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  These 
are:  (1)  The  first  general  council  held  in  the  West, 
reckoned  as  the  ninth  ecumenical,  imder  Calixtus 

II.  (1123),  attended  by  over  300  bishops;  its  prin- 
cipal purpose  was  the  settlement  of  the  investiture 
controversy  (see  Investiture)  by  the  confirma- 
tion of  the  Concordat  of  Worms  (see  Concordatb 
AND  Delimiting  Bulus,  I.,  {  1).  (2)  The  tenth 
ecmnenical,  under  Innocent  II.  (1139),  with  about 
1,000  members;  to  heal  the  schism  caused  by  the 
antipope  Anacletus  II.  and  to  condemn  the  her- 
esies of  Peter  of  Bruys  and  Arnold  of  Brescia 
(qq.v.).  (3)  The  eleventh  ecumenical,  under  Alex- 
ander III.  (1179),  attended  by  400  bishops  and 
600  abbots  and  other  dignitaries;  to  end  the  schism 
caused  by  Frederick  Barbarossa  and  to  condemn 
the  Waldensian  and  Albigensian  doctrines.  (4) 
The  twelfth  ecumenical,  under  Innocent  III.  (1215; 
see  Innocent  III.),  attended  by  412  bishops  and 
800  abbots  and  priors;  for  the  recovery  of  the 
Holy  Land  and  the  general  improvement  of  the 
Church,  including  the  condenmation  of  the  Cathari 
and  Albigensians  (see  New  Manichbans,  II.).  It 
is  notable  as  containing  in  its  decrees  the  first 
official  sanction  of  the  term  transubstantiation  and 
the  requirement  of  annual  confession.  (5)  The 
eighteenth  ecumenical,  under  Julius  II.  and  Leo 
X.  (1512-17),  with  an  average  attendance  of  100 
to  150  members;  the  Pragmatic  Sanction  (q.v.)  was 
abolished  and  a  concordat  concluded  with  Francis 
I.  for  the  regulation  of  the  status  of  the  Galilean 
Chiu'ch  (see  Concordats  and  Delimiting  Bulls, 

III,  2  {  1).  Other  important  Lateran  synods  were 
those  held  by  Melchiades  in  313  on  the  Donatist 
question  (see  Donatism);  by  Martin  I.  in  649 
against  Monothelitism  (see  Monothelites);  by 
Stephen  IV.  in  769  against  the  iconoclasts  (see 
iBfAGES  AND  Image- WORSHIP,  II.);  and  several  re- 
forming synods  in  the  Hildebrandine  epoch,  of 
which  that  under  Nicholas  II.  in  1059  is  noteworthy 
for  its  regulation  of  papal  elections  and  its  imposi- 
tion of  clerical  celibaoy.  See  Councils  and  Synods. 
Bibuoobapbt:  Tbe  Vterftture  ou  the  ooundlB  is  given  tinder 

the  articles  Oouitgilb  and  Synodb;  Cauxtub  II.;  In- 
nocence II.;  Alexander  III.;  Innocence  III.;  Jv- 
uus  IL:   and  Leo  X.     Cf.  KL.  vii.  149»-1602. 

LATIMER,  HUGH:  En^ish  reformer;  b.  at 
Thurcaston  (4  m.  n.e.  of  Leicester),  Leicestershire, 
about  1480;  burned  at  the  stake  at  Oxford  Oct. 
16,  1555.  He  studied  at  Christ's  College,  Cam- 
bridge (B.A.,  1510;  M.A.,  1514;  B.D.,  1524),  and 
was  at  first  a  bitter  antagonist  of  the  Reformation, 
obtaining  his  baccalaureate  of  theology  by  a  dis- 
putation  against   the   teachings   of  Melanchthon. 


Among  his  auditors,  however,  was  Thomas  Bilney 
(q.y.),  who  so  influenced  him  that  his  antipathy 
to  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  equaled  his  former 
enthusiasm  for  it.  In  his  sermons  he  laid  stress 
on  the  utter  corruption  of  man  and  on  atonement 
through  the  death  of  Christ,  opposing  indulgences 
and  the  belief  in  tradition,  and  urging  the  need  of 
a  translation  of  the  Bible.  His  opponents  now 
induced  Nicholas  West,  Bishop  of  Ely,  to  forbid 
him  to  preach  in  the  diocese,  but  the  Augustinian 
prior  Ilobert  Barnes,  whose  monastery  in  Cam- 
bridge was  exempt,  opened  his  church  to  him,  and 
a  large  number,  including  West  himself,  came  to 
hear  him.  At  the  request  of  the  Roman  Catho- 
lics, Cardinal  Wolsey  examined  Latimer,  but  ac- 
quitted him  and  gave  him  permission  to  preach 
anywhere  in  England.  In  1530  he  preached  be- 
fore the  king,  and  shortly  afterward  received  the 
living  of  West  Kington,  Wiltshire.  His  sermons 
caused  excitement  in  his  parish,  and  he  was  cited 
to  London,  threatened  with  excommunication,  and 
freed  only  at  the  intervention  of  the  king,  who  was 
pleased  with  his  attitude  and  talents.  At  the  rec- 
ommendation of  Cranmer,  he  was  appointed  chap- 
lain to  Anne  Boleyn  and  in  1535  was  made  bishop 
of  Worcester,  where  he  actively  promoted  the  Ref- 
ormation. Four  years  later  he  resigned,  since  he 
would  not  sign  the  Six  Articles  (see  Six  Articles, 
Act  of  the),  and  then  lived  in  retirement  imtil 
detected  by  the  spies  of  Gardiner,  when  he  was 
confined  in  the  Tower  until  the  accession  of  Edward. 
He  declined  an  invitation  to  resume  his  bishop- 
ric and  preferred  to  live  in  the  archiepiscopal 
palace,  where  a  wide  field  of  activity  opened 
to  him,  since  he  was  now  the  confidant  of 
Cranmer,  whom  he  assisted  in  the  preparation 
of  the  Book  of  Homilies  (See  Homilies).  At 
the  same  time  he  was  conspicuous  for  his  charity 
and  his  justice,  while  he  was  untiring  as  a 
preacher,  sparing  no  hypocrisy  and  no  tyranny. 
His  theology,  though  his  sermons  were  drawn  im- 
mediately frqm  the  Bible,  was  Lutheran,  but  his 
theory  of  the  Eucharist  later  became  GEdvinistic 
through  the  influence  of  Cranmer.  His  activity 
was  checked  by  the  accession  of  Mary.  While  on 
a  preaching-tour  he  was  cited  to  appear  before  the 
coimcil,  and  refused  a  proffered  opportunity  to 
escape.  On  Sept.  13,  1553,  he  was  imprisoned  in 
the  Tower,  being  placed  in  the  same  room  with 
Cranmer,  Ridley,  and  Bradford.  In  Ifarch  of  the 
following  year  Latimer,  Cranmer,  and  Ridley  were 
taken  to  Oxford,  and  on  Apr.  18  Latimer  was  ex- 
amined, but  refused  to  dispute,  basing  his  argu- 
ments solely  on  the  New  Testament.  After  a  year 
and  a  half  of  imprisonment,  he  and  Ridley  were 
sentenced  to  death  Oct.  1,  1555,  and  died  at  the 
stake  in  front  of  Balliol  College  two  weeks  later. 

(C.  SCHOELLf.) 
Biblioorapht:  Sources  for  a  Uf e  are  hia  Sermont  and  Be* 
maina,  ed.  G.  £.  Gorrie  for  the  Parker  Society,  2  yoIb,, 
Cambridge,  1844-45;  and  Select  Sermona  and  LeUen,  in 
Britieh  Reformen,  vol.  iv..  London,  1830.  Sketches  have 
been  written  by:  J.  C.  Ryle,  in  Buhopa  and  CUroy  pf 
Other  Day;  London.  1854;  idem,  in  The  Biehop,  Oye  Pot- 
ior and  the  Preacher,  ib.  1854;  W.  Gilpin,  ib.  1755;  J. 
Tulloch.  in  Leadere  of  the  Reformation,  Edinbuish.  1850; 
W.  Beck,  London.  1861;  J.  J.  Ellis,  New  York.  1890; 
R.  M.  and  A.  J.  Carlyle,  London,  1800;   R.  Demaus.  ib> 


lAtftndinaiiAns 

XAQd 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


420 


1903.  Consult  alto:  J.  Gairdner.  Ths  Bnglith  ChurOi  in 
1h»  ISth  Cwtury,  ib.  1903;  Cambrido*  Modern  HiMory,  h. 
538-n541  et  paarim.  New  York.  1904;  DNB,  xxxiL  171-179; 
and  works  on  the  Refonnation  in  Endaad. 

LATITUDINARIAIIS,  lat"i-tia"di-n6'ri-ani:  The 
name  applied  to  a  school  of  thought  in  the  Church 
of  England,  eepecially  in  the  seventeenth  century. 
It  is  given  somewhat  indefinitely  to  men  who  dif- 
fered widely  in  their  theological  opinions,  but 
agreed  in  a  spirit  of  toleration  toward  dissenters, 
and  in  laying  stress  only  upon  the  fundamentals  of 
religion.  According  to  its  first  representatives, 
Hales,  Chillingworth,  and  Taylor,  attached  as  they 
were  to  the  "  Church  and  king  "  side  of  the  great 
conflict  of  their  period,  the  genuine  basis  of  Chris- 
tian communion  was  to  be  found  in  a  common 
recognition  of  the  great  realities  of  Christian  thought 
and  life,  not  in  any  outward  adhesion  to  a  definite 
ecclesiastical  system.  All  who  profess  the  Apos- 
tles' Creed  are,  according  to  them,  members  of  the 
Church,  and  the  national  worship  should  be  so 
ordered  as  to  exclude  none  who  make  this  profes- 
sion. The  movement  begun  by  these  men  passed 
on  into  a  higher  and  broader  stream  of  thought 
with  the  "Cambridge  Platonists "  (q.v.),  e^ 
dally  Whichcote  and  Culverwel,  who,  in  a  philo- 
sophical spirit,  dealt  with  questions  touching  the 
very  essence  of  religious  and  moral  principles. 
They  carried  forward  the  cause  of  religious  liberal- 
ity, and  took  up  and  molded  into  a  definite  form 
all  the  nobler  intellectual  tendencies  of  the  time. 
Ahnost  all  the  influential  English  divines  of  the 
Revolution  period,  when  these  principles  had  free 
sway,  were  tnuned  in  the  Cambridge  school,  and 
carried  its  attitude  into  the  regulation  of  their 
public  conduct. 

The  spiritual  apathy  of  the  eighteenth  century 
in  England  has  been  attributed  (as  by  Canon  Perry, 
History  cf  the  English  Church,  ii.,  London,  1862, 
614  sqq.)  to  the  influence  of  the  Latitudinarians; 
but  it  may  be  truer  to  regard  both  as  alike  resulU 
of  a  reaction  from  the  fierce  religious  passions  and 
prejudices  of  the  preceding  age.    The  temper  of 
the  Latitudinarians  finds  its  modem  representa- 
tive in  the  so-called  ''  Broad-church  "  party,  whose 
earliest  distinguished  members  in  England  were 
Coleridge,  Whately,  Thomas  Arnold,  Julius  Charles 
Hare,  Frederick  Denison  Maurice,  Charles  Kingsley, 
and  Dean  Stanley.    The  tendency  to  reduce  the 
number  of  essential  doctrines  to  a  minimum  and  to 
lay  stress  rather  upon  the  Christian  temper  of  daily 
life  and  earnest  work  for  social  betterment,  helped 
forward  by  the  results  of  the  "  higher  criticism  " 
of  the  Bible,  has  become  very  wide-spread  in  re- 
cent years,  in  America  as  well  as  England,  and  not 
only  among  members  of  the  Anglican  commimion 
but  throughout  all  the  Protestant  bodies. 
Bibuoosapht:   W.  J.  Conybeare,  Churdi  Partie$,  London. 
1854;    J.  Hunt,  Religiout  Thought  in  England,  3  voU., 
ib.   1870-73   (impartial);    L.   Stephen,   Hitt.  of  EnifltMh 
Thought  in  the  18th  Century,  2  vols..  New  York,  1881; 
J.  H.  Overton.  The  Church  in  England,  vol.  ii.  paasim, 
London,  1807;    J.  F.  Hurrt,  Hiet.  of  RaHowAiMm,  New 
York,  1902;    J.  H.  Overton  and  F.  Retton,  The  BngUeh 
Church  {171 4-1800),   London,   1906;    Cambridge  Modem 
Hielory,  v.  911  eqq.;  KL,  vii.  1604-06. 

LATOMUS,  lat'o-mus,  BARTHOLOMAEUS  (BAR- 
THOLOMAEUS  HEIHRICI):    Roman  Catholic  hu- 


manist; b.  at  Arlon  (16  m.  w.n.w.  of  Luxemburg), 
about    1485;     d.  at    Coblens  Jan.  3,   1570.      In 
1516  he  matriculated  at  the  University  of  Frei- 
burg, where  he  lectured  three  years  later.    In  1521 
he  accompanied  Erasmus  on  a  journey  into  Alsace, 
and  in  Sept.,  1522,  he  was  in  Treves  and  defended 
the  city  against  Frans  von  Sickingen  (q.v.).     He 
had  already  made  himself  known  as  a  poet  by  his 
Vila  el  cbitus  Maximiliani  L  imperaioris  (Augsburg, 
1519)  and  an  Epistola  Austria  ad  Carolum  impera- 
(arem  (Strasburg,  1521),  while  he  now  wrote  his 
Actio  memorahUis  Francisei  ab  Siccingen,  cum  Trev- 
irorum   obsidione,  turn   exitus    ejusdem    (Cologne, 
1523).    From  Treves  he  went  to  Cologne  as  teacher 
of  dialectics  and  rhetoric,  and  in  1530  he  became  a 
teacher  at  Louvain,  but  soon  accepted  a  call  to  the 
high  school  of  Treves.    In  1531  he  was  in  Paris  as  a 
teacher  at  the  Collegium  Sanctae  Barbarae.    Three 
years  later  he  was  appointed  professor  of  rhetoric  at 
the  College  Royal  founded  by  Francis  I.,  and  in  1539 
visited  Italy,  settling  for  a  time  at  Bologna.   Thence 
he  traveled  to  Rome,  where  his  zeal  for  the  Refor- 
mation seems  to  have  abated.    In  1542  he  was  ap- 
pointed councilor  at  the  electoral  court  of  Treves, 
with  a  residence  at  Coblens.    An  attempt  to  in- 
troduce the  Reformation  in  Cologne  occasioned  a 
controversy  with  Butser,  who  accused  him  of  in- 
consistency, whereupon  Latomus  replied  that  be 
had  never  taught  the  Lutheran  doctrine  {Respoimo 
Barthohmari   Latomi   ad    epistolam    quandam    M. 
Buceri,   Cologne,    1544).    Butser   responded    with 
his  Scripta  duo  adversaria  (Strasburg  1544),  which 
was  answered  by  Latomus  in  1545.    After  accom- 
panying his  elector  to  the  diets  of  Speyer  and 
Worms  in  1544-45,  Latomus  was  summoned  to  the 
conference  of  Regensburg  as  a  Roman  Catholic 
scholar,  where  he  seems  to  have  written  the  anony- 
mous Adorum  cottoquii  Raiitbonensis  narratio  (In- 
golstadt,  1546).    In  1557  he  attended  the  colloquy 
of  Worms,  and  when  the  Lutherans  accused  the 
Catholics  of  having  broken  up  the  colloquy,  he 
wrote  his  Spaltung  der  augsburffischen  Konfession 
durch   die   neuen  und   streitigen   Theologen.    This 
occasioned  another  dispute  with  Petrus  Dathenus, 
pastor  of  the  Flemish  congregation  at  Frankfurt, 
and  he  also  engaged  in  a  controversy  with  Jacob 
Andreft  on  the  doctrine  of   communion  in  both 
kinds.    In  1569  Jacob  of  Eltz  made  him  councilor 
of  his  electoral  court.    In  addition  to  his  poems 
and  his  controversial  and  occasional  writings,  the 
works  of  Latomus  include  the  following:   Summa 
totius  ralionis  dissermdi  (Cologne,  1527),  Oraiio  de 
stiuiiis  humanUaiis  (Paris,  1534),  Oraiio  de  lawlibus 
eloquentia  (1535),  as  well  as  editions  of  Cicero,  Ter- 
ence, and  Geoige  of  Trebiiond.      (G.  Kawbkau.) 
BiBUOOKAniT:    Hi*  letter  of  June  24.  1633,  to  Melancb- 
thon,  ed.  G.  Kawerau,  is  in  TSK,  Ixxv  (1902).  140  aqq. 
Consult:    L.  Roersch,  in  BuUeHn  de  I'aeadhnie  royals  de 
Belgique,  maiee  8,  »▼  (1887),  132-176;    idem,  Biographie 
fuMondU  de  Belgique,  n.  424-434,  BruHele,  1891;    A    J. 
van  der  Aa,  Biographiedi  Woordenboek  der  Nederlanden, 
pp.  191  eqq..  Harlem,  1865;   ADB,  xviii.  14  (not  particu- 
larly raluable). 

LATOMUS,  JACOBUS  JACQUBS)  MASSOH: 

Roman  Catholic  theologian;  b.  at  Cambron,  Hai- 
naut,  in  1475;  d.  at  Louvain,  Belgium,  May  29, 
1544.    He  waa  educated  at  Paris,  and  in  1505 


4di 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDU 


lAtltiidlnarlanB 

lAQd 


called  to  Louvain,  where  he  was  appointed  regular 
professor  of  theology  and  canon  of  St.  Peter's  in 
1535,  becoming  rector  of  the  university  two  years 
later.  He  protested  against  the  Collegium  trilingue 
founded  at  Louvain  by  Erasmus  in  his  Z>0  trium 
lingtuirum  et  studii  theologici  ratitme  dialogua  (Ant- 
werp, 1519)  and  was  henceforth  stigmatized  by  the 
admirers  of  Erasmus  as  an  enemy  of  the  new  learn- 
ing. Melanchthon  and  the  Lutherans  contributed 
to  the  general  contempt  and  irony  heaped  upon 
the  theologians  of  Louvain  and  Latomus  defended 
them  in  his  ArHculorum  doctrina  fratria  M.  Lutheri 
per  theologoa  Lovanieruea  damnatorum  ratio  ex  sacrie 
literia  et  veteribua  iracUUoribus  (Antwerp,  1521). 
Luther  inunediately  replied,  and  four  years  later 
Latomus  responded  with  his  De  primatu  ponHficia 
adveraua  Luiherum,  In  the  same  year  he  attacked 
(Ecolampadius  and  Beatus  Rhenanus  in  his  i>e 
confeattione  aecreta  (Antwerp,  1525),  and  also  wrote 
against  Tyndale.  He  was  likewise  the  author  of 
treatises  on  various  doctrinal  problems,  and  in  the 
year  of  his  death  published  his  Dua  episUda,  una 
in  ItbeUum  de  ecdeeia,  Philippo  MelanchUumi  ad- 
acripta;  aiiera  contra  orationem  factiotorutn  in  comi- 
Hie  Ratieboneneibue  habitam  (Aiitwerp,  1544).  He 
was  the  object  of  the  special  antipathy  of  the  Lu- 
therans on  account  of  his  zeal  against  heretics  and 
as  the  theological  coadjutor  of  Franz  van  der  Hulst, 
the  imperial  inquisitor  in  the  Netherlands,  in  1522. 

(G.  Kawerau.) 
Bibliogbafht:   Hia  Opera  appeared,  Louvain,  1550.     Gon- 
suit:    BtographU  natianale  de  Beloiv^  xi.  434,  Bruawls, 
1891;  KL,  vu.  150&-07;  BMialheea  reformata  Nedandiea, 
iii..  1905. 

LATRIA:  See  Dulia;  Saints,  Vbnsbation  of. 

LATTER-DAT  SAniT&    See  Mobmonb. 

LAX7D,  led,  WILLIAM:  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury; b.  at  Reading  Oct.  7,  1573;  d.  at  London 
Jan.  10,  1645.  He  was  the  son  of  a  clothier,  and 
studied  at  St.  John's  College,  Oxford  (B.A.,  1504; 
M.A.,  1588;  D.D.,  1608),  being  a  fellow  at  the  age 
of  twenty.  In  1601  he  was  ordained,  and  in  1603 
became  chaplain  to  the  earl  of  Devonshire.  His 
ability  was  already  winning  attention,  and  his  ad- 
vance was  rapid.  In  1607  he  was  made  vicar  of 
Stanford,  Northamptonshire,  and  chaplain  to 
Richard  Neile,  later  archbishop  of  York,  who  in 
1610  presented  him  to  the  living  of  Cuzton  in 
Kent,  and  he  resigned  his  fellowship  to  enter  upon 
his  parochial  duties.  In  1611  he  was  elected  head 
of  his  college.  His  position  there  was  difficult; 
the  Oxford  of  his  day  was  thoroughly  Calvinistic, 
while  Laud  was  equally  hostile  to  Roman  Catholics 
and  Presbyterians.  The  Puritan  antipathy  to  him 
became  intense.  Robert  Abbot,  later  bishop  of 
Salisbury,  made  a  violent  attack  on  him  in  1614, 
but  his  stanch  friend  Neile  gave  him  the  prebend 
of  Buckden  in  the  same  year  and  the  archdeaconry 
of  Huntingdon  in  1615,  while  in  1616  he  became 
dean  of  Gloucester.  There,  with  most  excellent 
intentions,  he  roused  opposition  by  his  besetting 
fault,  lack  of  tact,  when  he  directed  that  the  altar, 
placed  through  Puritan  influence  in  the  center  of 
the  choir,  should  be  restored  to  its  ancient  position 
against  the  eastern  wall.    He  increased  his  unpop- 


ularity in  1617  by  wearing  a  surplice  at  a  funeral 
in  Scotland.  His  favor  with  the  king,  on  the  other 
hand,  increased.  In  Jan.,  1621,  he  was  installed 
as  a  prebendary  of  Westminster,  and  six  months 
later  was  consecrated  bishop  of  St.  David's.  It  is 
characteristic  of  his  rigid  adherence  to  what  he 
deemed  right,  that  he  refused  to  hold  the  two 
offices  of  bishop  and  head  of  St.  John's,  although 
he  had  express  permission  to  do  so.  In  1622  the 
affair  of  the  countess  of  Buckingham,  who  was  in- 
clining toward  Roman  Catholicism,  required  him 
to  define  his  position  toward  the  Church  of  Rome, 
which  he  acknowledged  to  be  a  true  Church,  al- 
though neither  at  that  time  nor  at  any  other  did 
he  approach  or  accept  its  characteristic  teachings. 

With  the  death  of  James  I.  (Mar.  27,  1625) 
Laud's  real  power  in  the  English  Church  began. 
Firmly  convinced  of  the  justice  of  his  cause,  he 
sought  to  make  the  king  an  instrument  in  forcing 
his  own  views  on  the  entire  body  of  the  Church. 
A  firm  advocate  of  the  alliance  between  Church 
and  State,  he  stressed  the  doctrine  of  the  divine 
right  of  kings  imtil  the  Puritan  house  of  com- 
mons came  to  regard  him  as  the  enemy  both  of 
civil  and  religious  liberty.  On  the  other  hand, 
Charles  rewarded  his  fidelity  richly.  On  June  20, 
1626,  he  was  nominated  bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells, 
and  continued  his  attempts  at  reform  in  his  new 
post,  notwithstanding  Puritan  opposition,  which 
he  did  not  try  to  conciliate.  In  1633,  on  the  death 
of  George  Abbot,  who  had  been  his  bitter  oppo- 
nent, Laud  became  archbishop  of  Canterbury. 
About  this  same  time  an  event  happened  which 
was  a  puzzle  at  once  to  the  Puritans  and  the  Ro- 
man Catholics;  Laud,  suspected  by  the  Puritans 
of  Roman  Catholic  tendencies,  received  the  offer 
of  a  cardinal's  hat,  but  refused,  saying  "  somewhat 
dwelt  within  me  which  would  not  suffer  that  till 
Rome  were  other  than  it  is."  He  entered  ener- 
getically on  his  new  duties,  as  head  of  the  Church 
of  England.  The  use  of  the  prayer-book  was  en- 
forced, dignity  of  worship  was  insisted  on,  the 
churches  were  repaired,  the  system  of  "  lecturers," 
by  which  sermons  attacking  Anglican  principles 
were  fostered,  was  curbed,  and  aggressive  Puritanism, 
as  exemplified  by  the  polemics  of  the  overzealous 
William  Prynne  (q.v.)  was  checked.  On  the  other 
hand,  his  insistence  upon  bowing  at  the  name  of 
Jesus,  and  the  placing  of  the  altar  at  the  eastern 
wall  of  the  church,  thus  distinguishing  it  from  the 
communion  table  of  the  Puritans,  as  well  as  his 
plea  for  healthful  recreation  on  Simday  as  con- 
trasted with  Puritan  asceticism,  were  violently 
assailed.  At  the  same  time  he  incurred  the  hos- 
tility of  the  queen,  who  was  a  Roman  Catholic,  by 
his  protest  against  the  favoritism  shown  her  co- 
religionists. As  he  himself  said  he  was  **  very  like 
com  between  two  mill-stones." 

In  the  first  year  of  his  incumbency  of  the  see  of 
Canterbury  Laud  attempted  to  force  ritualism  on 
the  Scotch  churches,  which  were  strongly  Presby- 
terian; the  results  were  disastrous,  leading  to 
riots  in  the  churches,  particularly  in  St.  Giles', 
Edinburgh  (see  Gbddes,  Jbnnt),  and  ultimately 
to  the  renewal  of  the  Solemn  League  and  Cove- 
nant in  1638  (see  Covbnantebb).    The  unfavor- 


Xiaad 
XiAvater 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOQ 


482 


able  termination  of  the  two  "  bishops'  wars " 
against  the  Scotch  hastened  the  downfall  of  the 
archbishop,  already  hated  for  his  activity  in  the 
privy  council,  the  court  of  high  commission,  and 
the  star  chamber.  On  Dec.  18,  1540,  he  was  im- 
peached of  treason  by  the  house  of  commons,  and 
was  placed  in  confinement,  although  he  was  not 
sent  to  the  Tower  until  Mar.  1  of  the  following 
year.  He  resigned  the  chancellorship  of  the  Uni- 
versity of  Orford  June  28,  1641,  and  lingered  in 
the  Tower  until  May  31,  1643,  Prynne  meanwhile 
seising  the  opportunity  to  print  damaging  extracts 
from  the  archbishop's  diary.  The  trial  b^an  Mar. 
12,  1644,  but  the  commons  perceived  that  they 
could  not  coimt  on  the  house  of  lords  as  they  had 
hoped,  and  in  October  they  resolved  to  substitute 
attainder  for  impeachment.  Under  threats  of  mob 
violence  and  the  claim  that  parliament  could  de- 
clare whatsoever  crime  it  pleased  treason,  the  lords 
finally  passed  the  ordinance,  and  the  archbishop 
was  beheaded  on  Tower  Hill  six  days  later. 

Laud  was  a  munificent  patron  of  learning,  giv- 
ing 1,300  manuscripts  to  Oxford  and  founding  a 
chair  of  Arabic  which  is  still  in  existence.  His 
complete  works  were  first  edited  by  W.  Scott  and 
W.  BUsB  (7  vols.,  Oxford,  1847-60).  According  to 
those  of  Puritan  sympathies,  he  was  narrow,  cruel, 
and  an  enemy  of  religion;  according  to  adherents 
of  the  Anglo-Catholic  branch  of  the  Anglican 
Church,  he,  like  his  king,  was  a  martyr.  In  his 
favor  it  may  be  said  that  his  faults  were  those  of 
his  age  and  his  narrowness  can  readily  find  its 
parallel  among  many  who  opposed  him.  His  sin- 
cerity and  adherence  to  what  he  believed  to  be 
right  are  beyond  question,  and  the  same  recogni- 
tion should  be  accorded  these  qualities  in  him  as 
in  his  Puritan  antagonists.  He  was  persistent  in 
his  warfare  against  the  Puritanism  which  he  re- 
garded as  injurious  to  the  Chiirch,  despite  scant 
hopes  of  success.  He  insisted  on  the  doctrine  of 
Apostolic  Succession  (see  Apostolic  Succbsbion), 
the  importance  of  tradition,  and  the  return  to 
the  primitive  Church  of  the  first  four  centuries. 
On  the  other  hand,  he  rejected  Roman  Catholicism 
as  overladen  with  accretions  not  recognized  by 
early  Christianity.  His  stress  was  laid  on  con- 
formity in  ritual,  which,  in  his  judgment,  would 
lead  to  uniformity  of  heart,  but,  on  the  other 
hand,  he  did  not  insist  on  absolute  harmony  on 
matters  of  mere  opinion.  In  theology  he  was 
an  Arminian,  and  postulated  the  necessity  of 
good  works.  Though  not  the  first  Anglican  to 
advance  High-church  views.  Laud  may  not  un- 
fairly be  regarded  as  the  most  prominent  early  ex- 
ponent of  this  school.  (T.  Kolde.) 

Biblxoobapbt:  The  aoeount  of  the  Laud  oommemoration, 
with  a  bibliography  of  the  literature  of  the  subject,  ed. 
W.  E.  CoIUds,  appeared  London,  1895.  The  main  source 
for  a  life,  outside  of  Laud's  Work9  (ed.  W.  Scott  and  W. 
BUss,  7  vols.,  Oxford,  1847-60)  is  the  biography  by  Peter 
Heylyn,  CvprianuM  Anglicus,  London,  1668  and  often. 
Modem  biographies  are  by  W.  H.  Button,  London,  1896; 
J.  Norton,  Boston,  1864;  T.  Rogers,  in  HUtorical  Olean- 
ino9,  ser.  2,  London,  1870;  P.  Bayne,  in  Chief  Adon  in 
tha  Puritan  Revolution,  Edinburgh,  1878;  Frances  Phil- 
lips, in  Fatkere  of  the  Englieh  Church,  ser.  2,  London, 
1892;  C.  H.  Simpkinson.  ib.  1895;  A.  C.  Benson,  ib. 
1898;  and  W.  L.  Mackintoah,  ib.  1907.     Consult  also:    A. 


k  Wood,  AAmm  (hMvienme,  ed.  P.  Bliss,  iit  117-144. 
4  Tols.,  London,  1818-20;  J.  H.  Overton,  The  Ckwrdt  in 
England,  vol.  ii.,  ib.  1897;  W.  H.  Button.  The  Enffliah 
Churd%  aet&-1714),  ib.  1903  (valuable);  A.  inummer. 
Enolith  Chunk  Hiat.  {1676-ie4»\  Edinbuxgh.  1904;  W. 
B.  Frera.  The  Englith  Churdi  il668-ietS),  London,  1904; 
DNB,  xzziL  185-194.  A  new  ed.  of  the  ReUOum  of  Ike 
Conference  .  .  .  {with)  Mr.  Fieher  the  Jeeuit,  by  C.  B. 
Simpkinson,  iMppeared  London,  1901. 

LAUDS:  An  office  in  the  breviary  (q.v.)  which 
originally  was  closely  joined  to  matins,  but  is  now 
frequently  separated  from  it.    See  Matxhs. 

LAURA.    See  Monabticish. 

LAURBHCB.    See  LAUBENTms. 

LAURSHCE,  SAINT:  Christian  martyr,  who 
suffered  at  Rome  in  the  Valerian  persecution,  Aug. 
10,  258.  He  was  a  disciple  of  Pope  Sixtus  II.,  who 
made  him  one  of  the  seven  deacons  of  Home,  and 
his  martjrrdom  fell  four  days  after  that  of  his  mas- 
ter, whose  fame  he  soon  surpassed.  According  to 
tradition,  the  Roman  prefect,  having  heard  that 
the  Church  possessed  great  treasures,  demanded 
that  Laurence  should  surrender  them,  whereupon 
he  gathered  a  crowd  of  the  old,  poor,  and  sick, 
paupers  and  cripples,  and  said,  "These  are  our 
treasures." 

Biblioorapht:  An  ezoellent  means  of  tracing  tbe  literature, 
legends,  and  institutions  in  honor  of  the  saint  is  afforded 
in  Ceillier,  AuUure  eacrte,  r«62s  giniraUt  ii.  90-91. 

LAURSHCE  OF  CANTERBURY:  Second  arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury;  d.  at  Canterbury  Feb.  2, 
619.  He  was  one  of  the  original  companions  of 
Augustine  (q.v.),  was  sent  back  to  Rome  by  the 
latter  probably  in  598  with  a  letter  for  Pope  Greg- 
ory, and  retunied  to  England  in  601  with  Mellitus, 
Justus,  and  others.  Augustine  ordained  him  as  his 
successor  and  he  succeeded  to  the  see  of  Canter- 
bury on  Augustine's  death  (604  or  605),  but  never 
received  the  pallium.  He  tried  to  win  over  the 
bishops  of  the  Celtic  Church,  both  in  Britain  and 
Ireland,  finished  and  consecrated  the  church  of 
St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul  at  Canterbury  (613),  and 
translated  Augustine's  remains  to  its  north  chapel. 
Eadbald,  son  and  successor  (616)  of  the  pious 
Ethelbert,  was  a  heathen  and  Laurence  was  on  the 
point  of  giving  up  his  work  and  joining  his  breth- 
ren, Justus  and  Mellitus  (qq.v.),  in  Qaul  when  he 
opportunely  converted  the  king  (c.  618)  and  was 
allowed  to  stay. 
Bibuookapht:  Bede,  HieL  Ecd.,  L  27,  33,  ii  4,  0,  7;  Had- 

dan  and  Btubbs,  CounciU,  iii.  01-70:   DCB,  iil  631-«32: 

W.  F.  Hook.  Lives  qf  the  ArMtiehope  of  Canterbury,  I 

79  sqq.,  London,  1860;  DNB,  I  79  sqq. 

LAURENTIUS:  Antipope  498.  He  was  an 
arch-presbyter  in  Rome,  the  choice  of  the  imperial 
party  for  the  papal  chair,  and  was  elected  Nov.  22, 
498,  successor  of  Anastasius  II.  The  Roman  party 
chose  Symmachus  (q.v.).  The  decision  was  left 
to  Theodoric,  king  of  the  Ostro-Goths,  who  de- 
cided in  favor  of  Symmachus;  and  Laurentius  was 
made  bishop  of  Nocera  (498);  but  when  he  returned 
to  Rome,  his  partisans  stirred  up  constant  strife 
until  the  Roman  council  of  501  deposed  him. 
Biblxoorafbt:    Liber  ponHfiealie,  ed.  Mommaen,  in  MGH, 

Oeet.  poni.  Rom.,  i  (1898),  120  sqq.;   Bower,  Popes,  i.  296 

sqq.;  Milman,  Latin  ChriaHaniiif,  i.  416  sqq.;   and  liteim- 

ture  under  SnocACBtm. 


4dd 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Laud 
Lavater 


LAURENTIUS  VALLA.    See  Valla. 

LAVAL-MONTMORENCY,  Ia'val"-m6n"m6"- 
rdn^'st',  FRANCOIS  XAVIER  DE:  First  French 
bishop  in  Canada;  b.  at  Montigny-sur-Avre,  de- 
partment of  Eure-et-Loir,  France,  Apr.  30,  1623; 
d.  in  Quebec  May  6,  1708.  He  received  the  ton- 
sure at  the  age  of  nine,  and  a  canonry  of  Evreux  at 
fifteen.  Renouncing  his  rights  as  heir  to  the  an- 
cient name  and  estates  of  his  family,  he  pursued 
his  ecclesiastical  career,  and  was  ordained  priest 
in  1647  and  made  archdeacon  of  Evreux.  In  1653 
he  was  chosen  as  one  of  three  French  bishops  to  be 
sent  to  the  Indies,  and  spent  fifteen  months  in 
Rome  awaiting  consecration,  but  the  opposition 
of  the  Portuguese  government  brought  the  plan 
to  nothing.  In  1659  he  was  sent  to  Canada  as 
vicar-apostolic,  with  the  title  of  bbhop  of  Petrsea 
in  partibus,  and  from  his  first  arrival  there  (with 
the  exception  of  three  visits  to  France  to  regulate 
the  affairs  of  his  mission  and  to  obtain  from  the 
government  himiane  treatment  of  the  aborigines) 
was  active  until  his  death  in  pastoral  and  mission- 
ary labors.  In  1663  he  foimded  the  Seminary  of 
Quebec,  to  which  the  king  assigned  tithes  that  were  to 
be  used  in  supplying  clergy  for  the  whole  province. 
The  see  of  Quebec,  the  first  diocesan  bishopric 
in  Canada,  was  founded  in  1674,  with  jurisdiction 
over  all  the  French  possessions  in  North  Amer- 
ica. Worn  out  by  his  arduous  tasks,  which  were 
made  harder  by  conflicts  with  Frontenac  and  other 
secular  authorities,  he  resigned  his  see  into  the 
hands  of  a  younger  man  in  1684,  but  continued  to 
make  himself  useful  in  the  affairs  of  the  seminary 
and  the  mission  imtil  his  death.  Laval  Univer- 
sity at  Montreal,  foimded  in  1852,  was  named  in 
his  honor.  In  1878  his  remains  were  transferred 
from  the  cathedral  to  the  seminary;  and  in  pur- 
suance of  the  investigation  connected  with  the 
process  for  his  canonization,  the  coffin  was  opened 
in  1901,  when  his  body  was  found  in  a  perfect  state 
of  preservation. 

Bibuooraphy:  H.  J.  Morgan,  Sketehea  of  CeUbrated  Cana- 
dian$  and  Pertona  Connected  with  Canada,  pp.  14  aqq., 
Montreal,  1865;  H.  T6tu,  Monaeioneur  de  Laval,  premier 
ivtque  de  Quibee,  Paris,  1887;  A.  GoMelin.  Le  VinSraiae 
Franpoia  de  Laval  .  .  .  .*  aavieetaaa  vertua,  Quebec,  1890; 
A.  Leblond  de  Bnunath,  Biahap  Laval,  Toronto,  1906. 

LAVATER,  la-va'ter,  JOHANN  CASPAR:  Poet 
and  theologian,  perhaps  best  known  as  founder  of 
the  ''  art  of  physiognomy,"  was  bom  at  Zurich  Nov. 
15,  1741;  d.  there  Jan.  2, 1801.  He  grew  up  in  an 
atmosphere  of  good  breeding  and  earnest  piety  and 

early  displayed  a  decidedly  religious 
Life.       nature.    At  the  gymnasium  in  Zurich 

he  had  as  his  teachers  Johann  Jakob 
Bodmer  and  Johann  Jakob  Breitinger  (q.v.),  the 
ardent  standard-bearers  of  a  poetical  art  that  had 
its  weUsprings  in  refined  sensibility.  Bodmer 
entered  into  dose  personal  relations  with  Lavater 
and  awakened  his  enthusiasm  for  friendship  and 
virtue,  for  free  political  ideals,  and  for  the  poetry 
of  Klopstock  and  Young.  His  theological  growth 
and  thought  were  greatly  influenced  by  Bishop 
Butler,  Samuel  Clarke,  and  their  German  devotees. 
In  the  spring  of  1762  he  was  admitted  to  the  minis- 
terium  of  Zurich.    The  same  year  occurred  his  ac- 


tion against  a  certain  district  ruler,  whom  he  ac- 
cused before  the  council  of  oppression  and  fraud. 
A  trip  to  Germany  and  a  sojourn  of  nine  months  in 
the  Pomeranian  village  Barth,  where  he  studied 
with  J.  J.  Spalding,  removed  him  from  the  agitations 
which  that  legal  action  left  in  its  train.  On  his 
return  to  Zurich  in  1764  he  busied  himself  in  liter- 
ary labors  of  a  practical  pastoral  character.  Under 
the  title  Der  Erinnerer  he  issued  an  ethical  weekly, 
which  was  largely  a  product  of  his  own  pen.  Though 
yearning  for  the  spiritual  calling  it  was  not  till 
1769  that  he  received  his  first  appointment  as  as- 
sistant at  the  Orphan  House  Church,  Zurich.  He 
succeeded  to  the  pastorate  in  1775.  In  1778  he 
was  called  as  assistant  at  St.  Peter's,  Zurich;  and 
in  1786  he  was  made  pastor  of  this  famous  church 
and  a  member  of  the  consistory. 

Lavater  assembled  beneath  his  pulpit  a  laige 
congregation  every  Sunday,  attracted  by  his  natu- 
ralness of  delivery,  by  the  direct  and  practical 
matter  of  his^  sermons,  and  by  the  spiritual  afflu- 
ence and  personal  conviction  of  the  preacher. 
With  his  warm  interest  in  every  individual,  his 
psychological  delicacy  of  feeling,  and  his  hearty 
love  of  man,  he  was  a  pastor  quite  unique.  Not 
residents  alone,  but  many  strangers  chose  him  as 
counselor  for  their  inner  life;  and  his  pastoral  cor- 
respondence grew  to  enormous  proportions.  He 
seldom  left  Zurich,  but  he  frequently  offered  hos- 
pitality to  old  and  new  friends  in  his  house.  In  the 
summer  of  1774,  at  Bad  Ems,  he  met  Goethe,  Base- 
dow, and  Jung  Stilling;  in  1786  he  accompanied 
his  son  to  Bremen;  and  in  1793  he  acceded  to  an 
invitation  of  Count  Bemstorff  to  visit  Copenhagen. 
His  closing  years  are  interwoven  with  the  great 
events  which  brought  on  the  downfall  of  the  an- 
cient SwIeb  Confederacy.  At  the  outset  Lavater 
hailed  the  French  Revolution  as  the  dawn  of  pop» 
ular  freedom.  Later,  however,  the  "liberators'" 
deeds  of  violence  filled  him  with  indignation.  An 
act  of  great  boldness  was  lus  Wort  einea  JMen 
Schweusers  an  die  franzosische  Nation  (Eng.,  Fr., 
and  Germ.,  London,  1798),  a  tract  of  arraignment 
that  he  sent  on  May  10,  1798,  to  the  French  di- 
rector Reubell.  There  was  no  procedure  against  him 
immediately;  but  in  the  following  year  he  was 
banished  to  Basel.  He  was  at  home  again,  when 
on  Sept.  28,  1799,  the  French  triumphed  over  the 
allies  near  Zurich.  The  French  entered  the  dty 
and  a  soldier  asked  Lavater  for  some  wine;  but 
hardly  had  he  received  it  when  he  shot  Lavater 
through  the  breast,  and  this  wound  ultimately 
caused  his  death.  A  few  days  after  lus  departure 
each  of  his  friends  received  a  memorial  verse  that 
he  had  devised  for  them  as  a  farewell  greeting. 

Lavater's  intercourse  with  German  scholars  con- 
firmed in  him  a  tendency  to  abstain  from  dogmatic 
forms  of  expression  in  religious  matters.    His  own 
point  of  view  was  distinctly  that  of  a  mystic,  though 
he  held  rigidly  to  the  Bible.    All  illib- 

Religious   erality  and  petty  disputatiousness  was 
Views,      repulsive  to  him.    It  was  this  that  set 
him  at  odds  with  the  Pietists  and  the 
Moravian  school.    From  the  observation,  made  in 
1768,  that  in  the  New  Testament  the  divine  com- 
munications of  power  bear  a  sensibly  supernatural 


avator 

ftw  Mid  Qospel 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


424 


stamp,  and  that  nowhere  in  the  New  Testament  is 
there  mention  of  any  ceasing  of  such  sensible  mani- 
festations, Lavater  inferred  that  perfect  Christian- 
ity should  still  rest  upon  experiences  of  this  kind. 
Thus,  he  acquired  the  habit  of  watching  curiously 
and  longingly  for  manifestations  of  supernatural 
divine  powers.  In  the  animal  magnetism  of  Me»- 
mer,  in  sonmambulism,  in  Pastor  Gassner's  exor- 
cisms, he  was  inclined  to  detect  oonmiunications 
from  the  silent  deity;  and  to  the  last  he  believed 
that  the  Apostle  John  still  tarried  on  earth.  His 
predilection  for  occult  phenomena  subjected  him 
to  considerable  ridicule.  However,  Lavater  recog- 
nised the  danger  of  his  enthusiastic  proclivities  and 
used  discretion  in  the  expression  of  his  supernatu- 
ral anticipations.  Regarding  Lavater's  personal- 
ity there  was  much  discussion  even  in  his  lifetime. 
The  unfriendly  and  unjust  criticisms  of  Goethe, 
particularly  in  the  Xemen,  have  dominated  gen- 
eral opinion  even  to  the  present;  but  in  other  con- 
nections Goethe  spoke  quite  di£Ferently  of  Lavater 
(ef.  Wahrheit  und  Dichtung,  III.  14).  In  practical 
life  Lavater  manifested  deep  piety,  trust  in  God, 
and  love  toward  man,  and  he  fulfiUed  the  duties  of 
his  calling  with  the  greatest  fidelity. 

Lavater  was  a  voluminous  author,  and  he  in- 
variably wrote  with  a  view  to  *'  generai  usefulness.'' 
Nevertheless,  with  his  tendency  to  emphasise  prac- 
tical  effectiveness   he   combined   the 

Writings,  idealism  common  to  the  Sturm  und 
Drang  period,  characterized  by  a  tend- 
ency to  contemplate  and  glorify  the  inner  life. 
Lavater  was  a  prominent  exponent  of  this  move- 
ment, though,  in  wealth  of  ideas  and  completeness 
of  form,  his  contributions  to  the  movement  fall  far 
behind  those  of  Goethe,  Herder,  and  others.  At 
least  three  works  deserve  special  mention  here.  In 
the  case  of  the  first  the  new  style,  for  Lavater,  ar- 
rayed itself  in  the  mantle  of  Klopstock.  A  lady 
had  besought  him  for  a  poem  on  the  blessedness  of 
the  glorified.  As  the  task  grew  upon  him,  he  ap- 
pealed by  letters  to  his  friends  for  counsel.  The 
poem  never  took  shape,  but  Lavater  published  his 
letters  as  Ausnchten  in  die  Ewigkeit  (4  vols.,  Zu- 
rich, 1768-78),  being  speculations  as  to  the  condi- 
tions and  powers  of  man  after  death.  The  guiding 
genius  of  Lavater's  ideas  here  is  not  imaginative 
vision,  in  its  proper  sense,  but  psychological  and 
ethical  intuition;  though  these  ideas  are  neverthe- 
less expected  to  withstand  the  judgment  of  physio- 
logical and  metaphysical  science. 

In  Phynognomiache  Fragmenie  (4  parts,  Leipsic, 
1775-78;  Eng.  transl.,  Etaaya on  Physiognomy ,  3  vols., 
London,  1789-08),  Lavater  sought  to  portray  the 
greatness  of  himian  nature  under  the  wealth  of  indi- 
vidual characterizations.  More  independently  than 
elsewhere  with  Lavater,  the  esthetic  interest  stands 
forth  in  this  work — the  esthetic  in  that  higher  sense, 
wherein  form  is  the  symbol  of  an  inner  content. 
At  the  same  time,  the  physiognomic  manner  of 
contemplation  was  to  have  for  its  object  the  Crea- 
tor's wisdom  and  his  peculiar  working  in  genial 
men,  as  the  elect  witnesses  of  his  greatness.  The 
ethical  individualism  that  reached  its  most  com- 
prehensive expression  in  this  work  stands  in  funda- 
mental accord  with  Goethe's  mode  of  thought,  as 


against  the  rationalistic  ethics  of  the  EIn%hteD- 
ment.  In  Pontius  Pilatus  (4  vols.,  Zurich,  1782- 
1785)  Lavater  givjss  a  portraitiue  of  humanity  in  the 
mirror  of  Christ's  passion  history.  The  author  es- 
teemed this  work  his  most  important;  but  Goethe 
took  offense  at  the  form  and  substance  alike;  and 
from  that  time  these  two  spirits  parted.  It  has 
even  burdened  more  indulgent  readers  to  find  their 
way  through  this  whirl  of  ideas;  and  yet  in  this 
work  the  author's  fimdamental  thoughts,  which  he 
was  fain  to  call  his  **  system,"  might  be  supposed 
to  appear  most  completely  centered.  Humanity, 
according  to  Lavater,  lives  in  individualities,  whose 
particular  manifestation  is  consonant  with  the  di- 
vine will,  and  who  must  mutuaUy  advance  one  an- 
other. Each  one  can  "  incite  and  enkindle  the 
slumbering  or  inactive  powers  in  his  fellow  ";  can 
help  him  to  become  "  livelier,  freer,  more  positively 
existent,  more  enjoyable,  and  more  surely  discern- 
ing." Even  God  becomes  enjoyable  only  through 
men.  Uppermost  on  the  ladder  of  humanity  stands 
Christ,  the  "  divine  man  "  and  the  "  manlike  God." 
The  infinite  is  enjoyable  for  us  only  m  the  finite; 
God  humanises  himself  in  Christ.  As  touching  the 
operations  of  Christ,  Lavater  loves  the  image  of 
the  physician  and  healing:  forgiveness  of  sins  is 
restoration  of  lost  power.  The  fimdamental  thoughts 
of  Christian  belief  thus  appear  reduced  and  adapted 
to  the  Gospel  of  the  quickening,  to  the  deification 
of  humanity,  as  advocated  by  the  youthful  spirits 
of  the  sixties  and  seventies  of  the  eighteenth  cen- 
tury. With  Hamann,  Lavater  is  the  Christian 
spirit  of  this  circle. 

Aside  from  Lavater's  numerous  collections  of 
sermons  and  many  devotional  compilations,  there 
are  a  number  of  other  works  deserving  mention. 
The  more  important  of  these  are:  Schweizerlieder 
(Bern,  1767),  a  volume  of  patriotic  songs  with 
which  Lavater  achieved  his  greatest  success  as  a 
poet;  Das  geheime  Tagibuch  von  einem  Beobachte- 
seiner  sdbst  (2  parts,  Leipsic,  1771-73;  Eng.  transl., 
Secret  Journal  of  Self-observer ^  2  vols.,  London,  1795), 
the  first  of  those  sentimental  disclosures  whose  more 
distinguished  parallels  occur  in  Goethe's  WertKer 
(1774)  and  Rousseau's  Confessions  (1781);  Abraham 
und  Isaak  (Winterthur,  1776),  a  Bibliosd  drams; 
Jesus  der  Messias  (4  vols.,  1788-86),  a  Biblical  epic; 
Nathanael  (1786),  an  apology  for  Christianity  and 
the  Bible;  HandbMiothek  fiir  Freunde  (24  vob., 
1790-94);  Joseph  von  Arimathia  (Hamburg,  1794), 
another  Biblical  poem;  and  Das  mensehliche  Hen 
(Zurich,  1798),  a  poem  in  six  cantos.  Lavater  also 
wrote  about  seven  hundred  hynms,  the  best-known 
collection  being  Christlicke  Lieder  (2  parts,  Zurich. 
1776-80).  Of  Lavater  as  a  poet  it  may  be  said 
that,  while  he  had  great  facility  in  metrical  expres- 
sion, he  lacked  creative  power. 

G.  VON  Sghulthesb-Rechbesg. 
Bibuoorapbt:  The  life  by  hia  aon-in-law.  G.  Gemer,  3 
vols.,  Winterthur,  1802-03.  is  excseUent  as  a  source,  but 
uncritical  in  its  use  of  the  material.  Tho  best  life  b  by 
F.  Muncker.  Stuttgart.  1883  (those  by  F.  I.  Herbst.  Ans- 
bach,  1832.  and  F.  W.  Bodemann.  Gotha,  1877,  are  closely 
dependent  upon  Gessner).  Consult  further:  J.  C.  MSri- 
kofer.  Die  Bchweiteriachs  LUeratur  dee  18.  JahrhwvUrU, 
Leipsic  1861;  H.  Funck.  Lavater  und  der  Markgraf  Kari 
Friedrieh  von  Baden,  Freibui^.  1800;  idem.  OneAe  und 
Lavater.    Briefe  und  TagebUdier^  Weimar.  1901;    G   X. 


4d5 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lavater 

Xaw  and  Oospal 


MOUer.  Aua  Lavaien  Britfiaadte,  Munich.  1897;  J.  C. 
Fioaier,  Lavaitn  Benehungen  gu  Paris  .  .  .  1789-96, 
Zurich.  1898;  Johann  Ka»par  LovaUr,  1741-1801,  ib. 
1902  (a  memorial  on  the  centennial  of  Lavater'a  death). 
There  is  a  Life  in  Engliah,  London,  1849. 

LAVI6ERIE,  la'M''2he-ii%  CHARLES  MAR- 
TIAL ALLEMAND:  French  prelate,  cardinal,  and 
promoter  of  African  missions;  b.  at  Bayonne  Oct. 
31,  1825;  d.  at  A^iers  Nov.  26,  1892.  He  was  ed- 
ucated for  the  priesthood  at  the  seminaries  of  St. 
Nicholas  and  St.  Sulpice  and  at  the  £cole  des 
Cannes.  In  the  last-named,  after  his  ordination 
in  1849,  he  taught  Latin  literature,  and  was  ad- 
junct professor  of  theology  at  the  Sorbonne  1854- 
1856.  He  was  then  appointed  director  of  the  French 
Christian  schools  in  the  East,  and  in  Syria  came 
for  the  first  time  into  contact  with  the  non-Chris- 
tian world,  recognizing  then  his  missionary  voca- 
tion. In  1861  he  returned  to  Europe,  and  was 
named  auditor  of  the  Rota  at  Rome  and  two  years 
later  bishop  of  Nancy.  By  the  influence  of  Mar- 
shal MacMahon,  then  governor  of  Algeria,  he  re- 
ceived the  offer  of  the  bishopric  of  Algiers  in  1866, 
and  accepted  it  in  preference  to  the  coadjutor- 
archbishopric  of  Paris  which  was  offered  him  at  the 
same  time.  His  new  see  had  just  been  raised  to 
the  rank  of  an  archbishopric.  He  took  possession 
of  it  in  Mar.,  1867,  and  at  once  plunged  into  mis- 
sionary plans.  In  the  next  year  he  organized  the 
"  Society  of  Algerian  Missionaries  "  (though  it  did 
not  receive  its  final  constitution  until  1874),  and  in 
1868  the  Propaganda  gave  him  the  oversight  of  the 
prefecture  apostolic  of  the  Sahara.  His  "  White 
Fathers,"  as  the  members  of  his  society  were  com- 
monly called  from  their  habit,  penetrated  the  in- 
terior, and  in  1875  and  1878  some  of  them  at- 
tempted to  reach  Timbuctu  at  the  cost  of  their 
lives.  In  1878  the  whole  of  equatorial  Africa  was 
placed  under  their  charge.  From  that  year  La- 
vigerie  was  prominent  in  antislavery  agitation,  and 
it  was  by  his  efforts  that  the  great  congress  on 
that  subject  assembled  in  Paris  in  1890.  He  was 
made  a  cardinal  in  1882.  His  work  in  Tunis  led 
to  the  reestablishment  of  the  ancient  see  of  Cyprian 
at  Carthage  in  1884,  and  from  Jan.  25,  1885,  he 
bore  the  title  of  archbishop  of  Carthage  and  pri- 
mate of  Africa.  The  policy  of  toleration  of  the 
French  Republic  adopted  by  Leo  XIII.  was  first 
enunciated  by  him  at  a  dinner  which  he  gave  to 
the  officers  of  the  Mediterranean  squadron  in  Nov., 
1890,  and  was  confirmed  by  a  papal  brief  of  the 
following  February.  A  selection  of  his  works,  con- 
sisting principally  of  letters  and  allocutions  (2  vols.) 
was  published  in  Paris,  1884. 

Bxbuoorapbt:  A.  C.  Qnusenmayer,  Vingt^inq  anniea 
d*ip%»eopat  en  France  et  en  Afrique,  2  vols.,  Algiers,  1886; 
R.  F.  Clarke,  Cardinal  Lovigerie  and  the  African  Slave 
Trade,  London.  1889;  F.  Klein,  Le  Cardinal  Lavi4ferie  et 
lee  mieeione  d*Afrique,  Paris,  1800;  idem,  Le  Cardinal 
Lavi4ferie  et  eee  auvree  d* Afrique,  ib.  1897;  E.  Lesur  and 
J.  A.  Petit,  Hist,  p&pvlaire  de  .  .  ,  U  cardinal  Charlee- 
Martidl-Allemand  Lavigerxe,  ib.,  1892;  A.  Perraud,  Le 
Cardinal  Lovigerie,  ib.,  1898;  F.  Boumand,  Sim  Eminence 
le  Cardinal  Lavigerie,  ib.  1893;  A.  Ricard,  Le  Cardinal 
Lavigerie,  Lille,  1893;  X.  de  Pr^ville,  Un  grand  franoaie, 
le  cardinal  Lovigerie,  ib.,  1894;  L.  Baunard,  Le  Car- 
dinal Lovigerie,  2  vols.,  Paris,  1896;  J.  Simon,  Quatre 
porlraite,  ib.,  1896;  L.  d'Annam,  Le  Orand  Apdtre  de 
r Afrique,  Lyons,  1899. 


LAW  AlID  GOSPEL. 

The  Judaic  and  Pauline  Conceptions  (§  1). 
The  Conception  of  Jesus  (§  2). 
The  Writings  of  John  (S  3). 
Early  and  Medieval  Church  (S  4). 
Luther  (S  5). 

The  history  of  these  two  conceptions  is  the  his^ 
tory  of  the  general  conception  of  Christianity,  be^ 
cause  Christianity  as  a  whole  is  based  upon  two 
corresponding  categories  which  form  the  standard 
of  the  religion  of  redemption — that  of  the  obliga- 
tory demand  which  human  activity  is  to  fulfil,  and 
that  of  the  saving  grace  which  God  bestows.  Juda- 
ism teaches  that  only  he  whom  God  declares,  justi- 
fied upon  the  basis  of  the  fulfilment  of  the  law  of 
Moses  partakes  of  the  promised  salvation  to  be  re- 
vealed in  the  Gospel.  Apart  from  the  ritualism  and 

national  particularism  of  the  Jews, 
z.  The  this  theory  is  defective  in  so  far  as  the 
Judaic  and  relation  between  God  and  man  is  con- 
Pauline  sidered,  after  the  analogy  of  civil  law, 
Conceptions,  as  one  of  human  service  and  a  divine 

equivalent  for  it,  from  which  follow 
irreligious  self-dependence,  heteronomy,  and  he- 
donistic motives  of  morality.  For  Paul  both  law 
and  Gospel  are  revelations  of  God  concerning  the 
way  to  eternal  life,  which  to  him  is  of  a  spiritual 
nature,  a  life  of  justice,  love,  and  sanctity.  The 
law,  however,  does  not  lead  to  eternal  life,  not  only 
because  it  consists  merely  of  ritual  provisions,  but 
also  in  so  far  as  it  demands  virtues  like  justice, 
love,  and  sanctity.  Just  because  it  merely  demands, 
it  can  not  accomplish  its  aim  over  against  the  flesh; 
it  even  increases  the  lust  of  the  flesh  and  incites 
transgression.  But,  apart  from  the  flesh,  the  law 
can  not  give  life,  because  it  induces  man  to  secure 
his  justification  before  God  as  a  legal  claim  of  re- 
ward. Therefore  it  is  not  a  permanent,  but  only  a 
transitory,  order  of  God.  It  was  to  awaken  knowl- 
edge of  sin  and  thus  prepare  the  way  for  the  pei^ 
manent  divine  order,  namely  that  of  the  Gospel, 
an  order  of  grace  which  pardons  and  gives  gratui- 
tously and  demands  nothing  more  than  faith, 
which  gives  God  his  honor  by  himibly  renouncing 
the  assertion  of  one's  own  wiU  and  trusting  in 
God's  grace  and  omnipotence.  What  the  new 
order  signifies  may  best  be  seen  from  the  stand- 
point of  faith.  On  the  basb  of  the  assurance  of 
God's  intention  of  grace  in  Christ,  the  believer 
knows  himself  to  be  justified  and  adopted  by  God 
and  reconciled  with  him.  He  has  the  assurance 
that  he  will  escape  the  wrath  of  judgment,  inherit 
eternal  life,  and  finally  be  endowed  with  perfection. 
The  consciousness  of  his  freedom  from  the  law 
leads  him  to  the  consciousness  of  the  duty  to  con- 
centrate his  will  upon  the  struggle  against  the  lusts 
of  the  flesh  and  the  earnest  endeavor  to  fulfil  the 
will  of  God  and  the  moral  conditions  of  eternal 
life.  Paul  does  not  consider  Christians  as  freed 
from  the  need  of  moral  instruction  and  he  expects 
Christian  tact  only  as  a  result  of  the  Christian's 
self-examination  and  self-education.  But  herein 
he  does  not  fall  back  upon  the  standpoint  of  the 
law,  because  the  reasons  on  which  he  bases  his  in- 
dividual rules  of  life  exclude  the  heteronomy  of 
ritualistic  norms,  and  also  all  hedonistic  motives. 


Xaw  and  OoBp«l 
I«aw,  Hebrew 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


426 


Thus  the  permanent  part  in  the  law  is  its  content, 
in  so  far  as  it  corresponds  to  our  conception  of  sal- 
vation and  as  the  Gospel  realizes  it,  while  its  legal 
form  is  only  a  temporary  means.  Since  this  was 
only  the  final  result  of  Paul's  reflections,  it  was 
possible  for  him  to  concede  previously  to  the 
legal  form  that  it  must  be  satisfied  by  the  death 
of  Christ  before  the  order  of  grace  can  become 
eflicacious. 

Jesus  had  a  different  conception  of  law  and  Gos- 
pel. Not  only  does  he  use  the  terms  differently, 
in  so  far  as  ''  the  Gospel  "  was  for  him  the  message 
of  the  nearness  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  imderstood 
in  eschatological  sense,  and  in  so  far  as  he  sub- 
jected his  disciples  to  "  the  law,"  not  dissolving  it, 
but  advocating  its  fulfilment  to  its  fullest  extent, 
but  also  there  is  an  essential  difference,  in  so  far  as 
Jesus,  instead  of  starting  from  the  experience  of 
the  present  redemption  from  guilt  and  the  power 
of  sin,  appealed  to  the  will  by  means  of  fear  and 
hope  so  that  justification  of  life  might 
3.  The  be  brought  about,  and  in  so  far  as  he, 
Conception  instead  of  deriving  all  salvation  from 

of  Jesus,  his  own  person  and  will,  placed  both 
behind  what  men  are  to  do  and  what 
God  will  do.  But  in  the  innermost  essence,  there 
is  no  real  difference  between  Paul  and  Jesus.  The 
seeming  contrast  is  to  be  explained  from  the  fact 
that  the  sermon  of  Jesus  is  a  means  of  the  edu- 
cating and  hence  redeeming  activity  of  the  bearer 
of  revelation,  while  Paul  speaks  out  of  the  con- 
sciousness of  the  redeemed.  Jesus  filled  the  trar 
ditional  formula  **  through  fulfilment  of  the  law 
to  reward  "  with  a  new  content — ^the  same  which 
Paul  advocated.  This  is  manifest  from  the  most 
peculiar  thought  of  Jesus,  that  of  Adoption  (q.v.). 
Without  infringing  upon  the  ritualistic  commands 
of  the  law,  he  assorted,  as  that  which  pleases  God, 
only  that  attitude  of  the  heart  which  manifests 
itself  in  childlike  trust  in  God,  and  in  imitation  of 
God's  disposition  in  the  love  of  our  fellow  men. 
He  excluded  the  legal  conception  of  our  relation  to 
God  by  demanding  an  unassuming  childlike  spirit 
and  calling  the  reward  a  superabundant  rewaixl  of 
grace.  Thus  he  changed  the  demand;  but  adop- 
tion was  for  him  more  than  an  obligatory  demand. 
For  himself,  his  life  and  activity  were  the  reflex  of 
the  love  of  God  as  he  had  experienced  it  in  his 
heart,  however  much  in  individual  cases  obedience 
conformable  to  duty  was  not  strange  to  him.  But 
as  he  disclosed  his  knowledge  of  the  Father  to  his 
disciples  and  assured  them  of  God's  forgiveness 
and  care,  and  as  the  impression  of  his  unity  with 
God  gave  emphasis  to  his  work,  his  admonition  to 
trust  in  the  Father  and  become  similar  to  God 
grew  powerful  in  such  a  way  that  it  raised  it  into 
the  life  of  adoption  which  will  be  perfected  in  the 
coming  kingdom  of  God.  Therefore  those  who 
have  heeded  his  admonition  become,  first  of  all, 
certain  of  the  fact  that  they  have  been  saved. 

Under  the  presupposition  of  the  consciousness  of 
salvation,  the  writings  of  John  place  the  self-activ- 
ity to  be  expected  of  the  regenerated,  especially 
that  of  love,  under  the  view-pomt  of  a  new  com- 
mandment, whose  fulfihnent  is  the  condition  for 
the  continuance  and  perfection  of  the  new  life.     This 


does  not  mean  the  reestablishment  of  law;  for  the 
experience  of  the  love  of  God  is  the  motive  of  the 
fulfilment  of  the  commandment.    The 
3.  The      new  law  in  the  sense  of  John  is  not  a 
Writing*    sum  of  commandments  as  they  are 
of  John,    given  to  servants,  but  a  disclosure  of 
the  entire  and  uniform  will  of  God 
as  it  is  made  to  friends  of  Christ.    Its  fulfilment  is 
inmiediate    life    and    blessedness.    Moreover,    the 
consciousness  of  duty  toward  God's  commandment 
is  overshadowed  by  the  consciousness  of  depend- 
ence upon  the  preserving,  purifying,  and  perfect- 
ing activity  of  God. 

In  the  early  Church  Christianity  was  at  first 
understood  as  new  law  in  the  Judaistic  sense,  in  so 
far  as  free  persons  have  to  acquire  the  eternal  re- 
ward by  their  own  fulfilment  of  moral  demaads, 
and  grace  is  limited  to  knowledge  of  God  and  for- 
giveness of  sin  in  baptism.  This  was  not  altered 
when  Irenffius  disclosed  Christ  again  as 
4*  Early  the  Redeemer,  because  redemption  in 
and  his  sense  is  only  physical;  or  when  the 
Medieval  institution  of  penance  mediated  for- 
Church.  giveness  of  sins  also  after  baptism, 
because  this  relates  only  to  particu- 
lar sins  and  does  not  give  an  individual  certainty 
of  the  state  of  grace.  The  Roman  spirit  even  in- 
tensified the  legal  conception,  since  the  relation  to 
God  was  considered  after  the  manner  of  civil  law, 
and  there  was  not  only  demanded  that  the  Chris- 
tian should  earn  for  himself  the  reward  of  God,  but 
should  give  him  satisfaction  also  for  sins  by  volun- 
tary painful  works.  Augustine  renewed  the  doc- 
trine of  Paul  concerning  law  and  Gospel,  law  of 
works  and  law  of  faith;  both  aim  at  the  realization 
of  love  to  God  as  the  highest  good,  but  are  opposed 
to  each  other  in  so  far  as  this  love  is  only  demanded 
by  the  law,  while  it  is  actually  given  as  a  blessing 
in  the  Gospel.  "  By  the  law  of  works  Grod  says  to 
us,  '  do  what  I  oonamand  thee ';  but  by  the  law 
of  faith  we  say  to  God,  '  give  me  what  thou  com- 
mandest '  "  (De  spintu  et  littera,  xxii.,  NPNF,  1st 
ser.,  V.  92).  They  are  related  to  each  other  in  so 
far  as  the  law,  by  inciting  lust,  shows  that  the  mo- 
tive of  its  fulfilment  is  not  love  to  God,  but  "  the 
fear  of  punishment "  and  **  the  love  of  gain,"  and 
thus  compels  us  to  seek  faith,  which  as  hope  and 
prayer  takes  refuge  in  God's  mercy.  But  his 
mercy  infuses  love  of  him  or  of  righteousness  into 
the  soul  of  the  believer,  by  means  of  which  the 
will  after  its  cure  fulfils  the  law  without  the  law, 
and  desires  no  other  reward  but  progress  and  per- 
fection, being  conscious  that  the  fulfilment  is  due 
to  the  grace  of  God.  But  Augustine  does  not 
come  up  to  the  standard  of  Paul  since  he  knows 
grace  only  as  a  secret  power  and  has  not  attained 
an  absolute  certainty  of  salvation.  Moreover,  he 
combined  with  Paulinism  the  oonmion  view  of 
Catholicism  concerning  the  law,  by  repeatedly  esti- 
mating the  achievements  due  to  grace  as  merits 
and  satisfactions.  In  the  Middle  Ages  this  com- 
bination of  Augustine  remained  as  basis,  but  by 
enlarging  the  conception  of  merit  and  applying  it 
to  actions  which  are  possible  without  grace  and 
necessary  for  its  preparation,  and  by  deriving  all 
hope  of  salvation  by  means  of  the  uncertain  de- 


4d7 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Law  and  Gospel 
Law,  Hebrcrsr 


duction  from  natural  secret  effects  of  grace,  the 
law  practically  gained  the  upper  hand. 

Luther  put  law  and  Gospel  into  the  strongest 
opposition.    The  law  demands  and  frightens,  the 

Gospel  bestows  and  consoles;  but  they 
5.  Luther,  belong  together  and  exhaust  the  whole 

content  of  Scripture.  In  order  to  tm- 
derstand  this,  we  must  distinguish  in  the  law  con- 
tent and  form.  Its  content  is  the  unchangeable 
will  of  God ;  without  its  fulfilment  there  is  no  salva- 
tion; but  it  is  not  to  be  fulfiUed  merely  as  a  con- 
dition of  salvation,  but  in  the  spirit  of  "  a  loving 
delight  in  the  law,"  contrasted  with  the  common 
pleasure-seeking  piety.  Thus  Luther  advanced  a 
step  beyond  Augustine  and  the  mystics,  since  with 
them  hope  preponderates,  while  for  him  eternal  life 
begins  here  on  earth  in  reconciliation  with  the  law; 
and  since  their  love  of  God  is  a  retired,  holy  in- 
difference, while  his  love  of  God  manifests  itself  in 
a  trust  in  God  which  is  elevated  above  sins  and 
death  and  governs  the  world  and  manifests  itself  in 
the  love  of  our  feUow  men.  According  to  its  form, 
the  law  brings  man  before  the  ''  throne  of  judg- 
ment.'' It  is  a  demand  and  threat  of  pimishment 
against  a  contradicting  will.  In  this  respect  it  is  only 
temporary;  for  the  thought  that  the  favor  of  God 
might  be  earned  is  not  only  impossible  in  consid- 
eration of  original  sin,  but ''  a  dream  which  is  false 
in  itself,"  a  robbery  of  the  honor  of  God,  idolatry; 
God  is  not  a  ''  huckster,"  it  is  his  nature  to  give 
everything  gratuitously.  It  is  true,  the  content  of 
the  law  as  hmnble  trust  in  God  and  inclination 
toward  good  conduct  contradicts  the  form  of  the 
law  as  a  rule  of  retribution,  but  in  this  very  form 
it  is  a  means  of  God  to  accomplish  his  purposes. 
On  the  one  side,  it  guards  against  external  trans- 
gressions and  upholds  public  peace;  on  the  other 
side,  by  disclosing  and  magnifying  our  spiritual 
transgressions  it  destroys  our  self-sufficiency  and 
awakens  a  feeling  of  guilt  and  longing  after  forgiv- 
ing grace.  After  this  has  been  accomplished,  the 
Gospel  steps  in — ^by  assuring  us  of  forgiving  grace, 
it  awakens  love  to  God  which  gladly  fulfils  the  law 
and  thus  experiences  salvation  already  in  this  life. 
The  Gospel  has  three  characteristic  traits.  It  is 
promise  or  attestation  of  the  divine  will  of  grace 
to  the  consciousness,  it  is  promise  of  the  forgive- 
ness of  sins,  it  is  promise  of  the  foi^veness  vouch- 
safed in  Christ  for  the  awakened  conscience.  It  is 
the  active  cause  of  faith  which  supports  conscience 
without  blimting  it.  With  this  faith  the  whole  re- 
demption is  realized  in  principle;  for  it  is  the 
moving  power  for  the  fulfilment  of  the  law.  By 
extending  over  the  whole  life,  it  is  the  fulfilment  of 
the  first  commandment,  and  by  becoming  a  prayer 
of  thankfulness  and  supplication,  that  of  the  sec- 
ond; and  the  desire  to  pass  on  our  blessings  to 
others  produces  in  us  an  inclination  to  love  our 
fellow  men,  and  by  paralyzing  the  attraction  of 
worldly  goods  and  evils  by  means  of  trust  in  God 
it  gives  the  power  to  realize  this  inclination.  But 
all  these  abilities  Luther  traces  back  also  to  a  sec- 
ond gift  beside  forgiveness,  namely,  the  Holy  Spirit. 
As  the  unchangeable  will  of  God,  the  law  is  also 
the  measure  for  the  manner  of  the  realization  of 
the  order  of  grace.    In  this  respect,  the  inviolabil- 


ity of  the  divine  will  as  expressed  in  the  law  must 
be  fully  satisfied.  This  is  the  case  in  so  far  as  the 
foi^veness  of  sins  in  the  penitent  is  the  very  means 
of  realizing  its  content.  But  Luther  postulated 
also  the  satisfaction  of  the  law  by  the  vicarious 
satisfaction  of  Christ,  in  contradiction  to  his  state- 
ment that  the  law  has  only  a  pedagogical  import. 
The  fulfilment  of  the  law  is  to  take  place  in  a  natu- 
ral manner,  without  reflection  on  the  law,  just  as 
the  good  tree  brings  forth  its  fruits.  The  good  must 
spring  from  a  good  disposition;  but  by  this  compar- 
ison Luther  places  himself  in  contradiction,  not 
only  to  Christ  and  John,  but  also  to  Paul,  since  it 
excludes  reflection  on  every  objective  norm  and 
the  motivation  of  good-will  by  the  thought  of  the 
aim  of  eternal  life.  But  since  for  Luther  the  new 
life  of  the  Christian  is  still  in  a  state  of  growth  and 
maintains  itself  only  by  continual  struggle  with 
the  remnants  of  sin,  he  teacheS  that  the  Christian 
still  needs  education  through  the  objective  law. 
As  he  can  think,  however,  of  an  objective  order  of 
the  law  only  in  the  legal  norm  of  right  which 
threatens  punishment,  instruction  and  admoni- 
tion by  the  law  appear  to  him  as  something  that  is 
in  contradiction  to  the  spiritual  condition  of  the 
new  man;  and  thus  Luther  makes  Christian  life 
dualistic,  instead  of  showing  how  it  stands  under 
a  moral  law  without  losing  the  character  of  its 
freedom.  (J.  GorrscHiCKt.) 

Biblioqrapht:  The  litoratore  on  H  1-3  is  given  under 
BiBUCAJL  Thkoloot;  that  on  S  4  under  Doctrineb,  Hm- 
TORY  OF.  On  i  6  consult:  J.  KOstlin,  Lutkert  Theolooie, 
Stuttgart,  1863;  T.  Harnack.  lMther9  Tkeologie,  I  47&- 
480.  Erlangen,  1862;  S.  Lommatssch,  LtUhen  Lehre, 
Berlin,  1879;  E.  Trdltsch,  Vemvnft  und  Offenbaruno  bei 
J.  Gerhard  und  Melanchihon,  pp.  127-143,  Gdttingen,  1891. 
On  the  general  problem:  S.  H.  Tyng,  Ledurea  on  the  Law 
and  the  Ooepel,  New  York,  1848;  J.  M.  Armour,  Atone- 
ment and  Law,   London,    1885.    Consult    also    Atonb- 

HXMT. 


LAW,    HEBREW,    CIVIL 

I.  Origins  and  Development. 
Semitic  Background  ($1). 
E£Fect8  of  Settlement  in 

Canaan  (§  2). 
The  Hebrew  Codes  (§  8). 
II.  Administration      of     the 
Law. 
The  Judges  (§  1). 
The  Procedure  (§  2). 
III.  Criminal  Law. 


AND    CRnailAL. 

Development  from  Lex 

Talionis  (§  1). 
Capital  Offenses  (§  2). 
IV.  Rights  of  Persons. 
V.  Rights  of  Property. 
Real  Estate  (S  1). 
Debt  (5  2). 
Injury  to  Property 
(5  3). 
VI.  Inheritance. 


L  Origins  and  Deyelopment:  According  to  the 
ancients,  law  and  justice  came  from  God.  The 
Babylonian  King  Hammurabi  received  his  man- 
dates from  the  hand  of  the  sim-god  Shamash,  while 
Yahweh  gave  the  tables  of  the  law  to  Moses  on 
Sinai.  Throughout  their  history  Yahweh  was  the 
source  of  law  for  the  Israelites,  his  precepts  (taro^) 
being  communicated  to  them  by  lus 

I.  Sem-  servants,  the  priests.  Matters  of  little 
itic  Back-  importance  were  not  referred  to  him, 

ground,  but  where  the  wisdom  of  man  was  in- 
sufficient, or  where  no  fixed  law  had 
yet  been  established,  the  decision  of  the  divinity 
was  sought  through  the  priests.  This  ruling  was 
then  regarded  as  a  norm  in  similar  cases  and  thus 
became  law,  deriving  its  authority  from  the  fact 
that  it  was  the  will  of  God.  This  sanction  gained 
additional  force  in  Israel,  sipce  there  Yahweh  was 


iMWf  R«llMfW 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


428 


regarded  as  a  God  who  watched  over  righteouB> 
11668  and  juBtioe  and  hated  iniquity.  When  the 
Israelites  first  emerged  into  the  light  of  history, 
they  possessed  neither  a  firm  political  organization 
nor  law.  Instead  of  written  law  tribal  custom  pre- 
vailed, and  in  place  of  an  executive  magistracy  stood 
the  tribal  deity,  whose  will  was  represented  by  the 
customs  of  the  tribe.  It  might,  then,  be  supposed 
that  each  tribe  would  create  its  own  custom,  with- 
out regard  to  its  neighbors,  but  it  must  not  be 
forgotten  that  since  the  dawn  of  history  Arabia 
and  the  Syro-Arabian  desert  had  been  under  the 
influence  of  Babylonian  civilization,  and  that  in 
Babylonia  as  early  as  2200  B.C.  law  had  reached 
a  height  in  the  Code  of  Hammurabi  (q.v.)  which 
was  not  equaled  even  in  the  Hebrew  Book  of 
the  Covenant  in  the  late  regal  period.  Contact 
with  ancient  Arabian  culture,  which  attained  a 
noteworthy  eminence  among  the  Minaeans  in  the 
second  half  of  the  second  iniUennium  B.C.,  is  con- 
firmed by  the  Israelitic  narrative  itself  when  it 
states  that  Moses  modeled  his  code  according  to 
the  counsel  of  the  Midianite  Jethro. 

The  settlement  in  the  West  Jordan  cotmtry  was 
a  momentous  epoch  in  the  development  of  law. 
In  its  content  law  must  have  been  widely  extended, 
since  new  conditions  brought  new  legal  problems; 
but  the  independent  development  of  Israelitic  law 
had  not  jret  b^gun.  Since  the  discovery  of  the 
Code  of  Hammurabi,  it  may  be  regarded  as  certain 
that  the  Canaanites  among  whom  the 
3«  Bffecti  Hebrews  had  come  and  whose  culture 
of  Setdft-  they  adopted  had  a  highly  system- 
ment  in  attied  code.  This  Canaanite  system 
Csnam.  was  deeply  influenced  by  Babylonia, 
and  this  explains  why  IsraeUtic  law, 
even  after  being  taken  from  the  Camuinites  and 
worked  over  in  the  Book  of  the  Covenant,  shows 
so  close  an  aflinity  with  the  Code  of  Ham- 
murabi. This  agreement  is  seldom  verbal,  but  the 
spirit  and  the  basal  concepts,  except  in  religion, 
are  essentially  the  same,  although  the  Babylonian 
code  deals  with  a  far  more  highly  developed  and 
more  coherent  political  oiiganization.  The  entire 
system  of  legal  procedure  was  transformed  by  the 
new  home  of  the  Israelites.  Nomadic  Bedouins 
have  no  judges  clothed  with  executive  authority, 
but  fixed  abodes  change  clans  and  families  to  local 
communities  and  territorial  unions.  The  heads  of 
the  communities,  or  elders,  become  the  magistracy, 
and  behind  their  enactment  stands  the  power  of 
the  conununity.  Thus  a  form  of  public  law  was 
evolved,  and  the  conununity  assumed  control  of 
the  protection  of  individual  rights. 

The  rise  of  the  Israelitic  kingdom  resulted  in  a 
definite  system  of  law  and  in  legal  uniformity,  in 
so  far  as  this  had  not  already  been  achieved.    The 
date  of  the  codification  of  the  unwritten  law  is  un- 
known.   It  may  have  taken  place  at  an  early  date 
at  the  sanctuaries,  but  the  most  prim- 
3.  The     itive  document  known  is  the  so-called 
Hebrew     Book  of  the  Covenant  (Ex.  xx.  24- 
Codes,      xxiii.  19).    The  Book  of  the  Covenant 
does  not  pronounce  great  principles  of 
law  or  abstract  legal  doctrines  to  be  applied  in  indi- 
vidual oases  at  the  discretion  of  the  judge,  but  it  is 


a  collection  of  special  instances  and  is  restricted  to 
the  problems  of  daily  life.  It  deals  with  the  status 
of  slaves,  with  injuries  to  life  or  limb,  and  with  in- 
juries to  property,  whether  daughter  or  slave, 
cattle  or  fruit.  There  is  as  yet  no  commercial  law, 
while  the  Code  of  Hanunurabi  is  highly  developed 
in  this  respect.  The  Book  of  the  Covenant  was 
evidently  a  compilation  of  existing  customary  law, 
and  it  is  nowhere  stated  that  it  ever  received  sanc- 
tion as  official,  nor  is  it  known  who  compiled  tbr 
collection  or  who  caused  it  to  be  made.  It  wa.« 
possibly  not  official,  but  may  have  been  drawn  up 
by  private  persons,  or,  in  other  words,  by  the 
priests.  Far  different  is  Deuteronomy,  which  was 
officially  proclaimed  as  the  law  of  the  State  in  the 
eighteenth  year  of  Josiah  (621  B.C.).  Though  simi- 
lar to  the  Book  of  the  Covenant  in  form  and  con- 
tent, it  marks  an  important  step  in  advance  in 
that  it  seeks  to  bring  all  civil  and  religious  law 
within  the  scope  of  the  point  of  view  of  the  theoc- 
racy. The  characteristic  of  this  code  is  its  human!- 
tarianism  in  providing  for  the  poor,  for  servants, 
for  widows,  and  for  orphans.  The  Priestly  Code 
was  introduced  as  the  law  of  the  State  after  the 
exile  (Neh.  viii.-x.).  Taken  as  a  whole,  it  con- 
tains only  religious  law,  although  it  also  considers 
individual  questions  of  civil  life  in  so  far  as  they 
concern  the  hierocracy  of  the  priestly  code.  In  it 
is  incorporated  the  independent  '*  Law  of  Holi- 
ness "  (Lev.  xvii.-xxvi.),  which  proceeds  from  the 
point  of  view  of  the  sanctity  of  the  people.  The 
written  law,  as  extant,  concerns  only  a  small  por- 
tion of  civil  life;  unfortunately  no  other  codification 
of  customary  law  has  been  preserved.  The  Torah 
became  the  infallible  basis  for  all  further  develop- 
ment of  the  law,  its  deficiencies  being  supplied  by 
casuistic  interpretation  or  by  a  codification  of  the 
law  of  custom.  The  law  thus  deduced  was  termed 
Halakhahf  and  with  its  recognition  the  scholars  of  the 
law  became  the  actual  legislators.  The  results  of 
their  activity  are  sununed  up  in  the  Mishnah  (see 
Talmud),  which  is  based  on  an  earlier  work  dating 
from  the  time  of  Rabbi  Akiba  ben  Joseph,  who 
flourished  between  110  and  135  a.o.,  imder  whose 
direction  the  Halakhah,  which  had  been  transmitted 
orally,  seems  to  have  been  codified. 

n.  Administnition  of  the  Law:    Legal  jiuisdic- 
tion   was  originally  lodged   in  the  family   (Gen. 
xxviii.  24;   Deut.  xii.  18  sqq.),  or  in  the  "  elders," 
or  heads  of  the  dans  and  tribes  (Ex.  xviii.  13  sqq.; 
Num.  xi.  16  sqq.;  Deut.  i.  13  sqq.).  Par- 
I.  The      allel  with  this  was  the  decision  of  the 
Judges,      priest  as  the  servant  of  God,  whilp 
Moses,  according  to  the  narrative,  laid 
the  most  difficult  problems  before  God  (Ex.  xviii.  15. 
19).  The  judicial  power  of  the  elders  was  only  moral; 
they  possessed  no  executive  authority  and  with  the 
settlement  in  Palestine  were  superseded  by  the 
heads  of  the  local  communities,  who  acquired  execu- 
tive power,  since  a  permanent  community  natu- 
rally had  an  interest  in  the  maintenance  of  the  law. 
This  court  of  elders  retained  its  judicial  authority 
in  the  regal  period  (II  Sam.  xiv.  4  sqq.;    I  Kings 
xxi.  8  sqq.),  while  Deuteronomy  recognises  them 
as  an  organized  body  with  full  judicial  powers 
(Deut.  xix.  12,  xxi.  2  sqq.,  xxiL  15,  etc.),  and  as 


480 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Law,  Hebrew 


the  representatives  of  the  oommunity  (Deut.  xvii. 
7).  It  must  accordingly  be  assumed  that  though 
the  Book  of  the  Covenant  does  not  state  it,  its 
"  judges  "  were  the  elders.  The  priests  retained 
their  judicial  power  at  all  times.  In  the  Book  of 
the  Covenant  (Ex.  xzii.  9,  R.V.)  the  decision  of 
God  is  sought  at  the  sanctuary  in  cases  of  unusual 
<lifficulty,  while  in  Deuteronomy  the  Levites  con- 
stitute an  ecclesiastical  court  which  decides  also 
secular  matters.  The  tendency  of  Deuteronomy  is 
to  enlarge  their  jurisdiction,  and  to  leave  the  elders 
the  right  of  punishment  only  in  those  derelictions 
which  directly  concern  the  family  (Deut.  xxi.  1  sqq., 
18  sqq.,  xxii.  13  sqq.,  xxv.  7  sqq.).  At  that  period 
the  king  was  the  chief  judge  (II  Sam.  xiv.  4  sqq.), 
although  his  ruling  might  be  sought  at  the  very 
first,  especially  in  difficult  cases  (II  Sam.  xv.  2 
sqq.;  I  Kings  iii.  16  sqq.;  II  Kings  xv.  5).  This 
right  of  the  king  was  then  transferred  to  his  offi- 
cials, who  judged  in  the  king's  name.  Unfortu- 
nately it  is  not  known  whether  or  how  the  author- 
ity of  the  royal  officials  was  conditioned  by  the 
elders  and  priests.  The  Chronicler  ascribes  to 
Jehoshaphat  the  creation  of  a  supreme  court  in 
Jerusalem  and  the  appointment  of  judges  in  the 
individual  cities  (II  Chron.  xix.  4-11),  but  it  is  im- 
possible to  assume  that  the  high  priest  and  the 
"  prince  of  Judah  "  were  the  spiritual  and  secular 
presidents  of  this  court,  although  it  would  agree 
with  the  statement  of  the  Chronicler  that  David 
had  given  6,000  Levites  the  office  of  judge  (I  Chron. 
xxiii.  4,  xxvi.  29).  The  local  judges  in  the  time  of 
Ezra  were  chosen  from  among  the  elders  of  the 
city  (Ezra  vii.  25,  x.  14).  In  the  Greek  and  Ro- 
man period  such  judges  were  found  everywhere 
(Judith  vi.  16;  Josephus,  Wara,  II.,  xiv.  1;  cf. 
Matt.  V.  22,  X.  17;  Mark  xiii.  9).  In  small  towns 
the  council  of  elders  exercised  judicial  functions 
(Luke  vii.  3),  while  larger  places  seem  to  have  con- 
tained special  courts.  In  later  times  local  courts 
usually  had  seven  members,  and  twenty  in  larger 
cities. 

Judicial  procedure  was  oral,  although  the  later 
period  seems  to  have  known  written  complaints 
(Job  xxxi.  35  sqq.).  The  judges  sat  at  the  city- 
gate  (Deut.  xxi.  19,  xxii.  15;  Amos  v. 
2.  The  12,  15),  while  Solomon  built  a  "  porch 
Procedure,  of  judgment "  at  Jerusalem  (I  Kings 
vii.  7).  The  plaintiff  lodged  his  own  com- 
plaint; if  he  failed  to  do  so,  no  one  else  brought  the 
matter  to  the  attention  of  the  court,  for  there  was  no 
prosecuting  attorney.  Proof  was  by  witnesses,  the 
^aw  requiring  the  concordant  testimony  of  two 
witnesses,  especially  in  cases  involving  capital  pun- 
ishment (Deut.  xvii.  6,  xix.  15;  Num.  xxxv.  30;  for 
an  exception  cf.  Deut.  xxi.  18  sqq.).  According  to 
the  Talmud  (cf.  Josephus,  ArU,  IV.,  viii.  15)  adult 
freemen  alone  were  eligible  as  witnesses,  slaves  and 
women  being  excluded;  according  to  Lev.  v.  1, 
compulsory  testimony  was  common.  False  wit- 
ness was  punished  by  the  lex  taltania  (Deut.  xix. 
18  sqq.).  In  cases  where  witnesses  could  not  be 
found,  an  oath  was  required  (Ex.  xxii.  6-11),  and 
in  the  older  period  the  Ordeal  (q.v.)  was  frequently 
invoked  as  a  means  of  proof  (Ex.  xxii.  8;  I  Sam. 
xiv.  41;  Joshua  vii.  14),  although  later  this  was  re- 


stricted to  the  single  case  of  the  chaige  of  adultery 
(Num.  v.).  Torture  was  first  emplo^^  as  a  means 
of  obtaining  testimony  during  the  Herodian  rule 
(Josephus,  WarSf  I.,  xxx.  2-5). 

nL  Criminal  Law:  In  the  Ckxie  of  Hammurabi 
criminal  law  is  under  the  absolute  control  of  the 
State,  while  in  the  Old  Testament  it  is  still  in  proc- 
ess of  development  from  private  to  public  law. 
Private  law  belongs  primarily  to  the 
I.  Develop-  lex  Udionis  ("  Eye  for  eye,  tooth  for 
ment  from  tooth,  .  .  .  woimd  for  wound,"  Ex. 
the  Lex  xxi.  24-25).  This  principle  dom- 
Talionis.  inated  even  public  law,  as  is  shown  by 
the  Code  of  Hammurabi,  although  it 
was  originally  the  norm  for  private  revenge.  The 
man  who  had  been  injured  had  the  right  to  do  to 
his  injurer  the  same  harm  as  had  been  done  him; 
among  savage  peoples  revenge  is  regarded  as  a  right- 
eous and  hxAy  sentiment.  Tim  appears  most  clearly 
in  the  case  of  murder,  where  revenge  was  not  merely 
justified  but  sanctified,  and  was  a  kinsman's  duty. 
Absolute  lex  talionie,  as  is  dear  from  Blood  Revenge 
(q.v.),  makes  all  controversies  eternal,  and  it  there- 
fore marks  a  long  step  in  advance  when  the  Israel- 
ites at  an  early  period  substituted  in  certain  cases 
the  wergild  for  blood-revenge.  Such  compensation 
could  not  escape  regulation  by  general  custom,  and 
ancient  Israelitic  usage  required  such  settlement 
in  personal  injuries  (Ex.  xxi.  18),  but  paralleled  it 
with  blood-revenge,  except  in  the  case  of  man- 
slaughter (Ex.  xxi.  30).  A  third  stage  is  public 
criminal  law,  in  which  society  deprives  the  indi- 
vidual of  the  right  of  punishment,  which  is  then 
executed  by  the  authorities.  Revenge  thus  be- 
comes punishment,  which  is  regulated  by  the  in- 
terests of  the  whole  community.  Punishment  has, 
moreover,  a  religious  end.  Sin,  especially  murder, 
brought  on  the  land  a  defilement  which  was  pui^ed 
by  punishment  (cf.  II  Sam.  xxi.,  xxiv.;  Num. 
xxxv.  33;  Deut.  xix.  19).  This  assimiption  of 
guilt  by  the  State  involved  a  family  in  the  punish- 
ment of  its  members,  and  in  aggravated  cases  chil- 
dren suffered  with  their  fathers  (Joshua  vii.  24; 
n  Kings  ix.  26;  cf.  also  the  general  principle  that 
Yahweh  visits  the  iniquity  of  the  fathers  upon  the 
children).  The  concept  of  blood-revenge  is  still 
retained,  and  if  the  avengers  are  imable  to  seize 
the  murderer,  his  family  is  slain  instead  (cf .  II  Sam. 
xxi.  6  sqq.),  a  principle  found  both  in  the  Code  of 
Hammurabi  and  in  modem  custom  among  the 
Bedouins,  which  was  not  abrogated  among  the 
Israelites  before  Deuteronomy  (Deut.  xxiv.  16). 
Punishment  by  retaliation  occurs  only  in  case  of 
bodily  injury,  and  substitutional  punishment,  fre- 
quent in  the  Code  of  Hammurabi,  is  mentioned  but 
once  (Deut.  xxv.  12).  The  death-penalty  was  by 
stoning  (Lev.  xxiv.  14;  Deut.  xvii.  5),  since  such 
cases  as  those  described  in  U  Sam.  i.  15  and  II 
Kings  X.  7,  25  were  not  the  execution  of  a  pun- 
ishment ordered  by  the  court.  In  certain  in- 
stances the  penalty  was  increased  by  burning  or 
hanging  the  corpse,  thus  depriving  the  criminal  of 
the  benefit  of  burial  (Lev.  xx.  14,  xxi.  9),  although 
Deuteronomy  (xxi.  22)  mitigated  this  portion  of 
the  punishment.  Crucifixion  and  strangulation 
(the  latter,  according  to  the  Talmud,  the  usual 


Law, 
Law, 


tebr«w 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


430 


fonn  of  punishment)  were  introduoed  by  the  Ro- 
mans. Burning  to  death  seems  to  have  been  prac- 
tised in  the  earliest  period  (Gen.  xxxviii.  24)  but 
in  later  times  it  was  restricted  to  gross  immorality 
(Lev.  zx.  14,  zxi.  9),  while  the  Code  of  Hammurabi 
enactfi  it  as  the  penalty  for  incest.  Punishment  by 
beating  is  first  mentioned  in  Deut.  zxv.  1-3,  but 
the  crimes  for  which  it  was  inflicted  are  taken  for 
granted,  although  the  maximum  number  of  blows 
is  fixed  at  forty  (later  forty  less  c»ie;  cf.  II  Cor. 
xi.  24;  Joeephus,  AtU.,  IV,,  viii.  21,  23).  Im- 
prisonment is  first  mentioned  in  the  post-exilic 
period  (Ezra  vii.  26),  but  dungeons,  stocks,  and 
iron  collars  were  frequently  employed  by  the  kings 
(Jer.  XX.  2,  xxix.  26  sqq.;  II  Chron.  xviii.  25).  In 
all  other  cases,  as  in  the  Code  of  Hammurabi,  fines 
alone  were  exacted,  and  were  r^;arded  as  a  recom- 
pense for  plaintiffs  rather  than  as  punishments. 
The  sense  of  liability  is  well  developed,  as  it  is  in 
the  Code  of  Hammurabi.  A  careful  distinction  is 
drawn  in  the  Book  of  the  Covenant  between  mur- 
der and  manslaughter  (Ex.  xxi.  12  sqq.),  and  the 
right  of  self-defense  is  recognized  (Ex.  xxii.  2), 
while  accidental  injuries  are  distinguished  from 
intentional. 

In  their  details  the  punitive  regulations  which 
have  been  preserved  are  very  incomplete.  Accord- 
ing to  the  ancient  view,  death  alone  could  atone 
for  murder  (Gen.  ix.  5-6),  and  the  later  law  was 
thus  obliged  to  recognize  the  right  of  blood-revenge 
(Deut.  xix.  1-13;  Num.  xxxv.  16-21), 
2.  Capital  although  the  tendency  to  transform 
Offenset.  this  into  punishment  inflicted  by  the 
authorities  was  early  manifested  (II 
Sam.  xiv.  4  sqq.).  The  factor  here  at  work  was  the 
distinction  between  murder  and  manslaughter.  In 
Deuteronomy  (xix.  1-13)  previous  hatred  is  consid- 
ered a  proof  of  the  intentional  character  of  the  deed, 
and  in  the  Priestly  Code  the  use  of  a  deadly  weapon 
bears  with  it  the  same  implication  (Num.  xxxv.  16 
sqq.).  Miuder  was  punished  with  death  (Num. 
xxxv.  31),  yet  the  murderer  had  the  right  of  asy- 
lum at  a  sanctuary  (Ex.  xxi.  14),  or,  in  later  times, 
at  special  cities  of  refuge  (Deut.  xix.  2-3;  Num. 
xxxv.  11  sqq.).  There  it  was  to  be  decided  whether 
the  fugitive  was  guilty  of  murder  or  manslaughter. 
In  the  former  case  he  was  to  be  driven  from  his 
asylimi  (Ex.  xxi.  14;  Deut.  xix.  11  sqq.;  Num. 
xxxv.  11  sqq.);  in  the  latter  eventuality  the  guilty 
man  was  free  within  the  city,  although  he  could 
not  obtain  full  amnesty  until  the  death  of  the  high 
priest  (Num.  xxxv.  25;  post-exilic).  In  case  of 
malice,  the  lex  talianU  was  emploj^,  but  in  in- 
juries inflicted  in  the  heat  of  quarrel  the  defendant 
had  only  to  pay  the  expenses  for  the  healing  of  the 
plaintiff,  and  recompense  him  for  the  time  of  his 
illness  (for  another  case  of  fine,  cf.  Ex.  xxi.  22). 
Among  offenses  against  morality,  incest,  pederasty, 
and  bestiality  were  pimished  with  death  (Lev.  xx. 
10  sqq.;  Ex.  xxii.  18),  and  the  same  penalty  was 
inflicted  on  both  parties  guilty  of  adultery,  except 
that,  when  force  had  been  used,  the  woman  was  ac- 
quitted (Deut.  xxii.  25-26),  the  law  agreeing  herein 
with  the  Code  of  Hanunurabi.  The  seduction  of 
an  unbetrothed  girl  was  regarded  as  an  injury  to 
property  (Ex.  xxii.  15;  Deut.  xxii.  28-29),  although 


the  daughter  of  a  priest  was  punished  with  death 
(Lev.  xxi.  9).  A  significant  trait  of  Hebrew  law  L- 
the  fact  that  it,  in  antithesis  to  the  Code  of  Ham- 
murabi, comprised  crimes  against  religion  under 
civil  law,  punishing  not  only  idolatry  and  witchcraft 
(Ex.  xxii.  18,  20)  with  death,  but  even,  in  Deute- 
ronomy (xiii.  6-18),  any  temptation  to  these  crimes, 
while  the  Priestly  Code  was  still  more  severe  (Lev. 
xxiv.  16). 

IV.  Rights  of  Ptrsons:  Full  rights  were  en- 
joyed only  by  adult  freemen  who  were  capable 
of  bearing  arms.  Lists  of  the  citizens  seem  to 
have  been  prepared  at  an  early  period  (Ex.  zxxii. 
32),  and  are  frequently  mentioned  in  later  times 
(e.g.,  Isa.  X.  19).  In  Num.  i.  3  and  Lev.  xxvii.  3 
the  age  of  twenty  is  taken  to  be  that  at  which 
arms  may  first  be  borne,  and  it  may  be  as8un:ied 
that  this  rule  held  good  at  an  earlier  period.  The 
legal  freedom  of  women,  on  the  other  hand,  was 
limited. 

V.  Rights  of  Property:  The  regulations  coming 
under  this  category  are  concerned  with  purchase, 
debt,  and  indemnity.  The  purchase  and  sale  of 
movable  property,  as  well  as  many  other  cammer- 
cial  matters  regulated  in  the  Code  of  Hammurabi, 

were  not  controlled  by  Hebrew  Law. 
z.  Real  Preexilic  Israel  was  not  a  commercial 
Estate,      people.    In    the   sale  of  real  estate, 

custom  laid  restrictions  on  the  owner. 
The  ground  in  which  father  and  grandfather  were 
buried  (I  Kings  xxi.  3)  was  sacred  to  the  son  and 
grandson,  and  the  law  sought  to  keep  the  property  in 
the  family,  giving  those  kinsmen  who  had  the  right 
of  inheritance  the  privilege  of  preemption  and  re- 
demption (Jer.  xxxii.  8  sqq.).  The  Priestly  Code 
enacted  the  right  of  redemption  of  real  estate  to 
be  exercised  within  a  year  (Lev.  xxv.  25  sqq.). 
The  antiquity  of  this  custom  is  unknown,  but  it  is 
a  mere  theory  that  every  fifty  years  purchased 
property  was  restored  to  its  original  owners  with- 
out compensation  (Lev.  xxv.  13  sqq.).  Certain 
formalities  were  customary  in  purchase.  Wit- 
nesses were  summoned  (Gen.  xxiii.  7-20),  and  in 
the  time  of  Jeremiah  it  was  usual  to  draw  up  a 
deed  (Jer.  xxxii.  6  sqq.,  44).  An  ancient  symbolic 
act  in  the  transfer  of  real  estate  was  the  giving  of 
a  shoe  to  the  purchaser  by  the  seller  in  token  of  his 
renunciation  of  the  property,  a  ceremony  no  longer 
clear  in  origin  (Ruth  iv.  7;  cf.  Ps.  Ix.  8;  Deut. 
xxv.  9,  xi.  24?). 

Debt  receives  less  detailed  treatment  than  in  the 
Code  of  Hammurabi.  Debts  exist,  even  accord- 
ing to  the  view  of  Deuteronomy,  oxily  because  the 
poor  exist;  the  Old  Testament  knows  nothing  of 
a  system  of  credit  in  connection  with  trade.     The 

tendency  of  the  laws,  therefore,  was  to 
2.  Dd)t    protect  the  debtor  against  oppression. 

Usury  was  accordingly  forbidden,  but 
unfortunately  there  is  no  statement  respectiog  a 
just  rate  of  interest  (Ex.  xxii.  25).  In  ancient 
Babylonia  interest  ran  as  high  as  forty  per  cent, 
and  averaged  twenty  per  cent.  In  the  Israelitic 
code  the  creditor  received  a  pledge,  but  could  re- 
tain an  upper  garment,  the  covering  of  the  poor, 
only  until  sundown  (Ex.  xxii.  26).  Deuteronomy 
went  still  further,  and  prohibited  the  taking  id 


431 


REUGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Law,  Hebr«w- 
Lawl  WlUl«m 


pledge  of  any  article  neoeasary  for  livelihood  (Deut. 
xziv.  6, 13, 17,  zzx.,  xziv.  10-11,  and  Code  of  Ham- 
murabi, 241).  In  a  like  spirit  interest  was  abso- 
lutely forbidden  (Deut.  xxiii.  19-20;  cf.  Ezek. 
xviii.  16-17),  at  least  so  far  as  compatriots  were 
concerned.  In  the  case  of  insolvent  debtors,  as  in 
Babylonian  law  (cf.  Code  of  Hammurabi,  54),  the 
levy  seems  to  have  included  the  person,  but  though 
the  creditor  could  not  deprive  the  debtor  of  his 
property,  he  was  permitted,  as  in  the  Code  of  Ham- 
murabi (116,  117),  to  sell  the  debtor  into  slavery 
together  with  his  family  and  property  (II  Kings 
iv.  1;  Neh.  v.  5,  8;  Isa.  1.  1;  Jer.  zxxiv.  8  sqq.), 
although  this  servitude  ended  after  the  lapse  of 
six  years  (Ex.  xxi.  2;  cf.  Code  of  Hammurabi,  117, 
which  enacts  that  a  wife  and  her  children  shall 
work  only  three  years;  on  the  bondage  of  the 
daughter,  cf.  especially  Ex.  xxi.  7  sqq.).  In  Deute- 
ronomy this  law  becomes  a  oomnmnd  to  remit 
all  debt  in  the  seventh  year  (Deut.  xv.  1  sqq.), 
although  with  little  success  (Deut.  xv.  9  sqq.; 
Ezek.  xvii.  7  sqq.;  Jer.  xxxiv.  8  sqq.).  To  Rabbi 
Hillel  was  ascribed  the  device  of  the  prosbul,  a  dec- 
laration before  the  court  that  the  creditor  reserved 
the  right  to  demand  payment  of  the  debt  at  any 
time  without  regard  to  the  year  of  release.  In  the 
Priest  Code  the  manumission  was  required  to  take 
place  in  the  year  of  jubilee,  but  kindly  treatment 
of  the  enslaved  debtor  was  enjoined  (Lev.  xxv.  35 
sqq.;  cf.  Code  of  Hanunurabi,  115-116). 

Indenmity  for  injiuy  to  property  could  be  ex- 
acted only  where  guilt  was  proved,  as  in  theft  and 
embezzlement,  wherein  the  Hebrew  law  was  more 
lenient  than  the  Code  of  Hanmiurabi,  which  here 
frequently  imposed  the  death  penalty.  The  resti- 
tution for  theft  was  to  be  double  the 

3.  Injury  amount  of  money  (comp.  Code  of  Ham- 
to  murabi,  120,  124,  126),  four  times  the 

Property,  number  of  sheep,  and  five  times  the 
ntunber  of  oxen  (Ex.  xxii.  1-3).  Guilt 
was  also  evidenced  by  gross  carelessness  (Ex.  xxL 
29-36,  xxii.  5,  12).  If  a  man's  guilt  was  proved 
and  he  was  unable  to  make  restitution,  he  was 
sold  into  slavery  as  a  debtor,  but  where  there  was 
no  evidence  of  guilt,  there  was  no  compensation 
(Ex.  xxii.  7-8,  10-11,  13).  Deuteronomy  contains 
no  details  on  these  subjects,  but  the  Priest  Code  is 
occasionally  milder,  enacting  that  one  who  con- 
cealed anything  entrusted  to  him,  or  anything 
stolen  or  found,  make  complete  restoration  and  add 
one-fifth  of  the  value  as  a  fine  (Lev.  vi.  20-24). 

VL  Inheritance:  The  law  of  inheritance  was 
agi^atic  throughout.  Unlike  the  Code  of  Ham- 
murabi (172),  Hebrew  law  denied  the  inheritance 
to  the  wife,  since  she  formed  part  of  the  heritable 
estate  of  her  husband.  Daughters  likewise  were 
incapable  of  inheritance,  this  being  another  point 
of  divergence  from  the  Code  of  Hanunurabi  (180, 
183,  184).  Lack  of  male  offspring  gave  the  in- 
heritance to  the  nearest  agnate,  who  also  had  the 
duty  of  blood-revenge.  The  sons  of  different  wives 
had  equal  right  of  inheritance,  although  the  first- 
bom  son  received  a  double  portion  (Deut.  xxi.  17). 
The  father  might,  however,  favor  one  son  rather 
than  another,  and  might  even  transfer  the  inheri- 
tance of  the  first-bom  to  a  younger  son,  as  to  the 


first  son  of  a  favorite  wife,  although  this  was  con- 
trary to  custom  and  was  forbidden  by  Deuteron- 
omy (Gen.  xlix.  3,  xxi.  1  sqq.;  I  Kings  i.  11-13; 
Deut.  xxi.  15-17).  It  is  unknown  whether  the 
real  estate  was  divided,  nor  is  it  certain  whether 
the  inheritance  of  the  sons  by  a  concubine  (Gen. 
xxi.  11)  was  equal  to  that  of  the  sons  by  a  wife, 
although  much  seems  to  have  depended  on  the 
good-will  of  the  father.  It  was  not  until  the  later 
period  that  the  law  allowed  daughters  to  inherit  in 
case  there  were  no  sons  (Num.  xxvii.  4  sqq.),  al- 
though in  such  instances  they  were  obliged  to 
marry  a  husband  from  their  father's  stock  (Num. 
xxxvi.  1-12),  in  order  that  the  estate  might  not 
pass  to  an  unrelated  family.  It  was  an  exceptional 
act  of  favor  to  allow  daughters  to  inherit  together 
with  sons  (Job  xlii.  15),  but  even  in  case  of  a  child- 
less marriage  the  wife  had  no  right  of  inheritance, 
the  heirs  then  being  the  kinsmen  of  her  husband. 

I.  Benzinger. 
BiBUOoaAPHT:  J.  Kleia,  Da»  Oe$etM  Hber  dot  geriehlUehs 
Bmoeuverfakren  naeh  moaaMehF4alimudi9dtem  BedU^  Halle, 
1885;  J.  D.  MichMlis.  MoaaUckea  RedU,  6  vols..  Frank- 
fort, 1775;  Frenkel.  Der  iferidMiche  Beweia,  Berlin.  1846; 
J.  L.  SaalBchuti,  Da»  motaiache  lUcht,  ib.  1853;  L.  Diestel. 
Die  reiigidaen  Delikte  im  uraelitiadten  S&afncht,  in  Jahr- 
bOeher  /Or  proteatantiadte  Thaologie,  v  (1800),  207  aqq.; 
M.  DuBchak.  Dob  moaaiaehe  RedU,  Vienna,  1800;  A. 
Knenen,  Reliffion  of  lerael,  ii.  250-280,  London.  1875; 
idem.  National  Relioione  and  Univereal  Reliinona,  pp.  82 
aqq.,  ib.  1882;  A.  P.  Biaael,  The  Law  of  Aeylum  in  lerael, 
Leiprio,  1884;  Smith,  OTJC,  pp.  208  aqq.,  428-430,  and 
lectures  xi.-xii.;  Q.  Wildeboer,  De  Peniateuehkriiik  en 
het  momieehe  StrafredU,  in  Tijdechrift  vor  StrafrecfU,  iv. 
205  sqq.,  v.  251  sqq.;  A.  Bertholet,  Die  SteUung  der 
leraeliten  und  Juden  xu  den  Fremden,  Freiburg,  1800; 
E.  Day,  Social  Life  of  the  HArewe,  New  York,  1001; 
G.  F.  Kent.  StudenVe  Old  Teetament,  vol.  iv..  ib..  1007; 
SchOrer.  OeetAidUe,  ii  143  sqq.,  Eng.  transl.,  consult 
Index;  DB,  in.  04-72;  EB,  iii  2714-30;  JE,  vii.  033- 
038;  the  literature  cited  under  Hajoittrabi  and  His  Code; 
and  the  works  on  Hebrew  archeology  and  antiquities  by 
DeWette,  Ewald,  Keil,  Benainger,  and  Nowack. 

LAW,  WILLIAM:  English  controversial  and 
devotional  writer;  b.  at  King's  CliflFe  (28  m.  n.e. 
of  Northampton),  Northamptonshire,  1686;  d. 
there  Apr.  9,  1761.  He  studied  at  Emmanuel  Col- 
lege, Cambridge  (B.A.,  1708;  M.A.,  1712),  and  was 
oAained  and  elected  fellow  of  his  college  in  1711. 
He  was  a  fearless  nonjuror,  and,  in  consequence 
of  his  refusal  to  take  the  oaths  of  allegiance  and 
abjuration  on  the  accession  of  George  I.,  forfeited 
his  fellowship,  and  all  prospects  of  advancement 
in  the  Church.  Subsequently  he  took  up  his  resi- 
dence at  Putney  as  tutor  to  Edward  Gibbon,  father 
of  the  historian.  In  1740  he  returned  to  King's 
CUffe,  where  he  spent  the  rest  of  his  life  in  literary 
labora  and  works  of  charity.  Law  was  one  of  the 
most  eminent  English  writers  on  practical  divinity 
in  the  eighteenth  century.  He  was  a  genuine  mys- 
tic, although  he  lived  in  a  worldly  and  rationalistic 
age,  and  is  best  known  by  his  Serious  Call  to  a  De- 
void and  Holy  Life  (London,  1729  and  often;  new 
ed.,  1906).  With  the  exception  of  The  Pilgrim'a 
ProgresSf  no  book  on  practical  religion  in  the  lan- 
guage has,  perhaps,  been  so  highly  praised.  Gib- 
bon, Dr.  Johnson,  Doddridge,  and  John  Wesley, 
vie  with  each  other  in  oonmiending  it  as  a  master- 
piece. At  one  time,  Law  was  a  kind  of  oracle  with 
Wesley,  and  his  influence  upon  early  Methodism 


Lawlor 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


48S 


waa  of  an  almost  formative  character.    In  hk  later 
years  he  became  an  enthuBtaatic  student  of  Jakob 
Boehme,  but  his  strong  churchly  feeling  and  his 
sound  English  sense  kept  him  from  the  wild  errors 
and  extravagances  into  which  some  of  Boehme's 
disciples  fell.    In  The  Spirit  €f  Pra^fer  (1750;   new 
ed.,  1893)  and  The  Spirit  <^  hove  (1754;   new  ed., 
1893),  Law  unfolds  his  mystical  views,  and  an- 
swers the  objections  which  had  been  made  to  them. 
They  are  remarkable  works,  and  abound  in  passages 
of  uncommon  spiritual  force  and  beauty.    Other 
well-known  writings  by  Law  are:   Thrtt  Letten  to 
the  Bishop  of  Bangor  (1717-19;   new  ed.,  1893),  the 
most  forceful  piece  of  writing  produced  by  the 
Bangorian  controversy  (see  Hoadlt,  Benjamin); 
and  A   Practical   Treatiee  on  Christian  Perfection 
(1726;   abridged  in  part  by  J.  Wesley,  1740;   new 
ed.,  1902).     All  of  these  maybe  found  in  his  Work* 
(9  vols.,  1762;   a  beautiful  reprint  ed.  G.  B.  Moi^ 
gan,  9  vols.,  Brockenhurst,  1892-93.)     Recent  vol- 
umes of  selections  from  Law  are:  Characters  and 
Characteristics  of  WxUiam  Law  (ed.  A.  Whyte,  Lon- 
don, 1893);   WhoUyfor  God  (ed.  A.  Murray,  1894); 
The  Power  of  the  Spirit  (ed.  A.  Murray,  1896);  and 
The  Divine  Indwelling  (ed.  A.  Murray,  1897) ;  Lib- 
eral and  Mystic  WrUings  (New  York,  1908). 
Bibliography:     J.    H.   Overton,    William  Law,   Nonjuror 
and  Myttic,   London,    lasi    (satisfactory);    [C.   Walton]. 
NoiM  and  maUrial»  for  an  Adequate  Biography  of  WiUiam 
Law,  ib.  1854  (privately  printed);    L.  Stephen,  Hown  in 
a  Library,  2  eer..    ib.    1876;   J.  H.  Overton,     The  Church 
in  England.  U.  222,  228-231.  235,  240,  ib.  1897;    idem 
and    F.    Relton.    The   Engliah   Church    {t7lA-t800\    ib. 
1906;    DNB,  xxxii.   236-240;   and  the  literature  under 
NoNJUROFA,  especially  T.   Lathbury,  Hint,  of  the  Not^ 
juror*;   Cambridge  Modem  Hist.,  vi.  81  sqq.,  19<)9. 

LAWLOR,  HUGH  JACKSOH:  Church  of  Ire- 
land; b.  at  Baliymena  (33  m.  n.n.w.  of  Belfast), 
Ck)unty  Antrim,  Dec.  11,  1861.  He  studied  at 
Trinity  (Allege,  Dublin  (B.A.,  1882;  M.A.,  1885), 
was  ordered  deacon  in  1885,  and  ordained  priest  in 
1886.  He  was  curate  of  Christ  Church,  Kingstown, 
Dublin  1885-93,  and  senior  chaplain  of  St.  Mary's 
Cathedral,  Edinburgh  1893-98.  Since  1898  he  has 
been  professor  of  ecclesiastical  history  in  the  Uni- 
versity of  Dublin,  where  he  had  already  been  as- 
sistant to  Archbishop  King's  lecturer  in  divinity 
in  1890-93.  He  was  university  preacher  in  1898- 
1905,  and  has  been  examining  chaplain  to  the 
bishop  of  Edinburgh  since  1895,  precentor  of  Trin- 
ity College  since  1900  and  of  St.  Patrick's  Cathedral, 
Dublin,  since  1902,  and  curate  of  Bray,  Dublin, 
since  1905.  He  has  edited:  The  Rosslyn  Missal 
(London,  1899);  G.  T.  Stokes'  Some  Worthies  of  the 
Irish  Church  (1900);  and  The  Diary  of  William 
King  .  .  .  Kept  during  his  Imprisonment  in  Dub- 
lin Castle,  1689  (Dublin,  1903);  and  has  written: 
Chapters  on  the  Book  of  Mulling  (Edinburgh,  1897); 
The  Kilcormic  Missal  (Dublin,  1900);  Thoughts  on 
Belief  and  Life  (sermons;  19(X));  and  The  Manu- 
scripts of  the  Vita  Sancti  Columbani  (1903).  He 
has  also  contributed  to  the  Peplographia  Dublinen- 
sis  (London,  1902)  and  The  Psalms  of  Israel  (1904). 

LAWRENCE,  WILLIAM:  Protestant  Episco- 
pal bishop  of  Massachusetts;  b.  in  Boston  May  30, 
1850.  He  was  graduated  at  Harvard  in  1871  and 
the  Episcopal  Theological  School,  Cambridge,  Mass., 


in  1875.  He  was  ordered  deaoon  in  1875  and 
priested  in  1876.  He  became  rector  oC  Graee 
Church,  Lawrence,  Mass.,  in  1876,  professor  d 
homiletioB  and  pastoral  theology  in  the  Episoopil 
Theological  School  at  Cambridge  in  1884  (dean  from 
1888),andbishopof  MaBBacfau8ettainl893.  He  has 
written:  Life  f^  Amos  A  [dciffwj  Lcaor^ryoe  (his  father; 
Boston,  1888);  Fimbfis  and  Service  (1896);  Lift 
of  Roger  Woleott,  Governor  of  MasaaekuaetU  (1902); 
and  Study  of  PhUUpB  Brooks  (1903). 
BiBUooaAPHT:  W.  8.  Peny,  The  Bpiaeepate  in  Awmie^ 
p.  350,  New  York,  1806. 

LAY  BAPnSlL    See  BAFnaM,  nL,  4. 

LAY  BROTHERS^  LAY  SISTER&    See  Monas- 

TICISM. 

LAY  CLERK:  A  designation  given  to  certain 
members  of  the  establishznent  of  an  English  cathe- 
dral, whose  duty  it  is  to  take  a  regular  part  in  the 
choral  services;  they  are  sometimes  known  also  as 
lay  vicars,  or  vicars-choraL  As  in  the  case  of  the 
parish  clerk,  the  name  comes  down  from  a  time 
when  these  functions  were  performed  by  actual 
clerics;  the  qualifying  adjective  "  lay/'  though 
etymologically  importing  a  contradiction,  being 
added  to  mark  the  difference  in  modem  usage. 

LAY  COMMUmOlf  (Lat.  oommumo  laica): 
Originally  the  status  of  the  lay  members  of  the 
Chureh  as  contrasted  with  the  cleigy,  but  restricted 
after  the  differentiation  between  clergy  and  laity 
to  a  deposition  from  the  higher  estate  of  the  former 
to  the  lower  rank  of  the  latter.  It  is  mentioned  in 
this  sense  as  early  as  the  third  centxiry,  especiaUy 
as  a  punishment  parallel  with  Deposition  (q.v.). 
The  punishment  implied  that  a  cleigjrman  thus  de- 
posed resumed  the  status  of  a  layman  and  had 
henceforth  only  lay  rights,  so  that  he  received  com- 
munion outside  the  choir  instead  of  within  the 
sanctuary,  like  the  clergy.  In  modem  Roman 
(Datholic  usage  the  development  of  the  doctrine  of 
the  "  indelible  character  "  of  bishops  and  priests 
has  rendered  absolute  reduction  to  lay  commu- 
nion impossible.  A  cleric  of  major  orders  can  be 
released  from  the  duties  of  his  office,  espedallj 
from  the  vow  of  celibacy,  only  by  dispensation  oi 
the  pope.  Those  who  hold  minor  orders,  however, 
may  return  to  the  estate  of  laymen,  and  if  they 
marry,  they  lose  their  benefices  and  aU  other  priv- 
ileges. (P.  HiNSCHIUSt.) 

LAY  READER:  A  term  applied  in  the  Anglican 
Conmiunion  to  laymen  who  are  licensed  to  read 
portions  of  the  service,  usually  in  the  absence  of  a 
cleigyman.  The  system  received  its  earliest  wide 
development  in  the  United  States,  where  the  num- 
ber of  clergy  was  inadequate  to  the  needs  of  mis- 
sionary expansion,  and  the  services  of  the  Episco- 
pal Chureh  were  in  many  places  kept  up  for  long 
periods  almost  entirely  by  the  ministrations  of  lay 
readers;  but  in  recent  years  it  has  been  adopted 
to  a  considerable  extent  in  England  also.  In  the 
United  States  a  lay  reader  is  required  to  have  a 
license  from  the  bishop,  which  is  granted  for  a  year 
at  a  time,  and  his  powers  are  minutely  defined  by 
the  canons. 


433 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDU 


Lawlor 
IiMftrists 


LATIN6  ON  OF  HANDS:  A  religious  rite,  both 
Jewish  and  Christian.  In  the  Old  Testament,  as  a 
prescribed  act,  it  appears  first  in  Lev.  i.  4,  for  the 
burnt-offering;  in  iii.  2  for  the  peace-offering;  in 
iv.  4  for  the  sin-offering;  in  xvi.  21  for  the  sending 
away  of  the  scapegoat  on  the  Day  of  Atonement. 
It  was  used  also  in  connection  with  the  setting 
apart  of  priests  (Ex.  zxiz.  10,  15,  19),  and  with  the 
solemn  punishment  of  idolatry  (Lev.  xziv.  14).    In 

Num.  viii.  10,  12  the  close  connection 
In  the  Old  between  the  use  of  the  rite  in  sacrifice 
Testament  and  that  in  consecration  of  priests  is 

seen;  whence  it  follows  that  it  can 
not  be  used  to  denote  the  designation  of  represent- 
atives by  the  people,  but  rather  signifies  that  they 
belong  to  God.  The  laying  on  of  hands  in  the  case 
of  the  scapegoat  is  a  symbolic  expression  of  par- 
ticipation between  subject  and  object,  the  latter 
becoming  or  doing  what  properly  belongs  to  the 
former.  In  the  punishment  of  idolatry  a  simi- 
larly close  connection  is  established  between  the 
bearing  of  witness  and  the  punishment  of  the 
crime.  It  is  an  easy  transition  to  the  setting  apart 
of  Joshua  as  leader  of  the  people  by  the  laying  on 
of  the  hands  of  Moses  (Num.  zxviii.  18;  Deut. 
xxxiv.  9),  in  order  to  symbolize  the  participation 
of  the  younger  in  the  exalted  mission  of  the  elder. 
From  all  these  cases  it  appears  that  the  act  either 
meant  the  marking  out  of  a  special  destiny  for  the 
object,  expressed  in  the  words  which  accompanied 
the  act  (for  some  words  were  always  used),  or  else 
it  signified  transmission,  either  of  an  office,  or  of 
a  blessing,  or  of  sin. 

In  the  New  Testament  there  is  no  express  men- 
tion of  the  rite  as  a  part  of  the  law.  But  Christ 
performed  a  number  of  his  miracles  of  healing  by 
the  laying  on  of  hands  (e.g.,  Mark  v.  23,  vi.  5,  vii. 
32),  and  his  blessing  was  conveyed  by  the  same 
act  (Mark  x.  13,  16).  The  same  thing  is  related  of 
the  miracles  of  heiding  performed  by  the  disciples 
(Acts  vi.  6,  ix.  12,  17,  xxviii.  8).    The  expression 

of  the  will  to  heal  or  bless  by  this  act 
In  the  New  is  so  natural  that  there  is  no  need  to 
Testament  attribute  any  magical  effect  to  the 

mere  touch,  against  which  would  be 
the  failure  of  the  parallel  passages  to  mention  it, 
and  the  same  working  of  the  word  at  a  distance 
(e.g.,  Matt.  viii.  5-13).  The  imposition  of  hands 
is  merely  symbolic  of  the  healing  will;  but  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  new  dispensation,  the  effect 
closely  accompanies  the  sign.  It  is  not  surpri- 
sing to  find  the  laying  on  of  hands  permanently 
connected  with  the  washing  away  of  sin  in  baptism 
and  with  the  appointment  to  offices  in  the  Church. 
In  the  former  connection  it  so  appears  in  Acts  viii. 
17  and  Heb.  vi.  2,  but  not  as  a  separate,  substan- 
tive act  accompanying  the  baptism  and  with  a 
blessing  of  its  own.  According  to  Acts  ii.  38,  the 
conimimication  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  not  a  thing 
separate  from  baptism,  but  follows  upon  it.  The 
separation  of  the  laying  on  of  hands  from  baptism, 
and  its  elevation  into  a  right  reserved  to  bishops 
in  Confirmation  (q.v.),  is  both  contrary  to  Scrip- 
ture and  derogatory  to  the  sacrament  of  baptism. 

According  to  Acts  vi.  6,  xiii.  3,  the  appointment 
to  office  in  the  Church  is  conferred  by  prayer  and 
VI.— 28 


the  laying  on  of  hands,  which  here  again  is  noth- 
ing more  than  a  natural  S3rmbol  for  the  transmis- 
sion of  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit  necessary  to 
their   exercise.    It    is   analogous   to   the    Jewish 
priestly  consecration  (Num.  viii.  10),  as  also  to  the 
ordination  of  readers  or  members  of 
In  the      the  Sanhedrin  in  the  post-Maccabean 
Church,     period.    But  once  more  the  New-Tes- 
tament S3rmboli8m   differs  essentially 
from  the  Old;    for  as  long  as  the  service  of  the 
Church  had  not  developed  into  a  hierarchical  con- 
stitution, the  oonmiissioning  of  a  man  with  an 
office  was  supposed  to  include  the  transmission  of 
the  powers  necessary  to  its  exercise.    Thus  Paul 
couM  write  to  Timothy  (I.,  iv.  14,  II.,  i.  6)  of  the 
chariama  which  was  in  him  through  the  laying  on 
of  his  hands  and  the  hands  of  the  presbytery,  and 
warn  him  (I.,  v.  22)  to  lay  hands  suddenly  on  no 
man.    For   later  development,  see   Clbrqt,  IV.; 
Confirmation;  Ordination.         (H.  CRBMBRf.) 
Bibuoosapht:  DCA,  L  82S-829:  DB,  iii.  84-85;   BB,  0. 
1956. 

LAYMAN'S    lOSSIONART    MOVEHENT.     See 

MOVBMBNT,   LaTMAN'B  MiBBIONAST. 

LAZARISTS:  1.  A  name  sometimes  given  to 
the  Mekhitarists  from  their  monastery  on  the  island 
of  San  Laszaro  (2  m.  s.e.  of  Venice).  See  Mexhit- 

ARI8TB. 

8.  The  common  name  of  the  congr^ation  of 
secular  priests  for  missions  founded  by  St.  Vincent 
de  Paul  from  the  old  hospital  of  St.  LaiEare  in  Paris, 
where  they  had  their  mother  house.  See  Vin- 
cent DB  Paxtl,  Saint. 

3.  The  Knights  of  St  Lazarus,  organised  for  the 
care  of  the  side,  especially  lepers,  probably  at  Je- 
rusalem about  the  middle  of  the  twelfth  century. 
The  tradition  that  the  order  was  foimded  by  the 
leprous  King  Baldwin  IV.  may  be  partially  au- 
thentic, in  that  he  probably  showed  special  favor 
to  a  lazaretto  in  Jerusalem  at  that  period,  and 
knighted  the  brothers  in  attendance  at  it.  After 
the  thirteenth  century,  they  spread  throughout 
Europe,  chiefly  in  Sicily,  Lower  Italy,  and  Ger- 
many, and  most  of  all  in  France,  where  the  laza- 
retto at  Boigni  (near  Orleans)  became  the  seat  of 
the  Grand  Master.  About  1490  the  order  was 
suppressed  in  Italy  by  Innocent  VIII.,  only  to  be 
restored  by  Leo  X.  In  1572  they  were  united  by 
Duke  Emmanuel  Philibert  of  Savoy  with  the 
Knights  of  St.  Maurice  (founded  1434  and  follow- 
ing Benedictine  rule),  and  the  two  orders  now  de- 
voted themselves  to  the  defense  of  Roman  Catho- 
lic doctrine  against  Protestantism.  The  Knights 
of  Saints  Lazarus  and  Maurice  still  exist  in  Italy 
as  a  secular  order  established  by  Victor  Emmanuel 
I.  of  Sardinia  in  1816. 

In  France  the  Knights  of  St.  Lazarus  were  united 
in  1607  by  Henry  IV.  with  the  Knights  of  Our 
Lady  of  Mount  Carmel,  and  imder  Louis  XIV.  they 
enjoyed  special  favor  in  1672,  receiving  the  estates 
of  aU  extinct  or  suppressed  French  orders.  After 
1691,  however,  these  estates  were  withdrawn,  and 
henceforth  the  order  slowly  declined,  being  almost 
annihilated  in  the  Revolution  and  being  formally 
suppressed  in  1830. 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


434 


As  special  insignia  both  the  Italian  and  Freneh 
branches  bore  a  green  cross  with  eight  points,  while 
the  French  division  added  lilies  between  the  arms 
of  the  cross  and  pictures  of  Our  Lady  of  Mount 
Carmel  and  Lazarus  rising  from  the  dead. 

(O.  ZOCKUBBf.) 
Biblioorafht:  Hdyot,  Ordrw  manoitiquea,  I  32,  64;  Heim- 
buefaer,    Orden   und   Kongregationen;     G.    Uhlhorn,    Die 
ehri$aiehe   LitbeuthMigkni   im    MHUIaUer,    pp.    27^274, 
493-494;   Currier,  ReUinout  OnUrt,  p.  218. 

LEA,  HENRT  CHARLES:  Historian;  b.  in 
Philadelphia  Sept.  19,  1825;  d.  there  Oct.  24, 
1909.  He  was  educated  privately,  and  in  1841 
entered  the  publishing-house  of  Lea  and  Blanchard, 
in  his  native  city,  becoming  a  member  of  the  firm 
in  1851  and  having  sole  control  from  1865  to  1880, 
when  he  retired  from  active  life.  During  the  Civil 
War  he  was  a  member  of  the  Union  League,  and 
alwajTs  retained  interest  in  municipal  and  civil  re- 
form. He  is  universally  known  by  his  studies  of 
medieval  ecclesiastical  history,  which  comprise: 
SuperatiUan  and  Farce:  Esaaya  on  Wager  of  Law, 
Wager  of  Battle,  Ordeal,  and  Torture  (Philadelphia, 
1866);  Hiatarical  Sketch  of  Sacerdotal  Celibacy  in  the 
Christian  Church  (Boston,  1867 ;  dd  ed.,  2  vols.,  New 
York,  1907) ;  Studiea  in  Church  History:  Riae  of  Tem- 
poral Power,  Benefit  of  Clergy,  Excommunication 
(Philadelphia,  1869);  History  cf  the  InquisiHon  of  the 
Middle  Agea  (3  vols..  New  York,  1888);  Chapterafrom 
the  Rdigioua  History  cf  Spain  connected  with  the 
Inquisition  (Philadelphia,  1890);  Formulary  of  the 
Papal  Penitentiary  in  the  ThirUenth  Century  (1893); 
History  of  Auricular  Confession  and  Indidgencea  in 
the  Latin  Church  (3  vols.,  1896);  The  Moriacoa  of 
Spain,  their  Converaion  and  Expulsion  (1901);  and 
History  of  the  InquisiHon  of  Spain  (4  vols..  New 
York,  1906-07) ;  Inquisition  in  the  Spanish  Depend- 
enciea  (1908). 

LEAD  (LBADE),  JANE:  English  mystic;  b.  in 
Norfolk  1623;  d.  in  London  Aug.  19,  1704.  Her 
maiden  name  was  Ward.  Receiving  the  usual  ed- 
ucation of  the  well-to-do  English  girl  of  the  period, 
she  heard,  in  her  sixteenth  year,  a  marvelous  voice, 
which  so  impressed  her  that  she  devoted  herself 
thenceforth  to  meditation.  At  the  age  of  twenty- 
one  she  married  her  kinsman  William  Lead,  and 
after  his  death  in  1670  lived  in  retirement  in 
London.  Her  innate  tendency  to  mysticism  was 
furthered  by  her  study  of  Jakob  Boehme  and  her 
acquaintance  with  John  Pordage  (q.v.),  an  Anglican 
clergyman,  after  1652;  but  she  was  not  content  with 
the  visions  of  others,  her  vivid  imagination  speedily 
producing  phantasms  of  her  own.  These  occurred 
almost  nightly  and  were  recorded  after  1670  in  her 
diary,  A  Fountain  cf  Oardena;  but  her  writings 
made  little  impression  until  1693,  when  one  of 
them  was  translated  into  Dutch.  She  now  became 
famous  in  an  hour.  An  important  event  in  her 
life  at  this  period  was  her  acquaintance  with  an 
Oxford  scholar  Francis  Lee,  who  became  succes- 
sively her  adopted  son,  secretary,  and  son-in-law, 
and  gave  her  writings  their  present  literary  form. 
About  the  pair  gathered  a  circle  of  mystics  who 
termed  themselves  the  Philadelphian  Society  and 
kept  in  close  touch  with  Germany  and  Holland.  In 
her  latter  years  she  had  to  struggle  against  poverty 


and  jealousy,  though  she  was  freed  from  the  for- 
mer by  an  annual  pension  of  400  florins  given  bj 
Baron  Kniphausen.  She  regarded  herself  as  the 
mere  instrument  of  her  visions;  and  her  works, 
though  lacking  in  originality  and  style,  exercised 
a  wide  influence  in  limited  circles.  Their  charac- 
ter is  sufficiently  indicated  by  the  titles:  The 
Heavenly  Cloud  now  Breaking:  The  Lord  Christ's 
Aacension-Ladder  Sent  Down  (London,  1681);  The 
Revelation  cf  Revelationa,  etc.  (1683);  The  Enochian 
Walka  with  God,  Found  out  by  a  Spiritual  TraveiUr, 
whose  Face  towarda  Mount  Sion  above  waa  set,  etc, 
(1694);  The  Lawa  cf  Paradise,  Given  Forth  by  Wia- 
dom  to  a  Translated  Spirit  (1695);  The  Wonders  of 
God'a  Creation  Manifested  in  the  Variety  cf  Eight 
Worlds  as  They  were  made  known  experimentaUy 
unto  the  Author  (1695);  A  Meaaage  to  the  Philadel- 
phian Society,  Whitheraoever  Diaperaed  over  the 
Whole  Earth  (1696),  followed  by  two  similar  mes- 
sages in  1698;  The  Tree  of  Faith  or  the  Tree  of  Life 
Springing  up  in  the  Paradise  of  God,  etc.  (1696); 
The  Ark  <^  Faith  (1696);  A  Fountain  of  Gardens 
Watered  by  the  Rivera  of  Divine  Pleasure  and  Spring- 
ing up  in  all  the  Variety  cf  Spiritual  Plants,  etc 
(4  vols.,  1696-1701);  A  RevelaHan  of  the  Everlati' 
ing  Goapd  Meaaage  (1^97);  The  Aacent  to  the  Mouni 
of  Viaion  (1698?);  The  Signa  of  the  Timea:  Fore- 
running the  Kingdom  of  Christ  and  Evidencing  vhen 
it  ia  to  Come  (1699);  The  Ware  of  David  and  tkt 
Peaceable  Reign  cf  Solomon,  etc.  (1700),  with  au- 
tobiographical material;  A  Living  Funeral  Testi- 
mony, or  Death  Overcome  and  Drowned  in  the  Lijf 
of  Christ  (1702);  and  The  First  Resurrection  n 
Chri^  (Amsterdam,  1704;  dictated  shortly  before 
her  death).  (Abnold  RCegg.) 

Bibuoorapht:  An  autobiography  exista  in  Stka  myuttat^ 
TraeUUlein,  pp.  413-423,  Amstordam,  16M.  Gonsfih: 
DNB,  Z3cxii.  312-313;  I.  W.  Jaeger.  Histana  •oelanaUic^ 
II..  iL  90-117,  Hamburg.  1717;  C.  Walton.  NoUm  far  a« 
Adeq^ale  Biooraphy  of  W.  Law,  London,  1854;  Oanoc 
Jenkins,  in  BrUiah  QuarUrly  Review,  July,  1873,  pp.  181- 
187. 

LEAGUE  AND  COVENANT,  THE  SOLEMN.  See 

COVENANTBBS,  {  4. 

LEANDER,  SAINT:  Metropolitan  of  Seville;  b. 
at  Cartagena,  Spain,  c.  550;  d.  Mar.  13,  600  or 
601.  The  brother  of  Isidore  of  Seville,  Fulgentius 
bishop  of  Ecija,  and  Florentina  prioress  of  a  nun- 
nery, he  was  for  many  years  a  monk,  and  even  at 
this  early  period  seems  to  have  exercised  the  in- 
fluence on  the  Visigothic  Prince  Hermenegild,  son 
of  Leovigild,  which  ultimately  converted  him  frcHo 
Arianism  to  the  catholic  faith.  Leander  was  exiled 
when  Hermenegild  rebelled  against  his  father;  and 
between  579  and  582  he  went  to  Bysantium  to  in- 
duce Tiberius  II.  to  send  troops  to  the  aid  of  the 
catholic  party  headed  by  his  convert.  Despite  the 
powerful  influence  of  Gr^ory  the  Great,  Leander 
met  with  no  success  at  Bysantium.  After  his  re- 
turn to  Spain,  he  was  consecrated  bishop,  or  metro- 
politan, of  Seville,  probably  in  584.  In  this  capac- 
ity he  not  only  confirmed  Leovigild 's  successor 
Recared  in  his  conversion  to  orthodoxy  (587),  but 
also  aided  materially  in  overcoming  the  opposition 
of  the  Arian  bishops  and  in  effecting  the  final  con- 
version of  the  Visigoths  from  Arianism.    He  pre- 


435 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Letanon 


sided  over  the  famous  Synod  of  Toledo  (589)  which 
marked  this  event,  and  was  the  chief  agent  in  add- 
ing the  fiUoque  to  the  creed  of  the  Visigothic  Church. 
His  activity  in  behalf  of  his  Church  is  also  shown 
in  his  correspondence  with  Gregory  the  Great,  who 
not  only  answered  his  questions  carefully  and  cor- 
dially, but  also  sent  him  the  pallium  in  599  and 
dedicated  to  him  his  Maralia  in  Jobum,  The  ex- 
tant works  of  Leander  are:  Regxda  sandimonialium, 
sive  ItbeUus  de  inatitiUume  virffinum  et  contemptu 
mundi  ad  Florentinam  aarorem,  and  HomUia  de 
triutnpho  ecdesics  6b  converaionem  Goihorum  (de- 
livered in  the  synod  of  Toledo).  Both  are  printed 
in  MPL,  Ixxii.  873-^98.  He  also  wrote  two  trea- 
tises against  Arianism,  one  a  sharp  polemic,  the 
other  an  orthodox  catechism.  In  the  ecclesiastical 
art  of  Spain  Leander  is  always  represented  with  his 
brother  Isidore.  (O.  ZOcKLERf:) 

Biblxoorapht:  Isidore  of  Seville,  De  vir.  ill.,  ohap.  xlL; 
ASB,  March,  ii  275-280;  ASM,  i.  37S-386;  P.  Game, 
Kird^engeBdiidUe  van  Spanien,  ii.  2,  pp.  37  eqq.,  66  sqq., 
3  vole.,  RegeneburK.  1862-79;  £.  QOiree,  in  Fanehunoen 
tur  deuUehen  (UKhichte,  1872-73;  idem,  in  ZHT,  1873, 
parts  i.,  iv.;  idem,  in  ZWT,  xxv  (1885),  part  iiL,  xzvi 
(1886),  part  i.,  pp.  36-50;  DCB,  iii.  637-640;  and  the 
literature  imder  Lsidors  or  SeviiiLK. 

LEATHES,  STANLEY:  Church  of  England;  b. 
at  Ellesborough  (20  m.  e.  of  Oxford),  Bucks,  Mar. 
21,  1830;  d.  at  Much  Hadham  (7  m.  n.e.  of  Hert- 
ford), Herts,  Apr.  30,  1900.  He  studied  at  Jesus 
College,  Cambridge  (B.A.,  1852;  M.A.,  1855),  and 
after  serving  various  churdies  was  appointed  in  1863 
professor  of  Hebrew  in  King's  College,  London. 
He  was  also  perpetual  curate  of  St.  Philip's,  Re- 
gent Street,  London,  1869-80,  and  rector  of  Cliffe- 
at^Hoo,  Kent,  1880-89  and  of  Much  Hadham,  Herts, 
1889-1900.  He  became  a  member  of  the  Old-Tes- 
tament company  of  revisers  in  1870,  and  from  1876 
until  his  death  was  prebendary  of  Caddington  Major 
in  St.  Paul's  Cathedral,  examining  chaplain  to  the 
bishop  of  Lichfield  after  1891,  and  examiner  in 
Scripture  to  the  University  of  London  after  1892. 
Among  his  publications,  special  mention  may  be 
made  of  his  Witness  of  the  Old  Testament  to  Christ 
(London,  1868);  The  Witness  of  St,  Paul  to  Christ 
(1869);  The  Witness  of  SL  John  to  Christ  (1870; 
these  three  volumes  the  Boyle  lectures  for  1868-70); 
The  Structure  of  the  Old  Testament  (1873);  The 
Cities  Visited  by  St.  Paul  (1873);  The  Gospel  its 
cum  Witness  (Hulsean  lectures  for  1873;  1874); 
The  Religion  of  the  Christ  (Bampton  lectures  for 
1874;  1874);  The  Grounds  of  Christian  Hope  {1S77); 
The  Christian  Creed,  its  Theory  and  Practice  (1877); 
Old  Testament  Prophecy,  its  Witness  m  a  Record  of 
Divine  Foreknowledge  (Warburton  lectures;  1880); 
The  Foundations  of  Morality:  Discourses  upon  the 
Ten  Commandments  (IS82);  Characteristics  of  Chris- 
tianity (1883);  Christ  and  the  Bible  (1885);  The 
Law  in  the  Prophets  (1891);  and  The  Testimony  of 
the  Earlier  Prophetic  Writers  to  the  Primal  Religion 
of  Israel  (1898). 
Bibuoobafht:  DNB,  Supplement,  iii.  86-86. 

LEBANON:  The  western  part  of  the  mountain 
system  of  central  Syria,  starting  near  the  sources 
of  the  Jordan  and  stretchmg  northeast  about  one 
hundred  miles.  Over  against  it  to  the  east  is  An- 
tilebanon,  while  between  the  two  ranges  is  the 


plain  of  Coele-Syria  (q.  v.).  The  general  character  of 
the  entire  system  is  that  of  a  mighty  mountain  wall 
between  the  coast  and  the  interior.  Lebanon  be- 
gins at  the  south  where  the  Litany  breaks  through 
on  its  way  to  the  sea;  its  southern  half  reaches 
northward  to  the  pass  through  which  the  railroad 
from  Beirut  to  Damascus  crosses  at  a  height  of 
4,870  feet,  and  its  highest  point  is  Jabal  Baruk, 
about  6,870  feet  above  the  sea;  its  northern  half 
extends  to  the  valley  of  the  Nahr  al-Kabir  where 
the  latter  flows  westward  into  the  Mediterranean. 
The  northern  half  reaches  a  higher  altitude  and  a 
greater  variety  of  form  than  the  southern.  Instead 
of  a  single  line  of  mountain  crests  there  are  ntuner- 
ous  extended  plateaus,  reminding  of  the  Alpine 
formation,  though  the  Lebanon  outlines  are  some- 
what softer  in  outline.  These  plateau  heights  are 
known  as  Jabal  Sannin  (8,060  feet),  Munaitira 
(8,680  feet),  Khaswani  (c.  9,000  feet),  "  the  Cedara  " 
(Arab.  Arz  Libnan,  "  Cedars  of  Lebanon  "),  and 
Akkar  (6,610  feet).  Arz  Libnan  culminates  in  two 
ranges  of  peaks  running  north  and  south,  each  row 
having  five  summits,  of  which  the  highest  is  Dahr 
al-Dubab  in  the  western  range,  altitude  9,470  feet, 
just  a  little  below  the  line  of  perpetual  snow,  if  the 
observation  of  C.  Diener  be  accepted.  Yet  there 
are  isolated  places  where  in  some  years  snow  lies 
continually  in  the  hollows  (Jer.  xviU.  14),  and 
moraines  reveal  traces  of  the  glaciers  of  former 
times. 

The  cedar  groves  near  Bsharrah  (40  m.  n.e.  of 
Beirut)  cover  part  of  a  somewhat  hilly  basin  about 
6,180  feet  high,  and  are  surrounded  by  a  high  wall 
pierced  by  two  gates  which,  however,  continually 
stand  open.  Leo  Anderlind  counted  on  Oct.  23, 
1884,  397  trees,  of  which  eight  were  outside  the 
wall,  none  of  them  higher  than  seventy-eight  feet. 
The  most  vigorous  trees  are  near  the 
The  Cedars,  little  Maronite  chapel,  one  of  which  at 
the  height  of  four  feet  from  the  ground 
has  a  girth  of  about  forty-five  feet.  Of  trees  like 
this,  which  bespeak  a  great  age,  there  are  seven. 
Rauwolf  in  1573  counted  only  twenty-four  trees, 
but  Burckhardt  in  1810  reckoned  in  all  375,  show- 
ing a  very  large  increase  during  the  last  300  years. 
Modem  investigation  shows  the  timber  not  to  be 
especially  durable  and  aromatic,  but  it  was  much 
valued  in  ancient  times  (I  Kings  vi.  20  sqq.;  Isa. 
xiv.  8,  xxxvii.  24,  xliv.  14;  Ezek.  xxvii.  24,  and 
the  cuneiform  inscriptions). 

The  width  of  the  stretch  between  the  mountains 
and  the  sea  varies  from  seventeen  miles  at  Sidon, 
to  near  eighteen  and  a  half  at  Beirut  and  twenty- 
six  and  a  third  at  Tripolis.  The  valleys  of  drain- 
age in  the  south  are  largely  the  result  of  erosion  in 
their  lower  course,  in  the  upper  course  following 
geological  cleavage.  The  northern  watercourses  are 
in  general  formed  by  gorges,  the  sides  of  which 
by  the  varying  color  of  the  strata  and  the  mixture 
of  vegetation  present  a  beautiful  effect.  Some- 
times these  brooks  have  a  subterranean  channel, 
that  of  the  Dog  River  (Nahr  al-Kalb)  having  been 
followed  for  nearly  two-thirds  of  a  mile. 

The  descent  from  the  crest  to  the  shore  is  accom- 
plished in  great  terraces,  each  of  which  has  in  pop- 
ular usage  its  own  name.    The  lowest  is  al-Sahil, 


lielMUlOB 

Ii«U  Bible 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


436 


the  second  is  al-Wast,  while  the  highest  is  al-Jurd; 
in  the  latter  the  chalky  formation  overlies  the  sand- 
stone. The  chalk  formation  is  the  conserver  of  the 
water  from  the  melting  snows,  which  percolates 
until  it  reaches  the  sandstone  and  is  then  brought 
to  the  surface.  The  numerous  springs  thus  created 
have  much  to  do  with  the  fertility  and  consequent 
population  of  the  region  below.  Much  snow  falls 
on  the  range  diuing  the  snowy  season,  and  the 
lower  limit  of  snowfall  is  between  1,550  and  1,850 
feet  above  the  sea. 

The  flora  in  consequence  of  these  favorable  con- 
ditions is  very  rich,  and  the  sones  marked  by  the 
terraces  have  each  its  own  characteristic  plants. 
For  those  of  the  coast  plain  see  Phknicia.  In  the 
middle  region  are  found  the  mulberry,  olive,  and 
fig,  then  come  nuts,  the  apricot,  peach,  almond, 
pear,  apple,  pomegranate,  quince  and  pistachio. 

Vineyards  are  productive  at  an  eleva- 

Flom  and  tion  of  3,100-4,600  feet,  at  which  ele- 

FkmuL      vation  diligence  has  produced  some 

spots  of  singular  fertility.  The  earlier 
and  native  flora  of  pines  and  cypresses  has  been 
superseded  by  the  plane,  maple,  linden,  arbutus, 
and  oak.  Alpine  flora  conmienoes  at  an  elevation 
of  7,400  feet.  The  sone  of  the  mulberry  is  fertile 
also  in  fragrant  plants  such  as  the  myrtle  and  the 
lavender  (cf.  Hoe.  ziv.  6).  Continued  occupation 
of  the  coimtry  and  consequent  despoilment  has 
cleared  away  the  former  rich  growth  of  forest  so 
often  mentioned  in  the  Old  Testament.  Some 
pieces  of  woodland  still  remain  and  give  shelter  to 
the  panther,  bear,  jackal,  hyena,  wild  boar,  and 
gazelle,  though  archeology  shows  that  a  much 
larger  fauna  existed  in  the  woods  which  once 
reached  nearly  to  the  coast.  There  are  indications 
that  the  primitive  inhabitants  of  the  region  were 
cannibals. 

The  lofty  and  abrupt  character  of  Lebanon  as 
well  as  the  great  number  of  gorges  make  access  ex- 
ceedingly difficult  and  fit  it  as  a  retreat  not  easy  to 
approach.  It  has  consequently  been  the  refuge 
during  the  centuries  of  those  in  difficulties,  who 
found  there  security  and  freedom.    Concerning  the 

inhabitants  of  Lebanon  only  too  little 
Inhaliittnti.  is  known.    Possibly  the  earliest  known 

to  history  were  the  Amorites  (q.v.), 
since  the  Amor  of  the  E^oi^tian  inscriptions  includes 
this  region.  In  the  fourteenth  century  the  Amor- 
ites fought  the  Egyptians,  in  the  next  century  they 
broke  out  to  the  south,  and  when  Israel  settled  in 
Canaan,  they  had  founded  two  kingdoms  in  the 
mountain  region  and  across  the  Jordan.  Compare 
with  this  the  independent  Druse  principality, 
1505-1634  A.D.  Among  the  historical  examples  of 
refugees  to  the  region  with  achievement  of  com- 
parative freedom  is  the  case  of  the  Maronites  and 
the  Druses  (qq.v.).  Present  conditions  are  the  re- 
sult of  the  interference  of  Western  powers,  partic- 
ularly of  France.  The  region  is  now  under  a  Chris- 
tian governor  who  pays  a  yearly  tribute  to  the 
Sublime  Porte. 

To  the  east  of  Lebanon  is  the  great  valley  of 
CcDle-Ssrria,  which  begins  at  the  Lake  of  Homs  (al- 
titude about  1,545  feet),  and  rises  toward  the  south, 
b<mnded  on  the  east  by  the  range  of  Antilebanon. 


Its  present  name  is  alrBika,  "  the  Valley  "  (cf.  the 
''  valley  of  Lebanon  "  of  Josh.  xi.  17).  The  middle 
and  southern  part  has  a  heavy  fertile 
CcBle-Syria.  red-brown  soil,  though  the  climate  is 
somewhat  harsher  than  on  the  western 
slope.  The  highest  point  is  not  far  from  Baalbek, 
whence  the  Orontes  flows  toward  the  north  and  the 
Litany  toward  the  south.  Antilebanon  b^^is  at 
the  south  with  the  mighty  Hermon.  North  of  the 
post-road  to  Damascus  the  range  spreads  out  fan- 
shaped  into  different  spurs  named  by  the  inhabi- 
tants the  "  Eastern,  Middle,  and  Western  Moun- 
tains." Damascus  lies  imder  the  "  eastern  "  range 
and  in  this  range  rises  the  Amana  of  II  Kings  v. 
12,  the  modem  Barada.  In  the  cuneiform  in- 
scriptions the  names  Amana  and  Senir  (cf.  Deut. 
iii.  9)  are  used  for  Antilebanon,  Senir  especially  for 
the  northern  part.  (H.  Guthk.) 

Bibuooeapht:  K  Baiedeker,  PaUaHm  and  Stfia,  London, 
1906;  J.  L.  Porter,  Fiv§  Y§an  in  Damaaau^  2  toU.,  ib. 
1865;  M.  C.  A.  Churohill.  Mount  Lebanon,  4  vols.,  ib. 
1662;  R.  F.  Burton  and  C.  F.  T.  Drake,  Untmlorod 
Syria,  ih.  1872;  O.  FraM.  Drei  Monate  am  lAbanon,  Stutt- 
gart, 1876;  Q.  Ebers  and  H.  Gutbe.  PaUuHna  in  B%id 
uni  Wort,  n  (1884),  1  iqq.;  C.  Diener,  Libanon,  Vienna. 
1888;  Leo  Anderlind,  in  ZDPV,  x  (1887).  89  eqq.;  M. 
Blanekenkom,  Bnhpickoluno  dm  Kreidmyototnt  in  Mittel- 
uni  Nord^yrion,  Gaaeel,  1890;  K  Ton  Fritaeh,  Zutnoffons 
HohUnfundiB  im  Lihamon,  Halle.  1893;  Q.  A.  Bmitb. 
Hiatarieal  Ooography  of  iko  Holy  Land,  London.  1897; 
DB,  iii.  90-92;  BB,  m,  2755-90:  JB,  til  66»-«67. 

LBBBABUS,  leb-bfus  (LBBBEUS).  See  Judas. 
LBBWnr  (UAFWIHB,  LBBUINUS):  English 
missionary  to  the  Frisians  and  Saxons  in  the  early 
part  of  Charlemagne's  reign.  He  went  to  Gregory, 
abbot  and  priest  at  Utrecht  (d.  776  or  776;  see 
Grbqort  or  Utrbcht),  who  sent  him  with  a  cer- 
tain Marcellinus  or  Marchelm  to  what  is  now  Ovei^ 
yssel.  Bfany  of  the  people  were  already  Christians 
and  Lebwin  built  a  church  at  Deventer  and  an- 
other on  the  west  side  of  the  Yssel.  Inroads  of 
heathen  Saxons  occurred,  however,  and  aooording 
to  Lebwin's  biographer,  Hucbald,  he  followed  them 
to  the  heart  of  their  country  and  appeared  at  their 
national  assembly  at  Marldo  on  the  lower  Weaer, 
clothed  in  his  priestly  vestments  with  a  crucifix  in 
one  hand  and  the  Gospel  in  the  other,  and  delivered 
a  threatening  address.  The  infuriated  warriors 
prepared  to  day  him  with  stakes  which  they  tore 
from  the  ground  and  sharpened;  but  an  old  noble 
took  his  part  and  the  outcome  was  that  Lebwin 
was  allowed  to  return  to  Deventer  and  work  there 
unmolested  the  rest  of  his  life.  He  is  the  patron 
saint  of  Deventer  and  is  honored  on  July  25  and 
Nov.  12.  The  story  of  a  missionary  of  the  same 
name  in  Flanders,  the  patron  of  Ghent,  who  is  said 
to  have  died  c.  660,  is  probably  an  imitation  of 
Lebwin  of  Deventer  by  one  FalsaHus  of  the  eleventh 
century.  (O.  ZOcKLBRf.) 

BiBUOoaAPHT:  Altfrid.  Viia  8.  Lindner  in  MOH,  StripL, 
ii  (1829),  406-406,  Eng.  trand.  in  H.  P.  Greaiy.  Ckwxk 
Hitory  qf  Brittany,  1068;  ASM,  ▼.  21.  36;  Hiatoire  Ul- 
tirain  do  la  Franeo,  vi  (1742),  210-221;  Rettbeis.  i^A  ii 
(1848),  406.  636-636;  DCB,  iii,  640-641;  DNB,  laaoL. 
333;   Hauok.  KD,  H  (1900).  34&n349. 

LBCHLBR,  lenaer,  GOTTHARD  VICTOR:  (Ger- 
man Lutheran;  b.  at  Kloster  Reichenbach,  near 
Freudenstadt  (40  m.  s.w.  of  Stuttgart).  WQrttem- 
berg,  Apr.  18,  1811;   d.  at  Leipsic  Dec.  26,  1888 


437 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lebanon 
~    -  .  Bible 


He  studied  at  the  gymnasium  at  Blaubeuren  1825- 
1829  and  at  the  University  of  Tubingen  1829-34,  and 
became  repetent  at  Blaubeuren  in  1835.  He  was 
transferred  to  Tubingen  in  the  same  capacity  in 
1838.  He  was  appointed  assistant  pastor  at  Waib- 
lingen  in  1841  and  dean  at  Knittlingen  in  1853, 
whence  he  was  called  to  Leipsic  in  1858  as  superin- 
tendent and  pastor  at  St.  Thomas'  and  professor  of 
theology  at  the  imiversity.  He  lectured  on  eccle- 
siastical history,  symbolics,  canon  law,  and  eccle- 
siastical polity,  and  also  on  certain  books  of  the 
New  Testament,  especially  Acts  and  the  Epistle  of 
James.  Later  he  became  a  member  of  the  Saxon 
diet,  and  in  1880  privy  ecclesiastical  councilor.  In 
1883  he  resigned  his  superintendency  and  pastorate 
in  order  to  devote  his  closing  years  entirely  to  his 
academic  and  literary  work.  Some  of  his  more  im- 
portant books  are :  Oeachtchte  des  englischen  Deismtu 
(Stuttgart,  1841);  D<i8  apostolische  und  nachapoa- 
toliscke  Zeitalter  (Haarlem,  1851;  Eng.  transl..  Apos- 
tolic and  PottrA-postoUc  Times,  2  vols.,  Edinburgh, 
1886);  Oesckichte  der  Preabyterialn  und  Synodalvet' 
fassung  (Leyden,  1854);  and  Johannes  von  Widif 
und  die  Vorgeschichte  der  Reformation  (2  vols.,  Leip- 
sic, 1873;  Eng.  transl.,  John  Widif  and  his  English 
Precwrsors,  2  vols.,  London,  1878,  new  ed.,  1884). 
In  collaboration  with  K.  Gerok  he  prepared  the 
conmientary  on  Acts  for  Lange's  Bibelwerk  (Biele- 
feld, 1862;  Eng.  transl..  New  York,  1869).  Other 
works  by  Lechler  are,  De  Thoma  Bradwardino 
(Leipsic,  1862);  Der  Kirchenstaai  und  die  Opposi- 
tion gegen  den  pdpsUichen  Absolutismus  im  Anfang 
des  xiv,  Jahrhunderts  (1870);  Urkundenfunde  des 
christlichen  AUertums  (2  parts,  1885-^);  and  Jo- 
hannes Hus  (Halle,  1890).  Theodor  Fickbr. 
Biblioorapbt:  G.  Meuael,  KinhlieheB  HandUrikon^  iv. 
201,  Leipdc,  1804. 

LECLERC,  le-clftn/,  JBAN.  See  Cucbicub,  Jo- 
hannes. 

LECOT,    le-cO',    VICTOR    LUCIEN    SULPICE: 

Cardinal;  b.  at  Montescourt  (40  m.  n.w.  of  Reims), 
Jan.  8,  1831 ;  d.  at  Chambery  Dec.  19,  1908.  He 
studied  at  the  Petit  S^minaire  of  Compidgne  and  at 
the  Grand  S^minaire  of  Beauvais,  and  was  appointed 
professor  at  the  Petit  S^minaire  of  Noyon  (Oise). 
During  the  Franco-German  war,  he  was  chaplain  in 
the  French  army,  and  after  being  parish  priest  of 
St.  Antoine  de  Compidgne  1872-86,  was  consecrated 
bishop  of  Dijon  in  the  latter  year.  In  1890  he  was 
enthroned  archbishop  of  Bordeaux,  and  in  1893 
was  created  cardinal  priest  of  Santa  Pudenziana. 
Bibuoorapht:  Der  Papet,  die  Regieruno  und  die  Vertoal- 
tuna  der  heUigen  Kireke  in  Rome,  pp.  186,  187,  188,  Mu- 
nich, 1904. 

LECTBRII:  Originally  a  high,  sloping  desk, 
either  single  or  double,  which  stood  in  the  middle 
of  the  choirs  of  churches,  and  was  used  as  a  rest 
for  the  antiphonarium  and  lectUmarium  from  which 
the  cantors  sang  the  antiphons  and  lessons.  In 
this  shape  it  is  retained  in  some  Roman  Catholic 
churches  at  the  present  day;  but  it  occurs  much 
more  frequently,  usually  in  the  shape  of  an  eagle 
with  outstretched  wings  and  frequently  of  brass,  in 
Anglican  churches  as  a  support  for  the  Bible  from 
which  the  lessons  are  read  at  morning  and  evening 


prayer.     In  this  latter  use  it  stands  as  a  rule  either 
beneath  or  just  outside  the  chancel  arch. 

LECTIOlf,  LECTIONART.  See  Evangeliari- 
uu;  Pbricope. 

LECTOR  ("Reader";  Gk.  Anagnims):  In  the 
early  Church,  an  ecclesiastic  in  minor  orders  ap- 
pointed to  read  to  the  congregation  from  the  Scrip- 
tures and  other  religious  writings.  From  the  very 
first  the  oral  reading  of  the  sacred  Scriptures  occu- 
pied a  large  place  in  religious  services,  and  for  a 
long  time  it  was  the  sole,  or  at  least  the  principal 
means  of  imparting  Scriptural  knowledge  to  the 
congregation.  Since  during  the  first  two  centuries 
Christianity  diffused  itself  especially  among  the 
poorer  classes,  and  the  congregations  were  fre- 
quently small,  it  was  not  always  easy  to  find  a 
competent  reader  of  the  sacred  books,  written  as 
they  were  without  spacing  between  the  words.  The 
position  of  the  lector  in  the  congregation  was  con- 
sequently an  important  one.  In  addition  to  read- 
ing, he  often  expounded  passages  of  Scriptiure,  es- 
pecially as  the  sermon  was  not  yet  an  official  duty. 
AlphiBUs,  lector  and  exorcist  at  Caesarea  (d.  303), 
was  ''  preacher  and  teacher  of  the  word  of  God  " 
at  that  place,  "  and  had  great  fortitude  before 
every  one"  (Eusebius,  De martyribus  Palestincs,  i.). 
During  the  early  centuries  the  lector  appears  to 
have  been  reckoned  with  the  spiritual  leaders  of 
the  congregations,  with  the  prophets,  evangelists, 
and  teachers  who  were  accustomed  to  conduct  di- 
vine worship.  Certain  expressions  in  liturgies  of 
the  later  time  reflect  the  ancient  estimate  of  the 
lector's  office;  thus  the  SUUuta  ecdesice  antigya 
(viii.)  observe  of  the  prospective  lector,  '*  he  is  to 
have  a  part  with  those  who  minister  the  word  of 
God,"  consequently  the  lector  occasionally  took 
precedence  of  the  deacon  and  subdeacon.  The  de- 
velopment of  polity  in  the  Church  catholic  from  the 
second  century  downward  was  unfavorable  to  the 
dignity  of  the  lector's  office.  The  bishop  or  the 
presbyter  was  accustomed  to  appropriate  the  ser- 
mon, and  sometimes  the  preacher  included  the 
Scriptural  reading  as  a  part  of  his  functions,  with 
the  result  that  the  lector  became  superfluous.  In 
the  ceremonially  ordered  public  worship  from  the 
fourth  century  onward,  the  reading  of  the  Gospel 
was  regularly  reserved  to  the  deacons  or  presby- 
ters, and  the  lector  came  to  be  reckoned  with  the 
derici  minores,  being  of  the  next  to  the  lowest  rank 
in  the  order  of  ecdesiastical  promotion  (Siridus, 
Ad  Himerium,  xiii.).  In  many  church  districts, 
children  and  even  catechumens  were  admitted  to 
the  lector's  rank,  an  impropriety  which  Justinian 
sought  to  correct.  The  ritual  for  the  installation 
of  the  lector  was  furnished  by  the  liturgies.  It 
usually  consisted  in  the  delivery  of  the  codex  of  the 
sacred  Scriptures.  In  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 
the  lector's  ordo  still  exists,  but  in  a  merely  formal 
sense.    See  Orders,  Holt.  H.  Acheus. 

Bibuookafht:  The  earlier  literature  is  given  in  A.  Har- 
naok,  Ueber  den  Ureprung  dee  LeklanUe  und  der  andeten 
niederen  Weihen,  in  Tl^.  iL  6  (1886).  67  eqq.  Connilt: 
Bingfaam,  Originee,  III.,  ▼.;  F.  Wieland,  Die  genetieehs 
Bntwiekelung  der  .  .  .  ordinee  mtnoret.  Rome,  1802. 

LEDA  bible.    See  Bible  Versions,  B,  IV.,  }  9. 


Itetroy 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


438 


LEE,  ANN:  Foundrefls  of  the  sect  of  Shakers 
in  America;  b.  in  Manchester,  Eng.,  Feb.  28,  1736; 
d.  at  WatervUet,  N.  Y.,  Sept.  8,  1784.  Her  father 
was  a  blacksmith  and  gave  her  no  education,  but 
put  her  at  work  in  a  cotton-factory;  afterward  she 
served  as  cook  in  the  Manchester  Infirmary.  In 
1758  she  married  Abraham  Standerin  (so  spelled  in 
the  register,  but  usually  given  as  Standley  or  Stan- 
ley), a  blacksmith,  by  whom  she  had  four  children, 
who  died  in  infancy.  In  1758  she  had  joined  the 
Manchester  society  called  the  "  Shaking  Quakers," 
which  had  seceded  from  the  Society  of  Friends  and 
was  under  the  leadership  of  James  Wardley.  Be- 
ing naturally  excitable,  she  was  quickly  affected 
by  the  religious  exercises  of  the  society,  and  began 
to  practise  austerities,  to  have  visions,  and  to  make 
revelations.  But  it  was  not  until  1770  that  she  had 
the  epoch-making  revelation  against  marriage,  and 
began  her  "  testimony  against  all  lustful  gratifica- 
tions as  the  source  and  foundation  of  htmian  cor- 
ruption and  misery,''  a  course  which  led  to  her  im- 
prisonment. It  was  then  that  Christ  appeared  to 
her  in  a  vision,  and  revealed  to  her  that  she  was  the 
second  incarnation  of  Christ,  and  thus  the  head  of 
all  women,  as  he  was  the  head  of  all  men.  From 
that  time  forth  she  was  called  by  her  followers 
"  Mother  Ann,"  and  believed  by  them  to  be  per- 
fectly righteous. 

Henceforth  she  claimed  to  be  directed  by  revela- 
tions and  visions.  In  1774  she  came  with  her  fol- 
lowers to  America,  and  finally  settled,  in  the  spring 
of  1776,  at  Niskeyuna,  later  WatervUet,  near  Al- 
bany, N.  Y.  In  1775  or  1776  she  and  her  husband 
parted.  Shaker  documents  asserting  that  he  de- 
serted her  after  having  been  tenderly  nursed  through 
a  dangerous  illness.  During  the  Revolutionary  War 
she  was  accused  of  treasonable  correspondence  with 
the  British  and  cast  into  prison,  but  was  released 
by  Gov.  Clinton,  1777.  At  a  later  period  (1780) 
she  was  again  imprisoned  for  refusing  to  take  the 
oath  of  allegiance  to  the  State  of  New  York,  which 
she  could  not  conscientiously  do,  but  was  released 
without  trial  by  the  same  governor.  Persecution 
had  the  usual  effect  of  increasing  the  numbers  of 
the  persecuted.  Taking  advantage  of  a  revival  of 
religion  (1779),  she  gathered  many  converts,  and 
in  1780  removed  the  community  to  New  Lebanon, 
Columbia  County,  N.  Y.  From  1781  to  1783  she 
went  through  New  England  on  a  missionary  tour. 
Her  influence  is  still  felt  by  the  Shakers,  who  revere 
her  memory.  See  Communism,  II.,  10. 
Biblioorapbt:  Anna  White  and  Leila  S.  Taylor,  Shaker- 
inn,  Ita  Meanino  and  Menage,  pp.  13-67,  ColumbuB, 
Ohio,  1904;  T.  Dwi«ht,  TraveU  in  New  England,  iii.  149 
aqq..  New  York.  1822;   DNB,  zxzii.  343. 


LEE,  BENJAMm  FRANELIH:  African  Metho- 
dist Episcopal  bishop;  b.  at  Bridgeton,  N.  J.,  Sept. 
18,  1841.  He  was  educated  at  Wilberforoe  Uni- 
versity (A.B.,  1872),  where  he  was  professor  of 
homiletics  (1873-75)  and  president  (1876-84). 
From  1884  to  1892  he  was  editor  of  The  Christian 
Recorder,  and  in  the  latter  year  was  elected  bishop 
of  his  denomination. 

LEE,  FREDERICK  GEORGE:  Church  of  Eng- 
land; b.  at  Thame  (13  m.  e.  of  Oxford),  Oxford- 
shire, Jan.  6,  1832;   d.  at  Lambeth,  London,  Jan. 


23,  1902.  He  studied  at  St.  Edmund's  HaU, 
Oxford  (D.C.L.,  1864),  and  was  curate  of  Sunning- 
well,  Berks,  1854-66,  then  for  several  years  dome- 
tic  chaplain  to  the  duke  of  Leeds  and  earl  of  Morton, 
while  from  1867  almost  until  his  death  he  was  vicar 
of  All  Saints',  Lambeth.  He  was  a  High-church- 
man, and  shortly  before  his  death  was  received  into 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  He  was  a  prolific  au- 
thor, among  his  principal  works  being:  The  Beauty 
cfHolineee  (London,  IS59);  Notitia LUurgica  (IS^' : 
The  ValidUyo/UieHolyOrderaof  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land Maintained  and  Vindicated  (1869);  The  Chu- 
tian  Doctrine  of  Prayer  for  the  Departed  (1872);  Tht 
Other  World:  or,  Glimpeee  of  the  SupemaJhmd  (2 
vols.,  1875);  Hietorical  Sketches  of  the  Reformatm 
(1879);  The  Church  under  Queen  Elizabeth  (2  vols^ 
1880);  History  and  Antiquities  of  the  Churdi  (f 
Thame  (1883);  Reginald  Pole,  Cardinal  Archbishop 
of  Cantabury  (1887);  The  Church  of  Haddenham, 
Bucks  (1888);  King  Edward  the  Sixth,  Supremt 
Head  (1889);  The  Sinless  Conception  of  the  Mother 
of  God  (1891);  and  The  Church  of  SL  Mary,  Long 
Crendon  (1891).  He  compiled  A  Glossary  of  Litur- 
gical and  Ecclesiastical  Terms  (London,  1877),  while 
among  the  numerous  works  which  be  edited  v«re 
the  second  and  subsequent  editions  of  the  Dtredo- 
rium  Anglicanum  (London,  1865)  and  its  abridg- 
ment, Manuale  Clericorum  (1874);  Altar  Servia 
Book,  according  to  the  Use  of  the  United  Church  (( 
England  and  Ireland  (1867);  and  The  Communm 
Office  of  the  Church  of  Scotland  (Aberdeen, 


LEE,  JESSE:  Founder  of  Methodism  in  Xev 
England;  b.  in  Prince  George  County,  Md.,  Mat. 
12,  1758;  d.  at  Hillsboro,  Md.,  Sept.  12,  1816.  He 
removed  to  North  Carolina  1777,  preached  his  first 
sermon  in  1779,  entered  the  itinerant  ministry  in 
1783,  and  during  the  next  six  years  labored  in 
North  Carolina,  Virginia,  Maryland,  and  New  Jer- 
sey. In  1789  he  was  sent  by  conference  to  the 
Stamford  circuit.  Conn.  For  the  next  eleven  years 
he  traveled  throughout  the  New  England  States. 
preaching  often  in  bams,  private  boiues,  or  od 
highways.  In  1796  he  became  assistant  to  Bishop 
Asbury.  He  returned  to  the  South  in  1800. 
Bibuoorapht:  L.  M.  Lee,  Hfe  and  Timee  cf  Jeam  Ut, 
Richmond,  1848;  W.  B.  Spngue,  Annate  ef  the  Amerieat 
Fulpit,  vii.  80^7.  New  York.  1861;  J.  M.  Backiey. 
American  Chvreh  HiUory  Seriee,  vol.  ▼.,  ib.  1896i 

LEE,  SAMUEL:  English  Orientalist:  b.  at 
Longnor  (8  m.  s.  of  Shrewsbury),  Shropshire,  Hay 
14,  1783,  d.  at  Barley  (16  m.  n.n.e.  of  Hertford). 
HertfordJshire,  Dec.  16,  1852.  He  received  his  ele- 
mentary training  at  a  charity  school,  and  at  the 
age  of  twelve  was  apprenticed  to  a  Shrewsbury 
carpenter.  While  working  at  his  trade  he  became 
interested  in  the  study  of  languages,  and  before 
he  was  twenty-five  he  had  learned,  without  a 
teacher,  Latin,  Greek,  Hebrew,  Aramaic,  Samari- 
tan, Syriac,  Persian,  and  Hindustani.  To  these 
languages  he  subsequently  added  a  dosen  others 
The  accidental  loss  of  his  tools  compelled  him  to 
look  for  other  means  of  a  livelihood,  and  in  1810  be 
became  master  of  Bowdler's  Foundation  School 
Shrewsbury.  In  1813,  under  the  auspices  of  the 
Church  Missionary  Society,  he  entered  Queen's 
Coll^;e,  Cambridge  (B.A.,  1818;  M.A.,  1819;  B.D. 


^s^ 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Iiefiroy 


1827;  D.D.,  1833).  In  1819  he  was  appointed  pro- 
fessor of  Arabic  at  Cambridge,  and  from  1831  to 
1848  was  regins  professor  of  Hebrew.  He  was  also 
a  canon  in  Bristol  Cathedral  after  1831,  vicar  of 
Banwell,  Somerset,  1831-38,  and  rector  of  Barley, 
Hertfordshire,  183i8-52.  His  publications  include 
editions  of  the  Scriptures  in  Arabic,  Coptic,  Per- 
sian, Syriac,  and  Hindustani;  A  Grammar  of  the 
Hebrew  Language  (London,  1827);  Prolegomena  to 
Bagster's  Polyglot  Bible  (1829);  Six  Sermons  on 
the  Study  of  the  Holy  Scnpturea  (1830);  A  Brief 
History  of  the  Church  of  Abyssinia  (in  S.  Gobat's 
Journal,  1834);  a  translation  of  Job,  with  com- 
mentary (1837);  A  Lexicon,  Hdjrew,  Chaldee,  and 
English  (1840);  and  An  Inquiry  into  the  Nature, 
Progress,  and  End  of  Prophecy  (1849). 

Biblioobapht:  Alice  M.  Lee,  A  Scholar  of  a  Paat  Oenera- 
Hon;  .  .  .  Memoir  of  .  .  .  Samuel  Lm,  London,  1896; 
DNB,  xzzu.  378. 


LEE,  WILLIAM:  Church  of  Scotland;  b.  in 
Edinburgh  Nov.  6, 1817;  d.  in  Glasgow  Oct.  10, 1886. 
His  father  was  John  Lee,  principal  of  the  Univer- 
sity of  Edinburgh  and  professsor  of  divinity.  He 
was  educated  at  the  high  school  and  the  Univer- 
sity of  Ekiinburgh,  and  in  1842  was  chaplain  to  the 
marquis  of  Bute,  lord  high  conunissioner  to  the 
General  Assembly  of  the  Church  of  Scotland.  In 
the  following  year  he  was  appointed  to  the  parish 
of  Roxbui^h,  where  he  ministered  with  much  faith- 
fulness and  acceptance  for  over  thirty  years.  Pas- 
toral duties  did  not  prevent  him  from  engaging  in 
literary  labor,  or  from  taking  an  active  part  in  the 
general  work  of  the  church  and  in  the  business  of 
its  Supreme  Court.  During  his  Roxburgh  minis- 
try he  edited  his  father's  Lectures  on  the  History  of 
the  Church  of  Scotland  (2  vols.,  Edinburgh,  1860); 
contributed  to  Cassell's  Bible  Educator,  and  pub- 
lished The  Increase  of  Faith  (1867),  and  The  Days 
of  the  Son  of  Man  (1874).  In  1874  his  learning  and 
ability  led  to  his  appointment  by  the  crown  to  the 
chair  of  church  history  in  the  University  of  Glas- 
gow. He  devoted  himself  with  much  zeal  to  the 
work  of  his  classes,  and  to  the  weU-being  of  his 
students,  but  found  time  also  to  continue  his  con- 
tributions to  literature,  his  most  noteworthy  wri- 
tings during  this  later  period  being  Scripture  Biog- 
raphies in  the  Bible  Educator.       Henbt  Cowan. 

LEEHHOF,  16n'hef,  FREDERK  VAN:  Dutch 
Protestant;  b.  at  Middelburg  Aug.,  1647;  d.  at 
ZwoUe  (52  m.  e.n.e.  of  Amsterdam)  1712.  In  1670 
be  became  pastor  of  the  Flemish  congregation  in 
Abbeville  in  Picardy;  in  1672  he  was  called  to 
Nieuwvliet.  In  1678-79  he  was  preacher  at  the 
extraordinary  embassy  of  the  general  states  at  the 
court  of  Louis  XIV.,  but  returned  to  his  native 
country  in  1679  as  court  preacher  to  Albertina 
Agnes,  the  widow  of  the  Frisian  stadtholder.  In 
1680  he  became  preacher  at  Velzen,  and  in  1681 
at  Zwolle.  He  was  an  adherent  of  (Cartesian  Coc- 
oeianism;  and  in  the  history  of  Dutch  Protestant- 
ism he  is  known  in  connection  with  the  contro- 
versy produced  by  his  book.  Den  Hemel  op  aarden; 
of  een  korte  en  klaare  beschrijving  van  de  waare  en 
stantvastige  blydschap  (Zwolle,  1703),  which  he 
wrote  to  refute  those  who  sought  the  test  of  Chris- 


tianity in  a  morbid  gloom.  He  maintained  that 
the  true  service  of  God  must  lead  to  a  pure  enjoy- 
ment of  true  happiness  on  earth.  On  being  ac- 
cused of  Spinozism  and  Hattemism  (see  Hattem, 
PoNTiAAN  van),  he  defended  himself  in  another 
work.  Den  hemd  op  aarden,  opgehelderd  van  de 
nevelen  van  misverstand  en  vooroordeelen  (Zwolle, 
1704).  In  the  course  of  the  ensuing  controversy 
the  entire  Dutch  Church  was  thrown  into  a  tui^ 
moil,  and  finally  Van  Leenhof  was  deposed  by  the 
Synod  of  Overyssel  in  1708.  The  consistory  and 
magistrates  of  Zwolle,  as  well  as  the  estates  of 
Overyssel,  did  not  acknowledge  the  legality  of  his 
deposition,  but  to  preserve  peace  Van  Leenhof  vol- 
untarily resigned  his  charge  Jan.  1,  1711.  Other 
works  are,  De  keten  der  bijbdsche  godgeleerdheid  (2 
parts,  Middelburg,  1678);  Kort  onderwijs  in  de  chr. 
rdigie  volgens  d'ordre  van  de  H.  Schrift  (4th  ed., 
1680);  De  geest  en  conscientie  des  menschen  in  hoar 
eygen  wezen  en  werkingen  eenvoudiglijk  verklaart  (3d 
ed.,  Amsterdam,  1683).  (S.  D.  van  Vben.) 

Biblioobapht:  G.  F.  Jeniohen,  Hietoria  Spinonsmi  Leen- 
hoflani,  Leipaic,  1707;  A.  Ypey  and  I.  J.  Dermout,  G«- 
echiedenie  tUr  nederlandeche  hervormde  Kerk,  iii.  240  aqq., 
4  vols.,  Breda,  1819-27;  E.  J.  Lorgion,  De  nederlandthe 
hervormde  Kerk  in  Frieeland^  pp.  216-223,  GroniogBii, 
1848;  L.  A.  van  Langeraad,  De  nederlandedte  Ambae- 
eade-Kapel  U  Parija,  i.  238-245,  The  HagHBp  1893  (givee 
sources  and  further  literature). 

LEFEVRE  D'^TAPLES,  le-fdvr"  d^'iA'pl, 
JACQUES.  See  Faber  (Fabri)  Stafulbnbis, 
Jacobus. 

LEFFIHGWELL,  CHARLES  WESLEY:  Prot- 
estant Episcopalian;  b.  at  Ellington,  Conn.,  Dec. 
5,  1840.  He  studied  at  Union  College  and  at  Knox 
College,  Galesburg,  111.  (graduated  1862).  He  was 
vice-principal  of  a  military  school  at  Poughkeepsie, 
N.  Y.,  1862-65,  and  then  studied  theology  at  Nash- 
otah  Theologittd  Seminary,  Nashotah,  Wis.,  being 
graduated  in  1867.  He  was  ordered  deacon  and 
ordained  priest  in  1867,  and  was  curate  of  St.  James', 
Chicago,  1867-68.  In  1868  he  established  at  Knox- 
ville.  111.,  St.  Mary's  School  for  girls,  of  which  he 
has  since  been  rector,  as  well  as  of  St.  Alban's 
School  for  boys,  which  he  founded  at  Knozville  in 
1890.  Since  1879  he  has  been  editor  of  the  weekly 
Living  Church,  an  organ  of  the  High-church  party. 

LEFROY,  WILLIAM:  Church  of  England;  b.  at 
Dublin  Nov.  6, 1836;  d.  at  Zermatt  (72  m.  e.s.e.  of 
Geneva),  Switzerland,  Aug.  12, 1909.  He  studied  at 
Trinity  College,  Dublin  (B.  A.,  1863),  was  ordered  dear 
con  in  1864,  and  ordained  priest  in  1865.  He  was 
curate  of  Christ  Church,  Cork,  1864-66  and  perpetual 
curate  of  St.  Andrew's,  Liverpool,  1866-89.  After 
1889  he  was  dean  of  Norwich,  and  also  vicar  of  St. 
Mary  in  the  Marsh,  Norwich,  after  1903.  He  was 
honorary  canon  of  Liverpool  1880-^7,  rural  dean  of 
South  Liverpool  1884-87,  proctor  for  the  archdear 
conry  of  Warrington  1886,  and  archdeacon  of  War- 
rington 1887-89.  He  was  Donnellan  lectiurer  at 
Trinity  College,  Dublin,  1887-88,  and  was  regarded 
as  the  foimder  of  the  Clergy  Sustentation  Fund. 
Among  his  writings,  special  mention  may  be  made 
of  his  Lecture  on  Scepticism  (Liverpool,  1868); 
Plea  for  the  Old  Catholic  Movement  (London,  1875); 
Pleadings  for  Christ  (1878);    The  Christian  Mini&- 


I,6ffat«a  and  Nunolo*,  Papal 


Titgandaij 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


440 


try  (1S90);  The  ChrisUan'a  StaH  (1S90);  The  Chris- 
Han's  Dutiee  (1891) ;  The  Christian's  ResponstbUiiits 
(1892);  AUiheCaariselofGod{\%9Z)\  AgoniaChrisli 
(1893);  Lectures  an  Ecclesiastical  History  (1896); 
HisUny  of  Norwich  Cathedral  (1897);  and  Christian 
Science  contrasted  with  Christian  Faith  (1903). 
Bibuoobapht:  B.  B.  Oould,  In  Memoriam:  Tht  Very  Rtn, 
WHUam  Lefroy,  London.  1909. 

LEGATES  AND  NU1TCI08,  PAPAL:  Represent- 
atives of  the  pope.  These  were  present  at  all  the 
ecumenical  councils  in  the  East  except  the  fifth 
(Constantinople,  563),  but  neither  held  the  actual 
presidency  nor  exercised  a  really  decisive  influence. 
What  they  were  able  to  accomplish  de- 
Baily  pended  upon  the  position  of  tluair  prin- 
Papal  Rep-  cipal  at  the  moment,  and  especially  his 
resentatives.  relation  to  the  emperor.  Besides  the 
pope,  they  frequently  represented  Ro- 
man synods  also,  or,  in  a  word,  the  whole  Roman 
Church.  In  addition  to  these  delegates  for  a 
special  purpose,  from  the  pontificate  of  Leo  I. 
(440-461)  until  at  least  the  end  of  the  seventh  cen- 
tury, the  popes,  like  other  patriarehs,  had  perma- 
nent representatives  at  the  imperial  court,  known 
as  apocrisiarii  or  responsales  (see  Apocrisiarius); 
but  these  were  simply  intermediaries,  and  had  no 
jurisdiction  in  the  later  sense.  The  canons  of  Sar- 
dica  (343)  conceded  to  the  pope  a  superior  juris- 
diction, which  was  fully  recogi^sed  on  the  part  of 
the  State  by  the  constitution  of  Valentinian  III. 
(445).  On  the  basis  of  this,  from  the  end  of  the 
fourth  centiuy  the  popes  entrusted  the  exercise  of 
such  jurisdiction  to  individual  bishops  (e.g.,  those 
of  Thessalonica  and  Aries),  who  were  designated 
as  apostolic  vicars.  In  the  succeeding  centuries 
other  representatives  appear  for  the  decision  of 
definite  questions,  both  ecclesiastical  and  political. 
These  were  known  as  missi  or  legati  apostolicfB  sedis, 
in  a  few  cases  as  legati  a  latere.  Their  position  be- 
came more  important  with  the  rise  of  the  papal 
power  from  Gregory  VII.  onward.  Gregory  em- 
phasised this  by  inserting  in  the  episcopal  oath  of 
fealty  (where  it  remains  to  this  day)  the  clause 
''  I  will  treat  with  honor  a  Roman  legate  going  or 
coming  and  assist  him  in  his  necessities.''  Leg- 
ates were  now  more  frequently  employed,  some- 
times empowered  for  whole  countries,  and  endowed 
with  great  powers,  including  even  that  of  a  concur- 
rent jurisdiction  as  ordinaries,  in  the  pope's  name, 
with  the  bishops. 

The  legatine  system  was  formulated  and  devel- 
oped in  the  decretak,  and  the  different  classes  are 
definitely  distinguished.     (1)  The  legatus  natus  was 
one  to  whom  the  legatine  authority 
Devek>p-    came  ex  officio  as  the  inciunbent  of  a 
mentand   special  arehiepiscopal  see  (e.g.,  Gan- 
Classifica-  terbury).     His  powers  were  originally 
tion.       those  of  legates  in  general,  especially 
that  of  concurrent  jurisdiction  with  the 
bishops  of  all  the  dioceses  in  his  province;    he  ap- 
pears as  ordinariiLS  ordinariorunty  competent  to  de- 
cide in  the  first  instance  cases  brought  before  him 
by  the  parties.     With  the  sixteenth  century  began 
a  gradual  disappearance  of  these  powers,  which 
finally  left  little  besides  the  bare  title.    Tlie  king 
of  Hungary  claimed  the  position  of  a  Ugaius  naius^ 


and  a  similar  claim  on  the  part  of  the  king  of  Sicily 
was  the  f oimdation  of  the  so-called  rnonarchia  Si- 
cula.  (2)  The  class  called  legati  missi  in  the  de- 
cretak were  sometimes  entitled  nuncii  apostoUd 
by  the  writers  of  the  thirteenth  century,  and  more 
often  in  the  papal  briefs  of  the  fourteenth,  until  the 
title  of  nimdo  became  the  regular  one.  They  were 
sent  out  on  a  special  mission,  exercising  an  ordinary 
jurisdiction  in  the  territory  affected,  and  until  the 
sixteenth  century  concurrently  with  the  bishops. 
They  had  the  power  to  decide  many  but  not  all  re- 
served cases  (see  Casus  Rebervati)  without  qiecial 
faculties,  and  to  grant  indulgences  not  extending 
beyond  one  year.  Red  robes,  a  white  horse,  and 
golden  spurs  were  among  their  insignia.  (3)  Leg- 
ates a  latere,  sent  "  from  the  (pope's)  side,"  i.e.,  car- 
dinals, exercised  practically  the  authority  of  the 
pope  in  person,  on  the  analogy  of  the  senatore  sent 
out  by  the  later  emperors  to  represent  them.  Their 
ordinary  jurisdiction  in  a  province  enabled  them 
to  suspend  the  entire  authority  of  a  bishop,  to  ab- 
solve from  all  reserved  cases,  to  confirm  the  elec- 
tion of  archbishops  and  bishops  (even  in  the  case 
of  exempt  sees),  to  take  precedence  of  all  bishops 
and  preside  at  councils,  and  to  use  the  insignia  of  a 
cross  carried  before  them  and  a  canopy  over  them. 
They  were  not,  however,  permitted  to  depose 
bishops,  to  divide  or  unite  dioceses,  or  to  interfere 
with  elective  dignities  in  cathedral  and  coU^iate 
churehes.  Distinguished  from  these  plenipotentiary 
legates  a  latere  were  certain  extraordinary  ones  sent 
on  a  special  mission,  as  to  convoke  a  council  or 
deal  with  a  sovereign.  Nuncios  were  occasionally 
sent  out  with  the  powers  of  legates  a  latere. 

Many  complaints  were  made  against  the  legates, 
and  led  to  a  substantial  alteration  of  the  system. 
Leo  X.  at  the  Lateran  Council  of  1515  ordered  the 

cardinal-legates  to  reside  in  the  places 

Modem     to  which  they  were  sent  and  attend  to 

Modifica-   their  duties.    The  Council  of  Trent 

tions.       (session  xxiv.,  chap.  20)  liberated  the 

episcopal  jurisdiction  from  legatine 
interference,  and  the  Congregation  of  the  Councfl 
subsequently,  on  the  basis  of  this  decree,  decided 
numerous  cases  against  legates.  The  Council,  how- 
ever, allowed  them  to  share  with  the  bishops  in 
investigating  the  canonical  requirements  for  cathe- 
dral dignitaries  and  still  conceded  to  them  an  ap- 
pellate jurisdiction  (ib.  chap.  vii.).  The  altered 
conditions  after  the  Reformation  led  to  the  estab- 
lishment of  permanent  nunciatures.  Such  had 
existed  at  the  courts  of  Vienna  and  Warsaw  from 
the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century,  but  here 
they  were  political  in  origin.  Others  were  now  es- 
tablished— at  Cologne  for  the  Rhine  district  in 
1582,  at  Lucerne  for  Protestant  Switzerland  and 
southwestern  Germany  in  1586,  and  at  Brussels  for 
the  Netherlands  in  1600.  Their  work  was  to  a 
large  extent  the  supervision  of  missionary  efforts, 
though  their  ordinary  faculties  permitted  them  to 
concur  with  the  episcopal  jurisdiction  in  such  parts 
of  their  territory  as  had  remained  Roman  Catholic. 
In  modem  times  the  Roman  €!atholic  Church  re- 
gards the  system  of  the  decretak  as  still  legally  in 
force.  Nuncios  are  now  in  practise  sent  much 
oftener  than  legates  a  latere,  and  there  is  a  consid- 


441 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


I«effatoa  and  Kunoios,  Pai»al 
Ii6ffend,  Leffendary 


erable  number  of  permanent  nunciatures.  Accord- 
ing to  the  order  of  precedence  adopted  at  the  Con- 
gress of  Vienna,  legates  and  nuncios  are  considered 
by  secular  governments  to  have  the  rank  of  am- 
bassadors. This  recognition  of  the  pope's  right  to 
send  diplomatic  representatives  formerly  rested,  of 
course,  partly  on  his  position  as  a  temporal  sover- 
eign; since  1870  it  has  been  based  not  upon  his 
still  asserted  claims  to  that  position,  but  upon  his 
undoubted  social  importance  as  the  absolute  spir- 
itual ruler  of  so  many  millions.  The  recognition, 
however,  extends  only  to  the  matters  in  which  the 
nuncio  is  accredited  to  the  government,  not  to  the 
internal  ecclesiastical  matters  for  the  regulation  of 
which  he  holds  powers  from  the  pope.  In  a  word, 
the  attitude  of  modem  non-CathoUc  governments 
toward  this  matter  is  the  same  which  has  been  as- 
simied  in  the  making  of  Concordats. 

(J.  F.  VON  SCHULTB  fO 
Biblxoorafht:  P.  A.  Gambanis,  Tradaiua  de  o^fleio  algus 
auetaritaU  leoaH  <2e  latere,  Venice.  1621;  S.  F.  de  la  Torre, 
De  auetoritate,  gradu  el  ierminie  Upati  a  kUere,  Rome,  1056; 
L.  Thomaaflin,  Vetue  et  twva  eedeeia  diaeiplina,  part  !.. 
book  ii..  chape.  107-106.  117-118.  3  vole.,  Paris.  1728; 
A.  J.  Binterim,  Denkwiirdigkeiten,  iii  162  aqq.,  Maini, 
1826;  P.  Hinechiufl,  KirdtenredU,  i.  408-499.  Berlin.  1870; 
J.  F.  Ton  Schttlte.  Die  SteUung  der  KoruUien,  PApete  und 
Bieehi^e,  pp.  64  sqq..  Prague.  1871. 

LEGEHD,  LEGENDARY:  In  present  usage 
**  legend  "  denotes  almost  any  fictitious  narrative, 
ancient  or  modem,  or  a  recital  of  true  history  dis- 
torted by  the  fancy  or  subjectively  colored.  It  is 
well,  however,  to  confine  the  term  to  the  religious 
domain,  as  many  recent  literary  historians  have 
done.  Legends  and  saints  belong  together.  Only 
in  so  far  as  heroes,  ancient  and  modem  alike,  enjoy 
a  sort  of  saint-worship,  may  one  speak  of  legend  in 
respect  to  them;  and  since  worship  of  saints  is  not 
restricted  to  the  Christian  medieval  era,  one  may 
transfer  the  idea  of  legend  to  other  religions.  This 
usage  is  modem.  About  1180  Johannes  Beleth  (De 
divinia  officiis,  Ix.,  in  MPL,  ccii.  66;  cf.  William 
Durand,  Rationale  divinorum  officiorum,  VI.,  i.  29) 
calls  the  book  "  which  treats  of  the  life  and  death 
of  confessors  and  is  read  at  their  festivals  "  a  leg- 
endary. This  presupposes  the  term  Ugenda  (i.e., 
"  things  to  be  read  ")»  which,  however,  first  ap- 
pears in  the  thirteenth  century  and  more  frequently 
in  the  fifteenth.  Originally  distinguished  from  the 
jtaanones  of  martyrs,  Ugenda  or  Ugendarii  later  in- 
cluded the  entire  aggregate  of  the  lives  and  pas^ 
sions  of  the  saints;  and  their  ecclesiastical  use  in 
public  reading  or  chanting  receded  in  favor  of  pri- 
vate edification. 

Christian  legend  is  as  old  as  Christianity  itself. 
Like  a  wild  vine  it  soon  encircled  the  Gospel  and 
created  an  apocryphal  history  of  the  apostles, 
wherein  they  are  heroes  at  once  of  asceticism  and  of 
martyrdom.  It  transformed  genuine  martyrology 
according  to  the  taste  of  later  times  and  created  in- 
credible monastic  tales.  The  products  of  the  fourth 
and  fifth  centuries  constitute  the  foundation  story, 
the  common  fund  of  Christendom's  hagiography,  but 
legendary  creation  continued,  finding  new  motives 
in  every  new  saint,  in  every  translation  of  relics,  and 
in  every  church  foundation. 

Of  literary  affinity  with  fiction,  legend  aims  to 


entertain,  but  likewise  to  edify  along  definite  re- 
ligious and  moral  lines.  The  hero  is  supposed  to 
serve  as  a  pattern  of  beneficence,  renunciation,  self- 
sacrifice,  constancy,  and  triumph  over  the  devil. 
The  invisible  is  to  appear  tangibly — God's  provi- 
dence toward  the  devout,  the  hearing  of  their 
prayers,  the  reward  of  the  righteous,  and  the  pun- 
ishment of  the  impious.  Miracle  displays  God's 
intervention  in  its  broadest  light.  In  seU-defense 
the  legend  also  appropriates  rationalizing  traits, 
and  seeks  to  enhance  its  credibility  by  proclaiming 
the  refutation  and  punishment  of  doubters. 

Legend  borrows  its  materials  first  of  all  from 
historic  reminiscence,  but  adorns  the  same  and 
combines  it  with  motives  of  its  own.  The  fancy  is 
ever  creating  new  forms  by  transferring  details 
from  place  to  place  and  from  one  person  to  another. 
The  same  motive  often  occurs  in  an  Indian  myth, 
a  tale  of  the  Thousand  and  One  Nights,  and  a  me- 
dieval legend  of  the  saints.  From  this  fact  Grimm's 
school  inferred  a  common  Indo-Germanic  origin. 
Of  late  there  has  been  talk  of  literary  migrations. 
Usener's  theory  of  myths  which  have  undergone  a 
Christian  transformation  has  been  sharply  criticised 
by  Delehaye;  the  points  of  contact  are  frequently  of 
a  purely  external  kind,  and  the  features  reiUly  com- 
mon are  story-telling  motives. 

The  legend  was  early  incorporated  into  the  lit- 
uigy.  Records  of  martyrdom  were  collected  to  be 
read  aloud  as  early  as  by  Eusebius,  and  afterward 
Palladius,  Rufinus,  and  others  gathered  ascetic 
narratives  for  the  edification  of  monks.  From 
these  beginnings  arose  the  great  collective  works 
(see  Acta  Marttrum,  Acta  Sanctorum).  Leg- 
ends were  worked  over  into  sermons  (Symeon  Meta^ 
phrastes,  Sermanea  de  sandia),  and  also  laigely  util- 
ized as  poetry  (Prudentius,  Peristephanan;  Paulinus 
of  Nola,  Carmina  natalicia).  In  the  medieval  era 
the  rhapsody  of  the  Madonna  and  the  praise  of 
heroic  renunciation  occur  as  the  counterparts  of 
secular  minstrelsy  and  chivalrous  adventures.  The 
fourteenth  and  fifteenth  centuries  turned  the  entire 
Legenda  aturea  (see  Jacobus  da  Varagimb)  into 
verse  and  found  edification  in  miracle  plays.  Graph- 
ic art,  especially  church  painting,  considered  its 
most  important  task  to  be  the  illustration  of 
legend.  Thus  the  legend  enveloped  the  whole  in- 
tellectual life  of  the  Middle  Ages. 

In  the  later  Roman  Catholidsm  l^ends  stiU 
have  a  place,  though  the  critics  have  taken  much 
away  from  them.  Luther  defamed  legends  as  LU- 
genden  ("lie-gends"),  yet  he  appreciated  their 
practical  utility.  Hence  an  Evangelical  history 
of  martyrs  could  thrive  on  Lutheran  soil,  whereas 
Calvinism  assumed  an  attitude  of  gruff  rejection. 
While  the  Enlightenment  saw  nothing  in  legends 
but  superstition  and  priestcraft,  romantidsm  found 
in  them  the  revelation  of  the  deepest  secrets  of  the 
popiilar  soul.  Modem  philological  and  historical 
investigation  has  discovered  rich  mines  in  this  field. 
Indeed  ecclesiastical  history  itself  is  taking  more 
and  more  note  of  the  fact  that  the  l^end,  with 
ceremonial  and  custom,  offers  the  best  embodiment 
of  the  popular  theology.  E.  yon  DoBSCHt)TZ. 

Bibliography:    J.  G.  von  Herder.  Werke,  ed.  B.  Suphan. 
zvi.  387-308.  xxviu.  167-246.  31  vols..  Berlin.  1877-93; 


I<6italt 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


44i3 


K.  G.  Vot&l  in  HUlariaehrthMohQUdtt  Ahhandlungen,  iii 
(1824),  141-170;  Migne,  DietUmnoire  dm  UgendM,  Paru, 
1865;  id«m,  Dietiofmmn  de9  apoeryp^^f  ib.  1866;  H. 
von  Eioken,  Omekkhis  uni  8y9itm  d^r  miUdaUgrlidun 
WtUanaehauuno,  Stuttgnrt,  1887;  F.  G6ma,  in  Hm- 
torUdie  ZtiUekrift,  Jvii  (1887).  212-221;  J.  J.  I.  von  DOI- 
linger,  Akademiadu  Tortrdoe,  I  180  iqq..  Bonn,  1800; 
A.  Harnftok.  in  FroUgtaniUchn  Jakrtmdi,  \xr  (1800), 
240-266;  Mrs.  A.  Jamaw>n.  Saend  and  Leoendary  Art, 
London,  1800;  idem.  LtgendM  of  the  Madonna,  LeoendM  of 
SainU  and  Martyrs,  LtQend*  of  the  Monaatie  Orders,  3 
vols..  London,  1003;  A.  ElirliArd,  AUchrietliehe  Liieraiur, 
i.  630  aqq.,  Fraibuiif,  1804;  A.  Maury,  Crayaneea  et  U~ 
gendee  du  moyenrdoe,  Paris,  1806;  E.  Male.  L'Art  relioieux 
du  ziii.»iMeen  France,  ib.  1808;  H.  Achelia,  Die  Martyro- 
logien,  ihre  Geeehiehte  und  ihr  Wert,  Gdttingen.  1000; 
C.  A.  Bernoulli,  Die  Heiliffen  der  Merooinoer,  TObingen, 
1000;  G.  Paris,  Pohnee  et  Ugendee  du  moyen^ge,  Pari^. 
1000:  idem,  LSgendee  du  moyen^ge,  ib.  1003;  P.  Toldo. 
in  Shidien  nr  vergleiehenden  LUeratur-Oeeehichie,  1001- 
1002;  E.  Ludua,  Die  Anf&nge  dee  HeUioenkuUe,  Tflbingen. 
1004'  H.  Delehaye,  Lee  LSgendee  hagiographiquee,  Parin. 
1006;  H.  H.  Gunter.  Leoenden^^udien,  Cologne,  1006. 
The  best  lists  of  lives  of  the  saints  are  to  be  found  in  the 
works  issued  by  the  BoUandista — Bibliatheca  hagiographa 
Qraeea,  Brussels,  1806  sqQm  ftnd  Biblictheea  haigiographa 
Latina,  ib.,  1808  sqq. 

LE6ER,  JEAN:  French  Protestant;  b.  at  Villa 
Secca  (in  the  valley  of  San  Martino,  Piedmont) 
Feb.  2,  1615;  d.,  probably  at  Leyden,  after  1665. 
At  the  age  of  fourteen  be  went  to  Geneva  to  study, 
and  remained  there  until  1639,  when  he  went  to 
Turin.  He  found  the  city  in  great  commotion, 
since  the  province  of  Piedmont  was  overrun  by  the 
French  and  Spaniards.  Leger  himself  was  exposed 
to  peril  and  was  taken  prisoner,  but  escaped  by  his 
presence  of  mind.  On  Sept.  27,  of  the  same  year, 
the  synod  of  San  Germane  appointed  him  pastor  of 
the  two  churches  of  Prali  and  Rodoreto.  In  1643 
he  succeeded  his  uncle  Antoine  as  pastor  of  San 
Giovanni  in  the  valley  of  Lusema,  and  there  came 
into  repeated  conflicts  with  the  monks.  His  pop- 
ularity was  BO  great  that  his  opponents  at  firet 
sought  to  win  him  over,  but  this  failed,  and  they 
then  resorted  to  persecution.  The  valley  of  Lu- 
sema was  overrun  with  troops,  who  pursued  the 
fugitives  to  the  heights  of  Angrogna.  Leger  him- 
self escaped,  and  as  the  moderator  of  his  church 
gathered  his  coreligionists  about  him,  urged  them 
to  remain  true  to  their  faith  and  native  land,  and 
hastened  to  seek  aid  and  comfort  for  them  in  for- 
eign courts.  He  stopped  in  Paris,  where  he  issued 
a  manifesto  addressed  to  all  the  powers,  which 
impressed  even  Louis  XIV.,  while  Cromwell  sent 
Sir  Samuel  Moreland  to  the  court  of  Turin  to  lodge 
an  emphatic  protest.  About  the  same  time  Leger 
returned  to  the  Waldensian  valleys,  and  a  treaty 
of  peace  was  signed  Aug.  18,  1655,  restoring  the 
Waldensians  to  their  rights,  but  forbidding  them 
instruction  in  their  religion.  Leger  refused  to  obey 
this,  and  was  condenmed  to  death  Jan.  12,  1661. 
He  was  cited  to  appear  at  Turin  and  was  resen- 
tenced on  Sept.  17.  Once  more  he  fled,  and  pass- 
ing through  Geneva  settled  at  Leyden  as  pastor  of 
the  Walloon  Church,  where  he  seems  to  have  spent 
the  remainder  of  his  life,  and  where  he  wrote  his 
HisUnre  ginirale  dea  ^lUe$  &vangdiquea  de  Pii- 
marU  ou  vauddsea  (2  vols.,  Leyden,  1669),  the  first 
part  treating  of  the  Waldensian  doctrines  and  di»- 
dplme  as  preserved  in  purity  and  without  inter- 
ruption or  the  need  of  a  reformation  from  the  time 


they  emerged  from  heathendom,  while  the  second 
part  gives  a  history  of  the  persecutions  which  tus 
corehgionists  endured  from  the  establishment  of 
the  Inquisition  to  1664.  The  work  is  marred  by 
partiality  and  lack  of  critical  abiUty. 

linger  had  a  noteworthy  kindred.  His  uncle 
Antoine  was  pastor  at  Conrtantinople  and  a  friend 
of  the  patrianch  Csrril  Lukar,  later  beccHiiing  pastor 
in  the  Waldensian  valleys,  whence  he  fled  to  Geneva 
and  was  appointed  French  and  Italian  preacher 
and  professor  of  theology.  Two  cousins  of  Jean 
Leger  were  also  preachers.  (E.  Comba  f) 

BiBUoaaApHT:  E.  Benoit,  Hiel.  de  VidU  de  Naniee,  rol  iii, 

Delft,  ie03;   A.  Huston,  VIerall  dee  Alpee,  vols,  il,  iv.. 

Pftiis,  1861;    Licht«nbeiver,  BSR,  viii.  84-88;    and  the 

UteimtuTB  daaling  with  tbe  WAij>uf8BB. 

LBGGB,  AUGUSTUS:  Bishop  of  Lichfield;  b. 
at  Sandwell  Hall,  Staffordshire,  Nov.  28,  1839. 
He  studied  at  Christ  Church,  Oxford  (BA.,  1861), 
was  ordered  deacon  in  1864,  and  ordained  priest 
in  the  following  year.  He  was  curate  of  Hands- 
worth,  Staffordshire,  1864-66,  and  of  St.  Mary's, 
Bryanston  Square,  London,  1866-67;  vicar  of  St. 
Bartholomew's,  Sydenham,  1867-79,  and  of  Lewis- 
ham  1879-91.  In  1891  he  was  consecrated  bishop 
of  Lichfield.  He  was  chaplain  to  the  bishc^  of 
Rochester  and  honorary  canon  of  the  same  diocese 
1877-91,  proctor  of  the  diocese  of  Rochester  1885- 
1891,  rural  dean  of  Greenwich  1880-86  and  of 
Lewisham  1886-91.  In  theology  he  is  a  liberal 
churchman,  and  has  written  In  Covenant  with  God  (a 
book  of  instruction  on  confirmation;  London,  1891). 

LE66E,  JAMES:  English  Congr^ationalist;  b. 
at  Huntly  (34  m.  n.w.  of  Aberdeen),  Aberdeen- 
shire,  Scotland,  Dec.  20,  1815;  d.  at  Oxford  Nov. 
29,  1897.  He  studied  at  King's  CoU^e,  Aberdeen 
(M.A.,  1835),  and  the  Highbury  Theological  Col- 
lege, London,  and  from  1839  to  1842  was  a  missioD- 
ary  of  the  London  Missionary  Society  at  Malacca, 
where  he  was  appointed  principal  of  the  Anglo- 
Chinese  College  in  1840.  From  1843  to  1873  he 
was  pastor  of  the  Union  Church  at  Hongkong  and 
head  of  the  theological  seminary  of  the  London 
Missionary  Society  at  that  place,  the  successor  of 
the'  Malacca  Anglo-Chinese  College.  In  1873  he 
returned  permanently  to  Great  Britain.  From 
1876  he  was  professor  of  Chinese  at  Oxford.  He 
was  the  author  of  many  works  in  Chinese,  and  also 
published  or  translated:  The  Notions  of  the  Chinese 
Concerning  God  and  SpiriU  (Hongkcmg,  1852); 
Chinese  Classics  (5  vols.,  1861-72);  Life  and  Teach- 
inga  of  Confvcius  (London,  1867);  The  Lifa  and 
Teaching  of  Mencius  (1875);  The  Bo€k  of  AneierU 
Chinese  Poetry  in  English  Verse  (1876);  The  Texis 
of  CoTifueianism  (4  vols.,  Oxford,  1879-«2);  Thi 
Religiona  of  China:  Confucianiam  and  TAoism  de- 
scribed and  compared  with  Christianity  (London, 
188Q>;  The  Texts  of  Tdaism  (2  vols.,  Oxford,  1886); 
Record  of  Buddhistic  Kingdoms:  Travels  of  the 
Buddhist  Pilgrim  Fa-hsien  in  India  (London,  1886); 
and  The  Nestorian  Monument  of  Hairan  FH  in 
SherirHat,  China,  relating  to  the  Diffusion  of  Chris- 
tianity in  China  in  the  Seventh  and  Eighth  Centuriet 
(1888). 

Bibliooraphy:   DNB,  Supplement,  iii  87-^,  wtee  refer- 
ences to  other  litermtura  may  be  found. 


443 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Leirdr 
Lelbni 


tnltz 


LEGIOlf,    THE    THUNDERING.    See    Marcus 

AlTRELinS. 

LEHNIN  PROPHECY:  A  poem  in  100  leonine 
verses,  preserved  in  manuscript  in  Berlin,  Breslau, 
Dresden,  Gdttingen,  Greifswald,  and  elsewhere, 
prophesying  the  fortunes  of  the  House  of  Branden- 
burg imtil  after  1700.  It  is  ascribed  to  a  monk 
named  Herman,  who  is  said  to  have  lived  in  the 
Cistercian  abbey  of  Lehnin  (14  m.  w.8.w.  of  Pots- 
dam) in  the  thirteenth  or  fourteenth  century;  but 
the  post-medieval  Latinity  and  the  content  of  the 
poem  forbid  its  attribution  to  either  Herman  II. 
(1267-72)  or  Herman  III.  (1335-42),  both  of  whom 
were  abbots  of  the  monastery.  The  prophecy  be- 
gins with  a  lament  on  the  early  fall  of  the  Askanian 
dynasty,  touches  briefly  on  the  Wittelsbachs  and 
Luxemburgs  ruling  Brandenburg,  recounts  the 
transfer  of  power  to  the  burgraves  of  Nuremberg, 
sketches  briefly  the  first  four  of  the  HohenzoUems, 
and  then  pauses  to  express  hostility  to  the  favor 
shown  Lutheran  doctrines  by  Joachim  I.  and  to  the 
secularization  of  Lehnin  by  Joachim  II.  The  five 
following  electors  are  also  clearly  indicated,  but 
here  the  author  loses  sure  historic  ground.  Fred- 
erick I.  does  not  win  a  crown;  Frederick  William 
I.  resolves  to  enter  a  monastery;  and  Frederick  the 
Great  is  drowned  after  a  reign  of  misfortune.  The 
Hohenzollem  line  ends  with  Frederick  William 
III.,  when  Germany  receives  a  Roman  Catholic 
sovereign. 

The  poem's  hostility  to  Prussia  and  its  ultra- 
montanism  are  self-evident,  but  its  authorship  is 
stiU  a  problem.    It  has  been  assigned  to  at  least 
six:  an  unknown  monk  or  priest  between  1688  and 
1700;   Andreas  Fromm  (d.  1685),  Lutheran  abbot 
at  Cologne-on-the-Spree,  but  deprived  of  office  in 
1666  because  of  hostility  to  the  Reformed  Church, 
and  a  convert  to  Roman  Catholicism  at  Prague  in 
1668;   Friedrich  Seidel  (d.  1693),  councilor  of  the 
supreme  court  of  judicature  and  consistorial  as- 
sessor at  Berlin;  the  adventurer  and  catholicizing 
pseudoprophet  Oelzen   (d.   1725);    the  Jesuit   F. 
Wolf,  chaplain,  for  a  time,  of  the  Austrian  embassy 
at  Berlin  during  the  last  years  of  the  great  elector 
(1685-^);  and  the  Roman  Catholic  convert  Niko- 
laus  von  Zitzewitz,  abbot  of  Huysberg,  near  Hal- 
berstadt    (1692-1704).    Even   after   the   spurious 
nature  of  the  Lehnin  prophecy  was  known,  it  was 
repeatedly  used  in  anti-Prussian  polemics.    Thus, 
in  the  crisis  of  Prussia  after  the  disasters  of  Jena 
and  Auerst&dt,  the  speedy  fall  of  the  Hohenzol- 
lems  was  proclaimed  in  various  anonymous  pamph- 
lets based  on  this  dociunent;   and  in  like  manner 
the  period  immediately  preceding  and  following  the 
Revolution  of  1848  called  forth  an  abundance  of 
literature  of  similar  character.       (O.  ZOckler  f.) 
Bxblioorapht:    The  edUion  princep§  was  published  in  Daa 
OeldiTte  Preuuen,  vol.  ii.,  Thorn,  1722;   an  edition  in  Lat. 
and  Germ,  appeazvd.  Regensburg,   1873.     For  the  litera- 
ture on  it  consult  E.  W.  Sabell,  Die  lAUaratur  dgr  ,  .  . 
lAfiinuMn   WeUBoaung,    Heilbronn,    1870,    and   BritUh 
Miueum  Catalogue,    "  Hermannua,    Abbot    of    Lehnin." 
Consult    also:     B.    Schmidt,   Die    WeUeagung   dee  ,  ,  , 
Hermann  von  Lthnin,  Berlin,  1820;    C.   L.  Gieeeler,  Die 
Uininadte  Weieeaoung,  Erfurt,  1849;  O.  Wolff,  Die  berOhnUe 
lehninethe  Weieeaaung,  Grttnbeis,  1850;    A.  Hilcenfeld. 
Die  lehnineche  Weieeagung  Hber  die  Mark  Brandenburg, 
Leipeic,   1876;    J.  Schrammen,  Dee  .  .  .  Herwtanne  aue 


L^nin  Propheteiung,  Cologne,   1887;    Hermens,  Kloeter 
L^nin  und  eeine  Weiteagung,  Barmen.  1888. 

LEIBNITZ,  laib'niis. 

Early  life  and  Workc  (S  1). 
Metaphysical  Doctrine  (S  2). 
Religious  Views  (i  3). 
Efforts  for  Churdi  Union  (i  4). 

Gottfried  WUhekn  (after  1709  Freiherr  von) 
Leibnitz,  one  of  the  most  distinguished  of  German 
philosophers,  was  bom  at  Leipsic  July  1,  1646,  and 
died  at  Hanover  Nov.  14,  1716.  After  studying 
jurisprudence,  mathematics,  and  phi- 
X.  Early  losophy  at  Leipsic  and  Jena,  he  en- 
Life  and  tered  the  service  of  the  elector  of 
Works.  Mainz  in  1666,  in  which  he  held  vari- 
ous positions,  being  occupied  chiefly 
with  jurisprudence.  In  1672  be  went  to  Paris, 
ostensibly  as  tutor  to  Baron  von  Boyneburg's 
sons,  but  his  real  purpose  was  to  divert  the 
attention  of  Louis  XIV.  from  plans  against  Ger- 
many. After  a  visit  to  London  he  settled  in  Paris 
till  1676,  occupying  himself  principally  with  mathe- 
matics and  natural  science.  His  great  mathemat- 
ical discovery,  the  differential  calculus,  dates  back 
to  1676,  though  it  was  not  published  till  1684.  In 
1676  he  accepted  an  offer  from  the  Duke  of  Bruns- 
wick to  settle  at  Hanover  as  librarian  and  historiog- 
rapher. Here  he  resided  during  the  remainder  of 
his  life.  Charged  with  writing  the  history  of  the 
house  of  Brunswick,  he  made  various  journeys  in 
Germany  and  Italy  and  gathered  an  immense 
amount  of  material.  The  fruits  of  these  labors 
were,  Codex  juris  gentium  diplomaticua  (2  vols., 
Hanover,  1693-1700),  Acceanonee  historicce  (2 
vols.,  1698-1700),  Scnptores  rerum  Brunsvicen- 
eium  (3  vols.,  1701-11),  and  the  unfinished  An- 
nalee  imperii  ocdderUis  Brunetrieenees  (ed.  G.  H. 
Perz,  3  vols.,  1843-46).  Along  with  these  histor- 
ical studies  be  wrote  a  laige  number  of  mathemat- 
ical, philosophical,  and  theological  treatises,  pub- 
lished mostly  in  Ada  erudiioTum,  Journal  dee  Sor 
vante,  and  MisceUanea  Berolinenna.  He  also  car- 
ried on  extensive  etymological  investigations  and 
published  Collectanea  etymologica  (1717). 

It  was  through  Leibnitz  that  German  philosophy 
first  came  into  its  own.    The  starting-point  of  his 
speculations  was  the  conviction  that 
2.  Meta-    the  world  is  not  to  be  explained  in  the 
physical    last  analysis  as  a  mechanism.    Things 
Doctrine,    in  nature  do  not  act  upon  one  another 
through   the  mediation   of  some  ex- 
ternal force,  but  are  ultimately  self-determining. 
Reality  is  spiritual,  and  consists  of  a  plurality  of 
simple,  independent  monads,  whose  activities  and 
relations  to  one  another  were  predetermined  by  the 
wisdom  of  God.    To  use  his  form  of  expression,  the 
monads  have  no  windows  through  which  they  may 
receive   external   impressions.    On   the   contrary, 
each  monad,  as  a  psychical  entity,  and  center  of 
intellectual  activity,  is  a  mirror  of  the  universe. 
The  human  body  is  an  aggregate  of  monads;   the 
soul  is  the  dominating  central  monad.    God  is  the 
monad  monadum.    By  regarding  ultimate  reality 
as  entirely  spiritual  in  essence,  Leibnitz  overcame 
the  difficulty  of  Descartes'  dualism,  involving  the 
relation  of  mind  to  body;  and  for  the  cumbersome 


XiCibnits 

Lflipalo,  Oolloauy  of 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HER20G 


444 


concurtua  dei  he  subetituted  his  famous  doctrine  of 
preestablished  harmony.  From  his  view-point  de> 
velopment,  or  evolution,  becomes  a  progressive 
growth  of  what  abeady  existed  in  embryo.  There 
is  nothing  radically  evil;  and  moral  life  is  gradually 
advancing  toward  perfection.  At  all  times  the 
same  reason  dominat.es  this  process,  but  it  too  is 
caught  up  in  this  process  of  development.  In  this 
historical  process  nothing  is  lost.  The  present  is 
"  laden  with  the  past  and  pregnant  with  the  fu- 
ture "  (cf.  also  Idbaubm,  II.,  {  2).  Leibnitz  left  no 
single  work  that  adequately  presents  his  philoso- 
phy. The  best  exposition  of  the  monadology  is  a 
mere  summary  which  he  prepared  for  Prince  Eugene 
of  Savoy  in  1714.  His  largest  philosophical  work 
was  the  Nouveaux  essats  tvr  VefUendemerU  humain 
(ed.  R.  E.  Raspe,  in  (Euvrea  phUotophiquea,  Amster- 
dam, 1765;  Eng.  transl..  New  Eaaaya  concerning 
Human  Undentanding,  New  York,  1896),  which  was 
written  against  Locke  in  1704,  but  not  published, 
owing  to  Locke's  death. 

The  same  intellectualism  which  Leibnitz  exhib- 
its in  his  metaphysical  doctrine  also  dominates  his 
religious  views.  While  the  core  of  all 
3.  RaUg-  religion  is  love  toward  God,  this  must 
ions  ViewB.  be  reached  by  a  process  of  cognition. 
For  Leibnits  religion  is  not  a  matter 
of  feeling  but  of  the  intellect;  though  it  may  be 
added  that  his  desire  for  the  immediate  presence  of 
God  in  the  soul  often  brings  him  close  to  mysticism. 
He  expressed  himself  frequently  on  religious  ques- 
tions, but  his  principal  religious  work  u  the  Tkiodic^e 
(a  word  coined  by  Leibnits  himself),  which  is  an 
attempt  to  demonstrate  the  agreement  of  reason 
with  faith.  The  full  title  is,  Easaie  de  thiodide  eur 
la  bonU  de  Dieu,  la  liberU  de  I'homme  et  Vangine  du 
mal  (2  vols.,  Amsterdam,  1710).  The  work  orig- 
inated as  a  polemic  against  Bayle's  dictionary  and 
was  occasioned  by  the  request  of  Queen  Sophia 
Charlotte.  In  many  ways  it  reflects  the  author's 
metaphysical  doctrines,  his  optimism,  and  deter- 
minism. His  doctrine,  that  this  world  is  the  best 
world  which  could  possibly  exist,  leads  him  to  a 
conception  of  evil  which  is  essentially  different  from 
that  held  by  the  religious  consciousness.  Evil  is  to 
his  mind  the  simple  and  natural  result  of  the  neces- 
sary limitation  of  every  thing  created:  it  is  conse- 
quently something  metaphysical,  and  not  ethical. 
He  does  not  reduce  evil  to  the  status  of  mere  ap- 
pearance, but  seeks  to  prove  that  the  world  is  bet- 
ter with  evil  in  it  that  it  would  be  without  it.  The 
world  can  not  be  rationally  condemned  on  the  basis 
of  the  very  small  portion  of  it  actually  known  to 
us.  It  is  to  be  viewed  as  an  intelligent  whole. 
Just  as  the  astronomer,  by  taking  the  sim  as  his 
view-point,  brought  forth  a  beautiful  solar  system 
out  of  chaos,  so  the  philosopher  of  the  universe 
will  transform  it  into  a  kingdom  of  reason,  as  soon 
as  he  learns  **  to  put  his  eye  in  the  sun."  In  a  simi- 
lar way,  his  doctrine  of  preestablished  harmony 
leads  him  into  a  kind  of  determinism,  in  which  the 
freedom  of  the  will  becomes  lost  in  the  metaphysical 
necessity,  or  at  least  loses  its  true  ethical  point.  In 
general  he  considers  Christianity  only  as  the  purest 
and  noblest  of  all  religions,  as  the  religion  of  the 
wise  made  by  Christ  the  religion  ttf  all,  as  the  natu- 


ral religion  raised  by  Christ  into  a  law.  Neverthe- 
less the  book  is  written  with  great  vigor  and  warmth, 
nor  did  it  fail  to  make  a  wide  and  deep  impression. 

Another  interesting  side  of  Leibnitz's   theolog- 
ical activity  is  his  participation  in  the  endeavors 
then  made  for  the  purpose  of  uniting 

4.  Efforts  the  different  Christian  denominations. 
for  Church  The  general  feeling  prevalent  after  the 
Unk>n.      end  of  the  Thirty  Years'  War  was  far 
vorable  to  such  plans;  and  the  subject 
was  ably  broached  by  Bossuet's  Exposition  de  la 
doctrine  de  V^liee  catholique  (Paris,  1671),  a  de- 
fense of  the  Chiurch  of  Rome,  but  conciliatory  in  its 
spirit,  and  very  guarded  in  its  expressions.     Rojas 
de  Spinola,  a  Franciscan  monk  of  Spanish  descent, 
and  confessor  to  the  Emperor  Leopold,  was  a  zeal- 
ous champion  of  the  project.     He  visited  Hanover 
several  times,  at  the  instance  of  the  emperor;  and, 
as  Duke  Ernest  August  was  willing  to  enter  into 
negotiations,  a  conference  was  arranged  between 
Rojas  de  Spinola  on  the  one  side,  and  Molanus  and 
Leibnitz  on  the  other.    The  results  of  the  confer- 
ence were  received  with  great  hopes,  both  in  Han- 
over, and  in  Vienna  and  Rome.    About  1686-90 
Leibnitz  outlined  his  plan  of  church-union  in  what 
is  known  as  Syetema  iheologicum  (Paris,  1819;  Eng. 
transl.,  A  System  of  Theology,  London,  1850),  which 
was  really  a  philosophical  defense  of  Roman  Cathol- 
idsm.    In  1691  he  entered  upon  a  long  correspond- 
ence with  Bossuet;  but  ultimately  the  authority  of 
the  Council  of  Trent,  absolutely  insisted  upon  by 
Bossuet,  and  absolutely  rejected  by  Leibnitz,  proved 
the  rock  on  which  all  the  plans  and  negotiations  for 
a  union  between  Romanism  and  Protestantism  were 
wrecked.    In  the  attempts  of  the  courts  of  Berlin 
and  Hanover  to  unite  the  Lutheran  and  the  Re- 
formed Churches,  Leibnitz  also  took  a  prominent 
part.    The  agitation  for  union  was  begim  in  1696, 
and  in  1698  a  conference  was  held  at  Hanover  be- 
tween the  Prussian  court-preacher  Jablonski,  on 
the  one  side,  and  Leibnitz  and  Molanus  on  the  other. 
The  plan  for  union  was  effected  in  outline,  and  the 
common  name  "  Evangelical  "  was  adopted;    but 
political  changes  now  caused  the  ardor  of  the  states- 
men to  cool.     In  1703  Frederick  I.  of  Prussia  took 
a  further  step  by  establishing  at  Berlin  a  Collegium 
Irenicum,  consisting  of  Lutheran  and  Reformed  the- 
ologians;   but  gradually  interest  in  the  plan  died 
out,  and  Leibnitz  himself  withdrew  from  it.     To- 
ward the  close  of  his  life  he  became  involved  in  a 
controversy    with   Samuel    Clarke    (see    Clarke, 
Samuel,  4),  who  published  the  correspondence  be- 
tween them  (London,  1717). 

At  present  there  is  no  complete  edition  of  the 
works  of  Leibnitz,  though  an  edition  is  in  course  of 
preparation  under  the  auspices  of  the  International 
Association  of  Sciences.  The  best  collected  editions 
are  those  of  L.  Dutens  (6  vols.,  Geneva,  1768),  G. 
H.  Pertz  (12  vols.,  Hanover,  184^-63).  and  the  un- 
finished edition  by  O.  Klopp  (1864-84).  The  phil- 
osophical works  have  been  edited  by  J.  E.  Erd- 
mann  (2  vols.,  Berlin,  1839-40),  by  P.  Janet  (2 
vols.,  Paris,  1866),  and  by  C.  J.  Gerhardt  (7  vob., 
Berlin,  1875-90).  Editions  in  English  are,  The 
PhUoeoj^ioal  Works  of  Leibnitz  .  .  .  TrandaUd 
.  .  .  with  Notes  by  0,  Af .  Duncan  (New  Haven, 


446 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Zittilmits 

XittipBio,  Oolloquy  of 


1890);  and  The  Monadology  and  Other  PkOosoph- 
ical  WrUing8f  TmnakUed  with  Introduction  and 
Notes  by  R,  Latta  (Oxford,  1898). 

(Rudolf  Euckibn.) 

Bxbuoorapht:  Data  regardins  the  editions  and  tranala^ 
tione  of  Leibnits  and  an  extenaive  list  of  works  oonoem- 
ing  him  are  in  J.  M.  Baldwin,  Dictionary  of  PhUowphy 
and  Ptyeholoffy,  iii.  1,  PP.  330-338.  Materials  for  a  life 
ara  found  in  his  letters,  the  various  collections  of  which 
are  noted  in  Baldwin,  ut  sup.,  pp.  331-332.  Lives  and 
sketches  of  his  life  have  been  written  by  B.  de  Fontenelle, 
Paris,  1716  (used  the  biographical  notices  of  J.  G.  von 
E^ckhiart.  Leibnits's  secretary);  G.  E.  Guhrauer,  2  vols., 
Breslau,  1846  (perhaps  the  best;  on  the  basLs  of  this  was 
written  the  IAf«  by  J.  M.  Mackie,  Boston,  1846);  L.  Grote, 
Hanover,  1869;  E.  Pfleiderer,  Leipsic,  1870;  E.  Bode- 
mann,  Hanover,  1876;  F.  Kirohner,  Cdthen,  1877;  J.  T. 
Men.  London,  1901;  ADB,  zviiL  172-209;  and  the  ac- 
counts in  the  works  on  the  hist,  of  philosophy  by  Windel- 
band,  Erdmann,  and  Ueberweg,  especially  in  that  of  K. 
Fischer,  Otaehidite  der  neuem  Philotophie,  Heidelberg, 
1902. 

Discussions  of  his  philosophy  or  of  phases  of  it  are: 
C.  Secr^tan,  La  PhilMophie  de  LeibniU,  Lausanne,  1840; 
L.  Feuerbach,  Oe$diidiis  der  neuem  PhUoeophie,  Ansbach, 
1844;  A.  Helfferich,  Spinoza  und  Leibnite,  oder  doe  Weaen 
dee  Idealiemue  und  dee  Realiemue,  Berlin,  1846;  R.  Zim- 
mermann,  LeihnU*e  Monadologie^  Vienna,  1847;  J.  F. 
Nourisson,  La  Philoeophie  de  LeibnUs,  Paris,  1860;  A. 
Piohler,  Die  Theologie  dee  LeibnitM,  2  vols.,  Munich,  1869- 
1870;  C.  H.  Plath,  Leibniie*e  MieeUmffedanken,  Berlin, 
1869;  G.  Class,  Die  meiaphyeiechen  VoraveeeiMunoen  dee 
leiimieiechen  DeterminiemiAe,  TObingen,  1874;  £.  Segond, 
La  Monadoloffie,  Paris,  1883;  J.  Dewey,  LeibniU*e  New 
Beeaye  coneeming  the  Human  Underetanding,  Chicago,  1888; 
B.  R.  Martin,  Leilmie'e  Ethik,  Erlangen,  1889;  H.  F.  Beneke, 
Leihnia  ale  Ethiker,  Erlangen,  1891 ;  £.  Dillmann,  Bine  neue 
DareteUung  der  leihniziedien  Monadenlehre,  Leipsic,  1891 ;  P. 
Gesche.  Die  Ethik  Leibniz*e,  Halle,  1891;  F.  G.  F.  Wemigk. 
Der  Begriff  der  Materie  bei  Leibnie,  Jena,  1893;  A.  Niet- 
haek,  Leibnie'  Lehre  von  der  meneehlichen  WafUfreiheit, 
Halle,  1894;  B.  Russell.  Critical  Expoeition  of  the  Phihe- 
ophy  of  Leibnitx,  Cambridge.  1900;  E.  Cassirer,  Leibnite* 
Syetem  in  eeinen  trieeeviechafUichen  Orundlagen,  Marburg, 
1902. 

LEIGH,  11,  EDWARD:  English  Puritan;  b.  at 
Shawell  (15  m.  s.  of  Leicester),  Leicestershire,  Mar. 
24,  1602;  d.  at  Rushall  (15  m.  s.s.e.  of  StafiFord), 
Staffordshire,  June  2,  1671.  He  studied  at  Mag- 
dalen Hall,  Oxford  (B.A.,  1620;  M.A.,  1623),  and 
afterward  studied  law  at  the  Middle  Temple.  In 
1640  he  was  elected  a  member  of  Parliament  for 
Staffordshire,  but  was  expelled  for  voting  for  the 
king  in  Dec,  1648.  His  reputation  rests  upon  two 
compilations,  Criiica  sacra  .  .  .  ObservaJbions  upon 
all  the  Greek  Words  of  the  New  Testament  (London, 
1639),  and  Critica  sacra.  Observations  on  aU  the 
Radices  or  Primitive  Hdfrew  Words  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment (1642).  Both  works  were  published  together 
as  a  third  edition  in  1650  (4th  ed.,  1662;  Lat. 
transl.,  Amsterdam,  1696).  Other  works  are:  A 
Treatise  of  Divinity  (London,  1647);  Annotations 
upon  all  the  New  Testament  (1650;  Latin  transl., 
Leipsic,  1732);  A  System  or  Body  of  Divinity  (1654) ; 
A  Treatise  of  Religion  and  Learning^  and  of  Relig- 
ious  and  Learned  Men  (1656). 
Biblxooraprt:    A.    h    Wood.   Athena  Oxonieneee,  ed.   P. 

Bliss,  iii.  92&-931.  4  vols..  London.  1813-20;  John  Nichols, 

Literary  Anecdotee,  iii  164-166,  9  vols..  London,  1812-16; 

DNB,  xxxh.  432-433. 

LEIGH,  SAMUEL.    See  Mbthodists,  II.,  §  1. 

LEI6HT0N,  Wtxm,  ROBERT:  Archbishop  of 
Glasgow;  b.  (probably  in  London)  1611;  d.  in 
London   June   25.    1684,     His   father,    Alexander 


Leighton,  a  Presbyterian  clergyman  and  physician 
who  was  cruelly  persecuted  by  the  Star  Chamber, 
sent  him  to  the  University  of  Edinbuigh  (M»A., 
1631),  and  afterward  to  travel  on  the  continent. 
He  spent  several  years  in  France,  where  he  was 
strongly  attracted  to  the  Jansemsts.  On  his  re- 
turn to  Scotland,  in  1641,  he  was  licensed  by  the 
presbytery  of  Edinburgh,  and  on  Dec.  16,  1641,  was 
ordained  and  inducted  into  the  parish  of  Newbattle. 
In  1652  he  was  sent  to  London  by  the  Synod  of 
Lothian  to  negotiate  the  liberation  of  the  Scottish 
ministers  imprisoned  there.  Finding  himself  out  of 
sympathy  with  the  political  zeal  of  his  colleagues 
he  resigned  his  charge  in  1652,  and  in  1653  became 
principal  and  professor  of  divinity  at  the  Univer- 
sity of  Edinbuigh.  This  post  he  retained  till  the 
Restoration.  When  episcopacy  was  established 
in  Scotland  in  1661  he  remained  in  the  reconsti- 
tuted church,  became  bishop  of  Dimblane,  and 
was  consecrated  with  Sharp  and  two  others,  in 
Westminster  Abbey,  Dec.  15,  1661.  With  two  or 
three  exceptions  all  the  clergy  in  his  diocese  con- 
formed. In  other  dioceses  numy  dezgymen  re- 
fused to  conform,  and  the  persecution  began. 
Leighton  pleaded  with  Charles  II.  for  milder  meas- 
ures, and  in  1669  got  the  first  Indulgence.  In 
1670,  Archbishop  Burnet  having  been  deprived  for 
opposing  this  clemency,  Leighton  was  made  arch- 
bishop of  Glasgow,  accepting  the  position  on  con- 
dition that  he  should  be  assisted  in  his  efforts  to 
secure  the  comprehension  of  the  Presbyterians. 
Failing  to  get  the  support  of  his  colleagues  he  re- 
tired from  the  archbishopric  in  1674,  and,  after  a 
short  residence  at  Edinbuigh,  went  to  live  with  his 
sister  at  Broadhurst  in  Horsted  Keynes,  Sussex. 

Leighton  published  nothing  during  his  lifetime, 
and  requested  that  his  papers  should  be  destroyed. 
His  writings  were  first  edited  by  his  friend  Dr. 
James  Fall.  The  principal  are :  Sermons  (London, 
1692);  A  Practical  Commentary  upon  the  .  .  .  First 
Epistle  General  of  St.  Peter  (part  i.,  York,  1693; 
part  ii.,  London,  1694);  Prelectiones  theologica 
(London,  1693);  and  Three  Posthumous  Tracts 
(1708),  including  the  well-known  Rules  and  In- 
structions for  a  Holy  Life  (new  ed.,  Oxford,  1905). 
There  are  several  more  or  less  complete  collected 
editions  of  his  works,  the  best  that  of  W.  West 
(vols.  ii.-vii.,  London,  1869-75;  vol.  i.  was  never 
published). 

Bxbuoorapht:  LiTas  wen  prefixed  to  the  editiona  of  hie 
works  by  J.  N.  Pearaon,  London,  1825,  and  J.  Aikman, 
Edinburgh,  1839.  Consult  also:  T.  Murray.  Life  of 
R.  Leig/Uon,  Edinburgh,  1828;  C.  F.  Seoretan,  The  Troub- 
led Timee  and  Holy  Life  of  ArdUnehop  Leighton,  London, 
1866;  W.  Blair.  SelecHone  from  the  Writinge  ef  Arehbiahop 
LeitiUon,  with  Memoir  and  Notee,  London,  1883;  idem, 
Sliort  Biography  of  Ardibidwp  Leighton,  with  Seleetionet 
ib.  1884;  G.  Burnet.  Hiet.  of  my  own  Timee,  ed.  O.  Airy, 
i.  239  eqq..  Oxford,  1900  (authoritative);  D.  Butler,  Life 
and  LeUere  cfRcbert  Leif^on,  London,  1903;  DNB,  XTriii. 
4-7. 

LBIPSIC,  COLLOQUY  OF:  A  conference  be- 
tween German  Lutherans  and  Calvinists  held  in  con- 
nection with  a  convention  of  Protestants  of  the 
empire  at  Leipsic  in  Feb.-Mar.,  1631,  caUed  for  the 
purpose  of  securing  imited  action  to  prevent  the 
execution  of  the  Edict  of  Restitution  (see  Wbbt- 
PHALiA,  Peace  of).    The  elector  of  Brandenburg 


Lenlkwt 


Oolloqny  of 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


446 


was  aooompanied  by  hiB  court  preacher,  Johannes 
Bergius;  and  the  landgrave  of  Hesse  by  his  court 
preachePi  Theophilus  Neuberger,  and  Professor 
Johannes  Crodus.  These  theologians,  who  be- 
longed to  the  Reformed  faith,  invited  certain  Lu- 
therans of  Saxony,  Bfatthias  Ho6  von  Hofinegg, 
Polycarp  Leyser,  and  the  court  preacher  Heinrich 
Hdpffner  to  a  colloquy  on  the  points  of  difference 
between  them.  It  began  Mar.  3,  and  continued  till 
Mar.  23,  the  Augsburg  Confession  being  taken  as 
basis.  An  agreement  was  soon  reached  with  re- 
spect to  articles  i.~ii.,  v.-ix.,  xi.-xxviii.  The  third 
article,  on  Christology,  proved  more  difficult;  the 
Lutherans  upheld  the  Communieatio  Idiomaium 
(q.v.)  which  the  Reformed  denied,  and  it  was  finally 
decided  to  attempt  no  more  than  a  definite  state- 
ment of  points  of  agreement  and  difference.  In  re- 
gard to  the  fourth  article  the  Reformed  declared 
that  they  taught  the  imiversality  of  the  divine  will 
of  salvation.  The  tenth  article,  on  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per, occasioned  the  same  difficulties  as  the  third, 
and  was  passed  in  the  same  way,  since  an  actual 
agreement  was  impossible.  The  Reformed  hoped 
for  an  agreement  in  order  to  oppose  Romanism 
more  effectively,  but  the  Lutherans  dreaded  to 
make  concessions.  After  the  Augsburg  Confession 
had  been  discussed,  it  was  felt  that  not  all  dis- 
putes had  been  settled,  and  the  doctrine  of  pre- 
destination was  specially  debated.  Here  again  a 
divergence  was  revealed,  as  the  theologians  of 
Brandenburg  and  Hesse  upheld  the  election  of  a 
limited  number  and  excluded  divine  foreknowledge 
from  salvation,  while  the  Saxon  theologians  con- 
sidered election  as  conditioned  by  a  faith  which 
God  foresaw.  The  tone  of  the  colloquy  was 
friendly,  even  in  cases  where  concord  could  not  be 
attained.  As  it  was  private,  only  four  copies  of  the 
protocol  were  made— one  for  each  of  the  princes, 
and  one  for  the  faculty  of  Leipsic;  but  general  re- 
ports were  soon  published  in  Germany,  Holland, 
France,  and  England.  (A.  Hauck.) 

Bibuoorapht:  Sources  an  the  protocol,  reprinted  in  Cor- 
pua  librorum  ^ymbolieorum,  ed.  J.  C.  W.  Atigusti,  pp.  386 
sqq..  Elberfeld.  1826,  and  in  CoUecHo  eonfeatUmum,  ed. 
H.  A.  Niemeyer,  pp.  653  eqq.,  Leipsic,  1840;  J.  Bergiufl. 
Relation  der  Privat-ConferenM  .  .  .  mu  Leipaie,  1031,  Ber- 
lin, 1636.  Consult:  J.  K.  Seidemann.  Die  Lnpnger  Die- 
puiatum,  Dresden.  1843  (best,  contains  documents); 
C.  W.  Herins,  Oeedtiehte  der  kireKlichen  UnionevenueKe, 
t.  327  sqq.,  I>eipsic,  1836;  A.  G.  Rudelbach,  Reformation, 
LiUhertum  und  Union,  pp.  407  sqq.,  ib.  1839;  Sohaff, 
Chrietiiin  Churtk,  vi  178  sqq.;  and  in  general  the  litera- 
ture on  Lctbbr;  the  Rsformation;  Hoft  yon  HoftNioo, 
Mattrxab. 

LEIPSIC,  DISPUTATIOll  OF.  See  Eck,  Johann; 
Luther,  Mabtin. 

LEIPSIC  INTERIli.    See  Interim,  3. 

LELAND,  lel'and,  JOHN:  Name  of  two  divines. 

1.  English  nonconformist  divine  and  polemical 
writer;  b.  at  Wigan  (15  m.  w.n.w.  of  Manchester), 
Lancashire,  Oct.  18, 1691;  d.  in  Dublin  Jan.  16, 1766. 
At  an  early  age  he  was  taken  by  his  father  to  Dub- 
lin and  there  ^ucated  for  the  ministry.  From  1716 
till  his  death  he  was  pastor  of  a  Presbyterian  congre- 
gation in  Dublin.  He  distinguished  himself  by  his 
writings  against  the  deists,  particularly  Tindal, 
Thomas  Morgan,  Henry  Dodwell,  and  Bolingbroke. 
His  most  important  work  is  A  View  of  the  Principal 


Dei$Hcal  Writers  thai  have  Appeared  in  England  in 
the  Laat  and  Preaent  Centuries  (2  vols.,  London, 
1754-^66;  best  ed.,  1837).  This  work  is  still  val> 
uable  for  the  facts  it  gives  about  deistic  writers, 
though  its  arguments  against  deism  are  now  anti- 
quated. Other  works  are:  The  Divine  Authority  of 
the  Old  and  New  Testament  (2  vols.,  1739-10);  A 
Defence  of  Christianity  (1740);  The  Advantage  and 
Necessity  of  the  Christian  RevdoHon  (2  vols.,  1764); 
and  the  posthumous  Discourses  (4  vols.,  1768-69). 
S.  American  Baptist;  b.  at  Grafton,  Mass.,  May 
14,  1764;  d.  at  Cheshire,  Mass.,  Jan.  14, 1841.  Con- 
verted at  twenty,  he  began  at  once  to  preach  as 
an  evangelist  and  soon  made  his  way  to  Virginia 
(1775),  where  he  became  a  leader  of  the  Virginia 
Baptists  in  their  struggle  for  liberty  of  conscience. 
In  1789  he  introduced  a  resolution  which  was 
adopted  by  the  Baptist  general  association  of  Vir- 
ginia to  the  effect  that  "  slavery  is  a  violent  de- 
privation of  the  rights  of  nature,  and  inconsistent 
mith  a  republican  government,"  and  recommend- 
ing that  Baptists  "  make  use  of  every  legal  means 
to  extirpate  this  horrid  evil  from  the  land."  In 
1788,  as  a  member  of  the  Baptist  general  committee 
on  religious  liberty,  he  addressed  a  noble  letter  to 
President  Wajshington  in  which  he  pointed  out  the 
lack  of  sufficient  security  for  liberty  of  conscience 
in  the  United  States'  constitution  as  it  was  being 
presented  to  the  States  for  ratification.  Washing- 
ton responded  courteously  and  sympathetically, 
and  article  I.  of  the  present  constitution  was  in- 
troduced. He  returned  to  Massachusetts  in  1800 
and  continued  active  in  his  ministry  almost  to  the 
end  of  his  long  life.  He  published  The  Rights  of 
Conscience  Inalienable  (Richmond,  1793). 

A.  H.  Newman. 
BiBLiooBArar:  1.  The  iXaeounet,  ut  sup.,  eontains  a  JLife 
by  the  editor,  L  Weld.  ConsiUt:  L.  Stephen,  Enoliah 
Thavoht  in  the  18th  Century,  toL  L.  New  York,  1881; 
DNB,  x3diL  17-18;  KL,  vil  1711.  2.  A.  H.  Newman. 
HiH.  €f  the  Baptiel  Churehee  m  the  United  Statee,  Kew 
York,  1898;  W.  Oathcart,  BapUH  Bncydopmdia,  Philadel- 
phia, 1888. 

LBL0N6,  le-l6n',  JACQUES:  French  bibliog- 
rapher; b.  in  Paris  Apr.  19,  1065;  d.  there  Aug. 
13,  1721.  At  an  early  age  he  was  sent  to  Malta  to 
be  educated  by  the  Knights  of  St.  John,  but  returned 
to  Paris  in  1676  and  entered  the  Congregation  of  the 
Oratory  in  1686.  He  was  librarian  of  the  Ora- 
tory of  St.  Honor6  at  Paris  from  1699  till  his  death. 
His  principal  work  is  the  valuable  Bibliotheoa  sacra 
(2  vols.,  Paris,  1709;  2d  ed.,  much  enlarged,  2 
vols.,  1723).  Enlarged  editions  were  published  by 
0.  F.  Bdmer  (2  parts,  Leipsic,  1709)  and  A.  G. 
Masch  (5  vols.,  Halle,  1778-M).  Other  works  are: 
SuppUment  d  Vhistoire  des  dictionnaires  h&jreux  de 
Wolfius  (in  Journal  des  Savants,  Paris,  1707);  Die- 
cours  historigues  sur  les  principales  editions  des 
Bibles  pdyghttes  (1713);  and  Biblioth^que  historique 
de  la  France  (1719;  augmented  by  F6vret  de  Fon- 
teUe,  6  vols.,  1768-78). 

Bibuoobapht:    The  Hfe  was  written  by  P.  N.  Deamooleta 

and  prefixed  to  his  (2nd)  edition  of  the  Bihlio^eoa  Saan, 

Paris,  1723.    Consult  KL,  viL  1712-14. 

LEMAISTRE  DE  SACT,  le-m^r  de  sQ^'dt',  LOUIS 

ISAAC:    Jansenist;   b.  in  Paris  Mar.  29,  1613;  d. 

at  the  ChAteau  of  Pomponne,  in  Brie,  Jan.  4,  16S4. 

He  added  to  his  name  *'  Saey,"  or  "  Sod,"  an  ana- 


447 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDU 


Leipaio,  Colloquy  of 
Lonfknt 


gram  from  his  Christian  name  Isaac,  and  is  often 
referred  to  under  this  title.  He  studied  at  the 
College  of  BeauvaiB  with  his  uncle,  Antoine  Amauld 
(q.v.),  was  ordained  priest  in  1648,  and  in  1650 
became  spiritual  director  of  the  recluses  at  Port 
Royal.  During  the  persecution  of  the  Jansenists 
he  was  expelled  from  the  monastery  (1661)  and 
on  May  13,  1666,  he  was  imprisoned  in  the  Bas- 
tile.  After  his  liberation,  Oct.  31,  1668,  he  lived 
for  a  time  with  his  cousin,  the  Marquis  of  Pomponne, 
in  Brie.  Later  he  went  to  Paris  and  returned  to 
Port  Royal  in  1675.  On  having  to  leave  the  mon- 
astery a  second  time  in  1679,  he  retired  to  Pom- 
ponne, where  he  spent  the  rest  of  his  life.  He  was 
buried  in  the  church  of  Port  Royal. 

Under  various  pen-names  Lemaistre  de  Sacy  was 
a  prolific  writer  and  was  particularly  successful  as 
a  translator,  both  of  verse  and  prose.  He  is  prin- 
cipally known  for  his  French  translations  from  the 
Bible.  He  collaborated  with  his  brother  Antoine 
Lemaistre  on  his  Nouveau  Testament  (2  vols.,  Am- 
sterdam, 1668),  long  known  as  the  Nouveau  TesUk- 
ment  de  Mons.  This  work  was  vehemently  at- 
tacked by  several  bishops,  condemned  by  Clement 
IX.,  defended  by  Amauld  and  Nicole,  and  caused 
a  controversy  that  lasted  twenty  years.  The  first 
instalments  of  a  translation  of  the  entire  Bible, 
which  Lemaistre  de  Sacy  had  begun  while  in  the 
Bastile,  appeared  in  1672.  After  his  death  the  work 
was  completed  by  Thomas  du  Foss6  and  C.  Hur6 
(32  vols.,  Paris,  1672-1706).  See  Bible  Vebsigns, 
B,  VI.,  §  4.  Among  other  translations  of  Lemaistre 
de  Sacy  are.  Fables  de  Ph^re  (Paris,  1647) ;  Comedies 
de  T&rence  (1647);  L'ImitaHonde  Jesus-Christ  (1662), 
which  passed  through  more  than  150  editions. 
Bibuoorapht:  Consult  the  literature  under  Pobt-Rotal. 

LE  MA^rRE,  le  m^'tr  (MEISTER,  MAISTER), 
JEAN  HENRI:  Swiss  Protestant;  b.  at  Zurich  c. 
1690;  d.  at  Kiissnacht  (7  m.  e.n.e.  of  Lucerne), 
1774.  He  studied  theology  and  philosophy  at  Zu- 
rich, espoused  the  cause  of  the  Huguenots  and  be- 
came preacher  of  the  French  colony  of  Huguenots 
in  Baireuth.  In  1733  he  was  called  to  Bddceburg 
as  assistant  of  Pierre  Cr^gut,  the  court  preacher  and 
director  of  the  Huguenot  colony,  whom  he  suc- 
ceeded in  1738.  He  rendered  valuable  service  to 
the  gifted  counts  of  Btkckeburg,  Friedrich  Ludwig 
Karl  and  Albrecht  Wolfgang,  the  sovereign  of 
Schaumburg-Lippe,  by  introducing  them  into  the 
philosophy  of  Malebranche,  Pierre  Bayle,  Christian 
Wolfif,  Spinoza,  and  others,  and  by  assuming  the 
religious  and  scientific  education  of  the  two  sons 
of  Count  Albrecht  Wolfgang — ^Wilhekn  and  Georg. 
On  account  of  the  rigid  church  discipline  which  he 
introduced  in  the  Huguenot  colony,  after  the  model 
of  the  Reformed  Church  in  France,  Le  Maltre  was 
secretly  attacked  and  slandered,  so  that  about  1747 
he  left  Biickeburg  and  accepted  a  call  to  Erlangen. 
Later  he  returned  to  his  native  country  and  acted 
as  preacher  at  KQssnacht,  but  his  relations  with  his 
former  pupil,  Count  Wilhelm,  who  in  1747  ascended 
the  throne,  always  remained  cordial. 

(F.  H.  Brakdeb.) 

BiBUOORArar:  Brandes,  in  Die  fraiud^iache  Kohnie,  1805, 
nofl.  10-12;  idem,  in  Oet^iehiMaUtr  dea  deutteken  Hu- 
nenottmiMreiiM,  voL  iiL  noe.  7-6. 


LBMME,  LUDWIO:  German  Protestant;  b.  at 
Salzwedel  (110  m.  s.e.  of  Bremen),  Aug.  8,  1847. 
He  studied  philosophy  and  theology  in  Berlin 
1866-69,  was  private  tutor,  and  then  tutor  at  Gdt- 
tingen  1872-74.  In  1874  he  was  ordained,  and 
was  then  assistant  preacher  at  the  cathedral  and 
second  inspector  of  the  seminary  for  canons  at 
Berlin  for  two  years.  From  1876  to  1888  he  waa 
inspector  of  the  Johanneum  at  Breslau,  and  from 
1876  until  1881  also  privat^ocent  at  the  University 
of  Breslau,  where  he  was  appointed  associate  pro- 
fessor in  1881.  In  1884  he  was  called  to  Bonn  as 
professor  of  sjrstematic  theology,  and  since  1891 
has  occupied  a  similar  position  in  Heidelberg.  In 
theology  he  maintains  a  positive  position,  allied 
to  that  of  I.  A.  Domer  and  R.  Rothe.  He  has 
written:  Das  VerhdUniss  der  Dogmatik  zu  Kritik  und 
AusUgung  der  heUigen  Schrift  nack  Schleiermacher 
(Gdttingen,  1874);  Die  drei  grossen  Reformations^ 
schriften  Luihers  vom  Jahre  1620  (Gotha,  1875); 
Das  Evangelium  in  Bdhmen  (1877);  Die  retigians- 
geschichUiche  Bedeidung  des  Dekalogs  (Breslau, 
1880);  Die  Ndchstenliebe  (ISSl);  Das  erste  Ermahr^ 
ungsschreiben  des  Paulus  an  den  Timotheus  (1882); 
Die  Sunde  wider  den  keUigen  Oeisi  (1883);  Die 
Pftege  der  Einbildungekraft  (1884);  Die  Macht  des 
Gebets  mil  besonderer  Benehung  avf  KrankenheH' 
ung  (Barmen,  1887);  Der  Etfolg  der  Predigt  (1888); 
Die  Primipien  der  RitsM'schen  Theologie  und  ihr 
Wert  (Bonn,  1891);  Orundlage,  Zid,  und  Eigen- 
tUmliehkeit  des  theologischen  Studiums  (Heidelberg, 
1891);  Der  Wert  des  Oebets  (1892):  Das  Recht  des 
apotioliscken  GlauhenMkenntnisses  und  seine  Oeg- 
ner  (1893);  Die  Kirche  die  Oemeinschaft  der  Hein 
ligen  (1893);  Heilstatsachen  und  Glavbenserfahrung 
(1894);  Die  Freandschaft  (Heilbronn,  1897);  Die 
EndiosigkeU  der  Verdammnis  und  die  allgemeine 
Wiederbringung  (Grpss-Lichterfelde,  1899);  Richard 
Rothes  Hundertjahffeier  (Heidelberg,  1899);  Zeug- 
nisse  vom  HeU  in  Jesu  Christo  (sermons;  1899); 
Der  gegenw&rtige  Stand  der  Ethik  (Carlsruhe,  1900); 
Das  Wesen  des  ChristerUums  und  die  Zukun/ts- 
re^t^^um  (Gross-Lichterfelde,  1901);  Die  Busse  nach 
Schrift,  Bekenntnis  und  Erfahrung  (Herbom,  1901); 
RdigionsgeschichUiche  Entwicklung  oder  gMiche 
Offenbarungf  (Carlsruhe,  1901);  ChristUche  Ethik 
(2  vols.,  Gross-Lichterfelde,  1905);  Wer  vyir  Jesusf 
(Berlin,  1905);  and  Theologische  EnzyklojMie  (1909). 

LENFANT,  Ito^fto',  JACQUES:  French  Prot- 
estant; b.  at  Basoches  (50  m.  s.w.  of  Paris)  Apr. 
13,  1661;  d.  at  Berlin  Aug.  7,  1728.  He  studied 
theology  at  Saimiur  and  Geneva,  and  in  1684  he 
became  preacher  to  the  French  congregation  at 
Heidelberg.  In  1688  Elector  Frederick  of  Bran- 
denburg (the  first  king  of  Prussia)  appointed  him 
pastor  of  the  French  church  in  Berlin,  where  he 
labored  nearly  forty  years.  He  was  a  member  of 
the  supreme  consistory  and  of  the  committee  for 
the  regulation  of  French  emigration,  and  in  1724 
became  a  member  of  the  academy  of  sdenoes  in 
Berlin.  He  was  a  prolific  writer,  but  is  promi- 
nent chiefly  as  a  church  historian.  His  principal 
works  are:  Histoire  de  la  papesse  Jeanne  (Amster- 
dam, 1694);  Histoire  du  ConcHe  de  Constance  (1714; 
2d  ed.,  2  vols.,  1727;  Eng.  transl.,  2  vols.,  London, 


I<«  Honrrr 
iMl 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


448 


1730),  the  most  important  of  hiB  works;  Hittoire  du 
Coneiie  de  Pise  el  de  ee  qui  8*eat  pasai  de  plus  nU- 
morable  depuia  ee  ConeUe  jusqu'au  Coneiie  de  Conr 
stance  (2  vols.,  Amsterdam,  1724);  and  Histaire  de 
la  guerre  des  Hussites  et  du  Coneiie  de  Basle  (1731). 
With  Beausobre  he  wrote  Le  Nouveau  Testament  de 
notre  Seigneur  Jesus  Christ  traduit  en  franfois  star 
V original  grec,  avec  des  notes  litSrales  (2  vols.,  1718; 
Eng.  tranisl.,  in  part,  London,  1726).  Lenfant  is 
the  author  of  the  first  volume,  which  contains  the 
four  Gospels  and  a  comprehensive  introduction. 
Other  writings  are:  the  polemical  Prlservatif  canJtre 
la  ronton  avec  le  sihge  de  Rome  (4  vols.,  Amster- 
dam, 1723);  and  Seiee  sermons  sur  divers  iextes 
(1728;  Germ,  transl.,  Halle,  1742).  Lenfant  was 
also  one  of  the  founders  of  the  Bibliothhque  Oer- 
mamque,  (C.  Pfbnder.) 

Bibuoohapht:  E.  and  £.  Hmc.  ^  France  prolMtante,  ed. 
H.  L.  Bordier.  vol.  vi..  Paris,  1889;  Liehtonberger.  E8R, 
vui.  130-138. 

LE  NOXTRRY,  le  nQ''il',  DENIS  HICOLAS:  A 
member  of  the  Benedictine  congregation  of  Saint- 
Maur  and  a  participant  in  their  learned  works;  b. 
at  Dieppe  in  1647;  d.  at  the  abbey  of  Saint-Ger- 
main-des-Pr^,  Paris,  Mar.  24,  1724.  He  was  edu- 
cated by  the  French  Oratorians,  and  entered  the 
Benedictine  order  at  Jumidges  in  1665.  He  wrote 
the  introduction  to  Garet's  edition  of  Cassiodorus 
(2  vols.,  Rouen,  1679),  and  collaborated  with 
Duchesne  and  Bellaise  in  the  edition  of  Ambrose, 
which  he  completed  with  Du  Friche  (2  vols.,  Paris, 
1686-90).  He  edited  also  the  treatise  De  mortibus 
persecutorum  (1710),  attempting  to  prove  that  it 
was  not  written  by  Lactantius.  His  chief  work, 
however,  was  his  Apparatus  ad  hibliothecam  vet- 
erum  patrum  (2  vols.,  1694-97;  2d  ed.,  enlarged, 
2  vols.,  1703-15),  a  historical  and  critical  treatment, 
to  the  end  of  the  fourth  century,  of  the  authors 
comprised  in  the  Mctxima  hibliotheca  veterum  patrum 
(27  vols.,  Lyons,  1677).  (C.  Pfkndbr.) 

Biblioorafht:  Nioeron,  Mfmoire»,  i.  275-278;  J.  C.  F. 
Hoefer,  NouvttU  biographit  ghUralt,  xxxviiL  680.  46 
Yolflw,  Paris,  1866-66. 

LENT:  The  forty  days'  fast  preparatory  to  the 
celebration  of  Easter.  The  name  appears  in  Mid- 
dle English  as  Lenten,  which  goes  back  to  Anglo- 
Saxon  lencten,  "  spring  "  (cf.  German  Lenz).  The 
Latin  name  is  Quadragesima,  from  the  fortieth  day 
before  Easter,  when  it  was  approximately  supposed 
to  begin.  By  a  similar  loose  calculation,  the  three 
preceding  Sundays  were  known  as  Sepiuagesima 
(seventieth),  Sexagesima  (sixtieth),  and  Quinqua- 
gesima  (fiftieth).  Traces  of  the  ancient  variations 
in  the  length  of  the  season  still  appear  in  the  Ro- 
man Catholic  practise  of  beginning  from  Septua- 
fi^ima  to  wear  vestments  of  violet,  the  Lenten  color 
of  mourning,  and  to  omit  from  the  services  the  Alle- 
luia as  an  ejaculation  of  joy.  For  the  history  and 
observance  of  the  fast,  see  Fastinq,  II. 

Biblioorafht:  Bingham,  Ori4;inea,  XXI.,  i  (best);  E. 
Mart^ne,  De  antiquie  ecdeeia  riHbue,  iii.,  chaps.  18-19, 
Antwerp.  1737;  H.  Liemke,  Die  Quadraoeeimalftuien  der 
Kirehe,  Paderborn,  1863;  J.  H.  Blunt.  Dictionary  of  Doc- 
trinal and  Hietorical  Theology,  pp.  407-408.  London.  1870; 
W.  E.  AfJdis  and  T.  Arnold,  Catholic  Dictionary,  pp.  658- 
660,  ib.  1903;   DC  A,  ii.  972-977  (gives  early  literature). 


LBRTULUS,  EPISTLE  OF.    See  Jwub  Chbut, 

PiCTUBBS  AND   IlCAOBS  OF,  I.,  {  3. 

LEO:    The  name  of  thirteen  popes. 

Leo  L,  called  the  Great:  Pope  440-461.  Ac- 
cording to  the  Liber  pontificalis  he  was  a  native  of 
Tuscany.  By  431,  as  a  deacon,  he  occupied  a  suf- 
ficiently important  position  for  Cyril  of  Alexandria 
to  apply  to  him  in  order  that  Rome's  influence 
should  be  thrown  against  the  claims  of  Juvenal  of 
Jerusalem  (q.v.)  to  patriarchal  jurisdiction  over 
Palestine — ^unless  this  letter  ib  addressed  rather  to 
Pope  Celestine.  About  the  same  time  Johannes 
Gassianus  (q.v.)  dedicated  to  him  the  treatise 
against  Nestorius  written  at  his  request.  But 
nothing  shows  more  plainly  the  confidence  felt  in 
him  than  his  being  chosen  by  the  emperor  to  settle 
the  dispute  between  Aetius  and  Albinus,  the  two 
highest  officials  in  Gaul.  During  his  absence  on 
tMB  mission,  Sixtus  III.  died  (Aug.  11,  440),  and 
Leo  was  unanimously  elected  by  the  people  to  suc- 
ceed him.  On  Sept.  29  he  entered  upon  a  pontifi- 
cate which  was  to  be  epoch-making  for  the  central- 
isation of  the  government  of  the  Church. 

An  uncompromising  foe  of  heresy,  Leo  found  that 
in  the  diocese  of  Aquileia,  Pelagians  were  received 
into  church  conmiunion  without  fonnal  repudia- 
tion of  their  errors;  he  wrote  to  rebuke  this  cul- 
pable negligence,  and  required  a  solenm  abjuration 
before  a  synod.  Bianicheans  fleeing  before  the 
Vandals  had  come  to  Rome   in  439 

Zeal  for  and  secretly  organised  there;  Leo  be- 
Orthodozy.  came  aware  of  this  and  proceeded 
against  them  (c.  443),  holding  a  public 
debate  with  their  representatives,  burning  their 
books,  and  warning  the  Roman  Christians  against 
them.  The  edict  of  Valentinian  III.  against  them 
(June  19,  445)  was  brought  about  by  his  efforts. 
Nor  was  his  attitude  less  decided  against  the  Pris- 
cillianists.  Bishop  Turrubius  of  Astorga,  aston- 
ished at  the  spread  of  this  sect  in  Spain,  had  ad- 
dressed the  other  Spanish  bishops  on  the  subject, 
sending  a  copy  of  his  letter  to  Leo,  who  did  not  let 
slip  the  opportunity  to  exercise  influence  in  Spain. 
He  wrote  an  extended  treatise  (July  21, 447)  against 
the  sect,  examining  its  false  teaching  in  detail,  and 
calling  for  a  Spanish  general  council  to  investigate 
whether  it  had  any  adherents  in  the  episcopate — 
but  this  was  prevented  by  the  political  circum- 
stances of  Spain. 

Leo  enforced  his  authority  in  445  against  Dios- 
curus,  Cyril's  successor  in  the  patriarcluite  of  Alex- 
andria, insisting  that  the  ecclesiastical  practise  of 
his  see  should  follow  that  of  Rome,  since  Mark,  the 
disciple  of  Peter  and  foimder  of  the  Alexandrian 
Church,  could  have  had  no  other  tradition  than 
that  of  the  prince  of  the  apostles.  The  fact  that 
the  African  province  of  Mauretania  Cssariensis  had 
been  preserved  to  the  empire  and  thus  to  the  Nicene 
faith  in  the  Vandal  invasion,  and  in  its  isolation 
was  disposed  to  rest  on  outside  support,  gave  Leo 
an  opportimity  to  assert  his  authority  there,  which 
he  did  decisively  in  regard  to  a  nimiber  of  questions 
of  discipline.  In  a  letter  to  the  bishops  of  Oun- 
pania,  Picenum,  and  Tuscany  (443)  he  required  the 
observance  of  all  his  precepts  and  those  of  his  pre- 


440 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Le  Nonrry 

Ii60l 


deoessors;  and  he  sharply  rebuked  the  bishops  of 
Sicily  (447)  for  their  deviation  from  the  Roman 
custom  as  to  the  time  of  baptism,  requiring  them 
to  send  delegates  to  the  Roman  synod  to  learn  the 
proper  practise. 

The  assertion  of  Roman  power  over  Illyria  had 
been  a  strong  point  with  previous  popes.  Inno- 
cent I.  had  constituted  the  metropolitan  of  Thes- 
salonica  his  vicar,  in  order  to  oppose  the  growing 
power  of  the  patriarch  of  Constantinople  there. 
But  now  the  Illyrian  bishops  showed  a  tendency  to 
side  with  Constantinople,  and  the  popes  had  dif- 
ficulty in  maintaining  their  authority.  In  444  Leo 
laid  down  in  a  letter  to  them  the  principle  that  Peter 
had  received  the  primacy  and  oversight  of  the 
whole  Church  as  a  requital  of  his  faith,  and  that 
thus  all  important  matters  were  to  be  referred  to 
and  decided  by  Rome.  In  446  he  had  occasion 
twice  to  interfere  in  the  affairs  of  Illyria,  and  in 
the  same  spirit  spoke  of  the  Roman  pontiff  as  the 
apex  of  the  hierarchy  of  bishops,  metropolitans,  and 
primates.  From  the  end  of  the  fifth  century,  how- 
ever, the  influence  of  Constantinople  was  again  pre- 
dominant here. 

Not  without  serious  opposition  did  he  succeed  in 
asserting  his  authority  over  Gaul.  Patroclus  of 
Aries  (d.  426)  had  received  from  Pope  Zosimus  the 
recognition  of  a  primacy  over  the  Gailican  Church 
(see  Arles,  Archbishopric  of),  which  was  strongly 
asserted  by  his  successor  Hilary  (429-449).  An  ap- 
peal from  Celidonius  of  Besangon  gave 
Asserts  His  Leo  occasion  to  proceed  against  Hil- 

Authority   ary,  who  defended  himself  stoutly  at 

in  GauL  Rome,  refusing  to  recognize  Leo's  ju- 
dicial status.  But  Leo  restored  Celi- 
donius and  restricted  Hilary  to  his  own  diocese,  de- 
priving him  even  of  his  metropolitan  rights  over 
the  province  of  Vienne.  Feeling  that  his  domi- 
nant idea  of  the  Roman  universal  monarchy  was 
threatened,  Leo  appealed  to  the  civil  power  for 
support,  and  obtained  from  Valentinian  III.  (q.v.) 
the  famous  decree  of  June  6,  445,  which  recognized 
the  primacy  of  the  bishop  of  Rome  based  on  the 
merits  of  Peter,  the  dignity  of  the  city,  and  the  de- 
crees of  Nicsea  (in  their  interpolated  form);  or- 
dained that  any  opposition  to  his  rulings,  which 
were  to  have  the  force  of  law,  should  be  treated  as 
treason;  and  provided  for  the  forcible  extradition 
by  provincial  governors  of  any  one  who  refused  to 
answer  a  sunmions  to  Rome.  Hilary  made  his  sub- 
mission, although  imder  his  successor,  Ravennius, 
Leo  divided  the  metropolitan  rights  between  Aries 
and  Vienne  (450). 

A  favorable  occasion  for  extending  the  authority 
of  Rome  in  the  East  offered  in  the  renewal  of  the 
Christologieal  controversy  by  Eutyches  (see  Euty- 
chianism),  who  in  the  beginning  of  the  conflict  ap- 
pealed to  Leo  and  took  refuge  with  him  on  his 
condemnation  by  Flavian.  But  on  receiving  full 
information  from  Flavian,  Leo  took  his  side  de- 
cisively. At  the  "  Robber  Synod  '*  of  Ephesus 
Leo's  representatives  delivered  the  famous  "  tome  " 
or  statement  of  the  faith  of  the  Roman  Church  in 
the  form  of  a  letter  addressed  to  Flavian,  which 
repeats,  in  close  adherence  to  Augustine,  the  for- 
mulas of  western  Christology,  without  really  touch- 
VI.— 29 


ing  the  problem  that  was  agitating  the  East.  The 
council  did  not  read  the  letter,  and  paid  no  atten- 
tion to  the  protests  of  Leo's  legates,  but  deposed 
Flavian  and  Eusebius,  who  appealed  to  Rome. 
Leo  demanded  of  the  emperor  that  an  ecumenical 
council  should  be  held  in  Italy,  and  in  the  mean 
time,  at  a  Roman  synod  in  Oct.,  449,  repudiated 
all  the  decisions  of  the  '*  Robber  Synod."  With- 
out going  into  a  critical  examination  of  its  dogmatic 
decrees,  in  his  letters  to  the  emperor  and  others  he 
demanded  the  deposition  of  Eutyches  as  a  Mani- 
chean  and  Dooetic  heretic.  With  the  death  of 
Theodosius  II.  (450)  and  the  sudden  change  in  the 
Eastern  situation,  Anatolius  the  new  patriarch  of 
Constantinople  fiilfilled  Leo's  requirements,  and 
his  **  tome  "  was  everywhere  read  and  recognized. 
He  was  now  no  longer  desirous  of  having  a  council, 
especially  since  it  would  not  be  hekl  in  Italy.  It 
was  called  to  meet  at  Nicsa,  then  transferred  to 
Chalcedon,  where  his  legates  held  at  least  an  hon- 
orary presidency,  and  where  the  bishops  recog- 
nized him  as  the  interpreter  of  the  voice  of  Peter 
and  as  the  head  of  their  body,  requesting  of  him 
the  confirmation  of  their  decrees.  He  firmly  de- 
clined to  confirm  their  disciplinary  arrangements, 
which  seemed  to  allow  Constantinople  a  practically 
equal  authority  with  Rome  and  regarded  the  civil 
importance  of  a  city  as  a  determining  factor  in  its 
ecclesiastical  position;  but  he  strongly  supported 
its  dogmatic  decrees,  especially  when,  after  the  ac- 
cession of  the  Emperor  Leo  I.  (457)  there  seemed 
to  be  a  disposition  toward  compromise  with  the 
Eutychians.  He  succeeded  in  having  an  orthodox 
patriarch,  and  not  the  Monophysite  Timotheus 
iElurus  (see  Monophtsitbs,  §{3  sqq.),  chosen  as 
patriarch  of  Alexandria  on  the  murder  of  Proterius. 

The  approaching  collapse  of  the  Western  Empire 
gave  Leo  a  further  opportunity  to  appear  as  the 
representative  of  lawful  authority.  When  Attila 
invaded  Italy  in  452  and  threatened  Rome,  it  was 
Leo  who,  with  two  high  civil  functionaries,  went  to 
meet  him,  and  so  impressed  him  that  he  withdrew 
— at  least  according  to  Prosper,  although  Jordanis, 
who  represents  Leo's  contemporary  Priscus,  gives 
other  grounds.  His  intercession  could  not  pre- 
vent the  sack  of  the  city  by  Genseric  in  455,  but 
murder  and  arson  were  repressed  by  his  influence. 
He  died  probably  on  Nov.  10,  461. 

The  significance  of  Leo's  pontificate  lies  in  the 

fact  of  his  assertion  of  the  imiversal  episcopate  of 

the  Roman  bishop,  which  comes  out  in  his  letters, 

and  still  more  in  his  ninety-six  extant  orations. 

According  to  him  the  Church  is  built 

Leo's  Sig-   upon  Peter,  in  pursuance  of  the  prom- 

nificance.  ise  of  Matt.  xvi.  16-19.  Peter  partici- 
pates in  everything  which  is  Christ's; 
what  the  other  apostles  have  in  common  with  him 
they  have  through  him.  The  Lord  prays  for  Peter 
alone  when  danger  threatens  all  the  apostles,  be- 
cause his  firmness  will  strengthen  the  others.  What 
is  true  of  Peter  is  true  also  of  his  successors.  Every 
other  bishop  is  charged  with  the  care  of  his  own 
special  flock,  the  Roman  with  that  of  the  whole 
Chiirch.  Other  bishops  are  only  his  assistants  in 
this  great  task.  Through  the  see  of  Peter,  Rome 
has  become  the  capital  of  the  world  in  a  wider  sense 


X.eoI-IX 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


450 


than  before.  For  this  reason,  when  the  earth  was 
divided  among  the  apostles,  Rome  was  reserved  to 
Peter,  that  here,  at  the  very  center,  the  decisive 
triumph  might  be  won  over  the  earthly  wisdom  of 
philosophy  and  the  power  of  the  demons;  and  thus 
from  the  head  the  light  of  truth  streams  out  through 
the  whole  body.  In  Leo's  eyes  the  decrees  of  the 
Coimcil  of  Chaloedon  acquired  their  validity  from 
his  confirmation.  The  wide  range  of  this  theory 
justifies  the  application  to  him  of  the  title  of  the 
first  pope.  (N.  Bokwxtbch.) 

Biblxoorapht:  The  Opera  were  edited  by  P.  Quesnel.  2 
vols.,  Paris,  1676  (defended  Hilary  againut  Leo,  therefore 
put  on  the  Index);  and  by  P.  and  H.  Ballerini,  3  vols., 
Venice.  1763-57  (contain  works  of  doubtful  authentic- 
ity).  from  which  they  were  reprinted  in  MPL,  liy.-Ivi., 
with  life  by  Anastaaiua  Bibliothecariua  (siven  with  com- 
mentary in  MPL,  cxxviii.  299  aqq.)  and  Queanel's  Dt9- 
BerUMo,  Fifty  selected  letters  are  printed  in  H.  Hurter, 
0pu9cula  aaerorwn  patrum  aeleeta,  ser.  1,  yols.,  xxv-xxvi.. 
Innsbruck,  1874.  An  Eng.  transl.  of  selected  letters  and 
sermons  is  given  in  NPNF,  2  ser.,  vol.  xii.,  together  with 
a  life  and  prolegomena.  * 

Data  oonoerning  Leo's  life  may  be  sought  in:  Liber 
panHJleali*,  ed.  Mommsen  in  MOH,  Oeet.  pont.  Rom.,  i 
(1898).  101-106;  TUlemont,  Mhnmrea,  xv.  414^832  (ac- 
curate, impartial);  Jaff^,  tUgeata,  pp.  34  sqq.;  W.  A. 
Arendt,  Leo  der  Grosae  und  aeine  Zeil,  Mains.  1836  (Ro- 
man CbthoUo.  apologetic):  £.  Perthcl,  Leo'§  I,  Leben  und 
Lehren,  Jena,  1843  (Protestant  and  depreciatory);  T. 
Greenwood.  Cathedra  Petri,  i.,  book  vi.,  chaps.  iv.-vi„ 
London,  1859;  F.  Bdhringer.  Die  Kirehe  ChriaH  und  ikre 
Zeugen^  voL  xii..  Stuttgart,  1879;  C.  H.  Gore,  in  Faihere 
for  Englitk  Readere,  London.  1880;  DCB,  iii.  652-673 
(minute);  F.  Gregorovius,  Hiet.  of  the  City  of  Rome,  i. 
189-228,  London,  1894.  Views  of  his  activitim  are  given 
by  P.  Kuhn.  Die  Chrietologie  Leoa  /.,  Warsbuig.  1894; 
Hefele,  ConcUienoeaehichU,  n.  302-356,  564.  Eng.  transl., 
vols,  iii-iv.;  O.  Bardenhewer,  Patrologie,  pp.  460  sqq.. 
Freiburg,  1901;  Hamack,  Dogma,  vols.  il^v..  passim. 
Consult  also.  Ceillier,  AtOeure  eacria,  x.  169-275;  Bower. 
Popea,  I  189-248;  Milman.  Latin  Chriatianity,  i.  253 
sqq.;  Neander,  Chriatian  Churd^,  vol.  iL,  passim;  Schaff, 
ChrieHan  Chiareh,  iii.  314  sqq.  et  passim. 

Leon.:  Pope  682-683.  The  importance  of  his 
brief  pontificate  lies  in  his  action  in  confirming  the 
acts  of  the  sixth  ecumenical  council,  which  con- 
tained the  inclusion  of  his  predecessor  Honorius 
among  the  condemned  leaders  of  Monothelitism 
(q.v.).  Similarly,  in  sending  the  acts  of  the  coun- 
cil to  the  Spanish  bishops,  he  included  Honorius  as 
one  "  who  did  not,  as  became  his  apostolic  author- 
ity, extinguish  the  flame  of  heretical  doctrine,  but 
by  his  negligence  fostered  it.''  Macarius  of  Antioch 
and  his  Monothelite  friends,  who  had  been  sent  to 
Rome,  were  (according  to  the  Liber  pantificalis) 
imprisoned  in  various  monasteries,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  two  who  recanted.  The  same  authority 
describes  Leo  as  learned  in  the  Scriptures,  Greek, 
and  ecclesiastical  music,  and  as  charitable.  The  date 
of  his  burial  is  July  3,  683.         (N.  Boitwbtsch.) 

Biblxoorapht:  The  Epietoke  aie  in  MPL,  xcvi.,  cf.  NA, 
viii.  363-^64.  Consult:  Liber  poniifUialia,  ed.  Mommsen 
in  MGH,  OeaL  ponl.  Rom.,  i  (1898).  200-202;  ASB,  June. 
V.  375;  R.  Baxmann,  Die  Politik  der  P&pate,  i.  185  sqq.. 
Elberfeld.  1868;  J.  Langen,  Geat^irhte  der  rdmiachen 
Kirehe,  ii.  568  sqq..  Bonn.  1885:  Ceillier.  Auieura  aacria, 
xi.  784-785.  xii.  955-958;  Hefele.  Condliengeadiidite, 
iii.  287  sqq.,  Eng.  transl.,  v.  179  sqq.;  Bower,  Popea,  i. 
486-487:  MUman,  IxUin  ChriatianUy,  ii.  287;  DCB,  iii 
673-674. 

L«o  nL:  Pope  795-816.  A  Roman  by  birth, 
he  was  elected  Dec.  26  and  consecrated  the  next 
day.     His  election  is  said  by  the  lAber  pontificalis 


to  have  been  unanimous;  but  the  Roman  aristoc- 
racy was  certainly  hostile  to  him  at  the  start,  which 
drove  him  to  rely  on  the  support  of  Charlemagne. 
He  sent  word  of  his  election  to  the  king,  assuring 
him  of  his  fidelity,  and  Charlemagne's  answer  ex- 
pressed his  readiness  to  renew  the  alliance  between 
the  Frankish  kingdom  and  the  Church.  At  firs: 
this  relation  was  useful  to  Leo,  and  soon  enough 
was  absolutely  necessary,  owing  not  only  to  the 
danger  of  Saracen  attack  but  even  more  to  the  hos- 
tile attitude  of  Leo's  personal  opponents  in  Rome, 
the  men  whom  his  elevation  had  robbed  of  tbeu* 
power.  At  the  customary  procession  on  St.  Mark's 
day,  799,  he  was  attacked  and  maltreated;  and  a 
tumultuous  gathering  judged  him  on  various  g^a^-e 
chaiges  and  declared  him  deposed.  His  partizans 
rallied  and  released  him  in  the  night.  He  fled  \.o 
Germany,  where  Charlemagne  received  him  as  the 
lawful  pope,  and  in  November  he  was  restored  by 
the  Frankish  power.  In  Charlemagne's  mind,  how- 
ever, the  duty  of  protection  involved  the  right  of 
oversight.  His  conmiissioner  was  directed  to  make 
a  full  investigation  as  well  of  the  charges  again< 
Leo  as  of  the  violence  of  his  opponents.  Difficul- 
ties stood  in  the  way  either  of  judging  a  pope  or  of 
allowing  his  sacred  oflioe  to  be  filled  by  a  man  under 
suspicion  of  serious  misdoing.  The  suggestion  of 
Leo's  voluntary  retirement  to  a  monastery  was 
made,  but  not  so  easily  carried  out.  Charlemagne 
decided  to  take  the  matter  up  in  (wrson,  and  ap- 
peared in  Italy  in  the  autunm  of  800.  The  inves- 
tigation ended  not  by  a  judicial  condemnation  or 
by  a  judicial  acquittal,  but  by  Leo's  taking  a  solemn 
oath  in  Charlemagne's  presence  that  he  was  inno- 
cent of  the  charges,  after  which  his  opponents  weir^ 
condemned  to  death  as  rebels,  though  the  sentenft 
was  commuted  to  banishment.  Two  days  later,  or 
Christmas  day,  Leo  crowned  Charlemagne  as  em- 
peror, apparently  (though  the  question  has  been 
much  debated)  without  any  preliminary  knowledi^e 
or  desire  on  the  king's  part,  and  to  the  profit  rather 
of  Leo's  own  importance. 

Charlemagne  deduced  from  the  new  title  the  con- 
clusion that  Rome  was  to  be  treated  as  an  integrd 
part  of  his  empire,  and  thenceforth  little  essential 
difference  can  be  observed  between  it«  bishop  and 
the  other  metropolitans  of  the  empire;  the  pope 
was  considered  a  subject  of  the  emperor.  The  ex- 
tent to  which  this  was  carried  may  be  seen  frtMn 
the  small  part  assigned  to  Leo  in  the  settlement  d 
the  controversies  of  the  time.  The  Adoptionist  con- 
troversy was  taken  in  hand  by  Charlemagne  him- 
self, and  Leo  had  nothing  to  do  but  to  repeat  at  a 
Roman  synod  Oct.  23,  798,  the  condemnation  al- 
ready pronounced  in  Germany.  In  the  negotia- 
tions as  to  the  FUioque  he  ventured,  indeed,  to  dis- 
sociate himself  from  the  conclusion  of  the  Frankish 
Church,  but  his  solenm  exposition  of  the  ancient 
text  of  the  creed,  engraved  on  silver  tablets,  in  St 
Peter's  made  no  impression  on  Charlemagne  and 
his  theologians,  and  the  FUioque  was  accepted  both 
in  the  Frankish  Church  and  tacitly  in  Rome.  E\tr 
in  his  relations  with  the  Greek  Church  Leo  was  ham- 
pered by  his  relation  to  Charlemagne.  When  tbp 
emperor  died  (Jan.  28,  814),  Leo  neglected  to  havt* 
the  Roman  people  do  homage  to  his  successor  Loub 


461 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lao  I-IX 


the  Pious.  Thinkiiig  to  get  revenge  on  his  old 
enemies,  he  had  some  of  them  imprisoned  or  exe- 
cuted. Louis  took  notice  of  this  trespass  on  the 
imperial  rights,  and  sent  his  nephew  Bernard  to  in- 
vestigate it;  but  Leo  succeeded  in  pacifying  him 
by  an  embassy.  He  died  June  12,  816.  He  was  a 
man  of  small  capacity,  imduly  magnified  in  later 
times  by  the  importance  attached  to  his  coronation 
of  Charlemagne.  (A.  Hauck.) 

Bibliographt:  The  Epiatola  are  in  Jaff^,  BRG,  iv.  308- 
334,  and  Bouquet.  Recueil,  v.  597-604.  Sources  are:. 
lAber  potUiflcaliM,  ed.  Duchesne,  ii.  1  sqq.,  Paris,  1802; 
and  the  annals  collected  in  MOH,  Script^,  i.  1826.  Ck>n- 
suH:  F.  Gregorovius.  Hist,  of  the  City  of  Rome,  ii.  460- 
493.  London,  1894;  J.  A.  Ketterer,  Karl  der  Qroeee  und 
die  Kirehe,  Munich,  1898;  Hauck.  KD,  ii.  passim;  He- 
fele.  ConeUienaeadiidUe,  vol.  iii.  passim;  Ceillier,  AiAteure 
muTie,  xii.  399-401  et  passim;  Bower,  Popes,  ii.  173-192; 
Milman,  LcAin  Chriatianity,  ii.  454  sqq.;  Neander.  Chrie- 
tian  Church,  vol.  iiL  passim;  Schaflf.  Chriatian  Churd^, 
iv.  455;  DCB,  iii  674-679;  and  also  much  of  the  litera- 
ture under  Crarlemaonb. 

Leo  IV. :  Pope  847-855.  He  was  elected  at  the 
end  of  January  and  consecrated  Apr.  10,  without 
waiting  for  imperial  confirmation,  on  pretext  of 
danger  from  the  Saracens.  For  the  same  reason  he 
zealously  pushed  the  new  fortifications  of  Rome, 
and  thus  strengthened  the  papal  independence.  The 
legal  relations  with  the  empire  were  not,  however, 
substantially  altered;  Leo  acknowledged  the  theo- 
retical supremacy  of  the  emperor  in  both  temporal 
and  spiritual  matters,  even  while  he  endeavored  to 
efface  the  recollection  of  its  past  exercise.  In 
purely  spiritual  questions  he  acted  unhesitatingly 
as  the  supreme  head  of  Christianity.  He  showed 
his  conception  of  his  see  as  "  mistress  and  head  of 
all  churches  "  (Jaff^,  Regeata,  2647)  by  refusing  his 
assent  to  the  decrees  of  the  Synod  of  Soissons  (853) 
and  requiring  a  new  one  to  be  held  in  presence  of 
his  legate  (see  Hincmar  of  Reims),  as  well  as  by 
reproaching  Ignatius  of  Constantinople  for  holding 
a  synod  and  deposing  certain  bishops  without  his 
sanction,  and  finally  sunmioning  both  parties  to 
Rome  (see  PHonus).    He  died  July  17,  855. 

(A.  Hauck.) 
Bxbuoorapht:  The  Epiatola  et  deereta  are  in  MPL,  cxv. 
655-674,  cf.  cxxix.  999-1002.  Soxirces  for  a  life  are  the 
Vita  with  commentary  in  ASB,  July,  iv.  302-326;  Liber 
porUiflcalia,  ed.  Duchesne,  ii.  106  sqq.,  Paris,  1892;  and 
the  annals  collected  in  MOH,  Script,  i.  1826.  Consult: 
F.  Gregorovius,  HiaL  of  the  City  of  Rome,  iii.  91-111. 
London,  1895;  Ceillier,  AtUeura  aacrfa,  xii.  406-409; 
Bower.  Popea,  ii.  217-220;  Milman,  Latin  Chriatianity, 
iii  18-20;  Schaff.  Chriaiian  Churdi.  iv.  459.  Much  of 
the  literature  cited  imder  Gregory  IV.  is  pertinent. 

Leo  v.:  Pope  903.  He  ruled  only  a  month 
from  his  consecration  in  August,  was  then  over- 
thrown and  imprisoned,  and  soon  died. 

(A.  Hauck.) 
Bibuoorapht:  Sources  for  a  Ufe  are:  Liber  pontiflcalia, 
ed.  Duchesne,  ii  234,  Paris.  1892;  Jaffd,  Regeata,  i.  444; 
J.  M.  Watterich,  Romanorum  pontifleum  .  .  .  vitce,  i. 
32,  Leipsic,  1862.  Consult:  F.  Gregorovius,  Hiat.  of  the 
CUy  o/  Rome,  iii.  242,  London,  1895:  C.  Dflmmler.  Auxil- 
iua  und  Buloariua,  Leipsic,  1866;  Ceillier,  Auteura  aacria, 
xii.  743;  Bower,  Popea,  ii.  306;  Milman.  Latin  Chriatian^ 
ity,  iii.  155. 

Leo  VL:  Pope  928-929.  He  was  the  son  of 
the  Roman  primtoeriiLa  Christophorus.  All  that  is 
known  of  him  is  that  he  was  elected  in  June,  928, 
and  died  probably  in  the  following  February. 

(A.  Hauck.)       | 


Bibuographt:  Sources  are:  Liber  pontiflealia,  ed.  Duckeme, 
ii.  242.  Paris.  1892;  Jaffd,  Regeata,  i  453;  J.  M.  Wat- 
terich. Romanorum  pontifleum  .  .  .  vitm,  i.  33,  Leipsic, 
1862.  Consult:  F.  Gregorovius,  HiaL  of  the  City  of 
Rome,  iii.  282;   Bower,  Popea,  ii.  311. 

Leo  Vn.:  Pope  936-939.  He  was  consecrated 
early  in  Jan.,  936,  presumably  the  choice  of  the 
younger  Alberic,  then  in  power.  He  was  a  pious 
monk,  allied  with  the  Cluniac  movement,  and  what 
is  known  of  his  papal  acts  is  principally  confined  to 
efforts  for  monastic  reform.     He  died  in  July,  939. 

(A.  Hauck.) 
Bibuoorapht:  His  Epiatola  are  in  Bouquet,  Recueil,  vol. 
ix.  Consult:  Liber  pontificalia,  ed.  Duchesne,  ii.  244, 
Paris.  1892;  Jaff^,  Regeata,  i.  455-456;  J.  M.  Watterich, 
Romanorum  pontifleum  .  .  .  vita,  i  33,  Leipsic,  1862; 
£.  Sackur,  Die  Cluniacenaer,  Halle.  1892;  F.  Gregoro- 
vius, Hiatory  of  the  City  of  Rome,  iii.  306-317.  London, 
1895;  Bower,  Popea,  ii.  312-313;  and  the  literature  under 
John  XI. 

Leo  Vm. :    Pope  963-965.    He  was  elected  Dec. 

4  to  replace  John  XII.,  who  had  been  deposed  by 

Otto  I.     For  a  time  he  was  driven  from  Rome, 

but  was  restored  by  Otto  after  John's  death,  and 

his  new  rival,  Benedict  V.,  was  deposed  in  June, 

964,  at  a  synod  held  in  the  emperor's  presence  (see 

John  XII.;  Benedict  V.).    Leo  died,  however,  in 

the  following  spring.  (A.  Hauck.) 

Biblioorapht:     Liber  pontificalia,   ed.    Duchesne,    ii.    250. 

Paris.  1892;    Jaff^.  Regeata,  i.  467-168;    J.  M.  Watterich, 

Romanorum    pontifleum  .  .  .  vita,    L    42-43;     A.     Ens, 

Pythagoraa  novua  ezcuaaua,  Li^ge,  1767;    Ceillier,  Auteura 

aacria,  xii.  831-833;    F.  GrsKorovius,  Hiat.  of  the  City  of 

Rome,  iii.  348-357,  London.  1895;   Bower.  Popea,  ii.  319- 

320;    Milman,  Latin  Chriatianity,  iii.  183-185;    Neander, 

Chriatian  Church,  iii.  368;    Schaff.  Chriatian  Church,  iv. 

290. 

Leo  IX.  (Bruno,  son  of  Count  Hugo  of  Egisheim 
in  Alsace,  a  cousin  of  the  Emperor  Conrad  II.) : 
Pope  1048-54.  He  was  bom  at  Egisheim  (2  m.  w. 
of  Colmar)  June  21,  1002,  and  had  already  dis- 
tinguished himself  by  a  model  administration  as 
bishop  of  Toul  when,  by  command  of  Henry  III. 
and  on  request  of  the  Roman  delegates,  he  was 
chosen  pope  at  the  diet  in  Worms  early  in  Dec, 
1048,  succeeding  Damasus  II.  Talented,  ener- 
getic, lovable,  experienced,  and  in  close  touch  with 
the  movement  for  a  reform  in  church  life  emanating 
from  Cluny  (q.v.),  he  was  highly  qualified  for  the 
office  tendered  to  him.  His  reception  in  Rome  was 
brilliant,  and,  at  his  own  request,  he  was  there  again 
elected  and  then  assumed  the  pontifical  government, 
being  enthroned  on  Feb.  12,  1049.  Hildebrand 
(see  Gregory  VII.),  who  in  1046  had  been  obliged 
to  accompany  Gregory  VI.  to  Germany,  returned  to 
Rome  in  Leo's  retinue,  and  was  now  received  into 
the  body  of  cardinals.  Of  still  greater  significance 
was  the  importation  of  other  forces.  The  episco- 
pal see  of  Silva  Candida  was  assigned  to  the  monk 
Humbert  (q.v.);  Hugo  the  White  (q.v.)  was  pro- 
moted as  cardinal  priest  of  St.  Clement  in  Rome; 
Stephen  of  Lorraine  obtained  an  abbot's  post  in 
Rome;  and  Archbishop  Frederick,  brother  of  Duke 
Godfrey  of  Lorraine,  was  called  from  Li6ge. 

Leo  held  his  first  Roman  synod  in  the  Lateran 
Apr.  9-12,  1049,  and  there  laid  the  foundation  and 
outlined  the  policy  of  his  whole  administration. 
His  first  attempt  at  reform  aimed  to  suppress  sim- 
ony. The  synod  approved  the  deposition  of  simoni- 
acal  bishops,  but,  with  clamorous  protest,  refused 


LmZZ-X 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


452 


the  pope's  denumd  for  the  annulment  of  all  ordina- 
tions of  simonists  on  the  ground  of  its  practical  in- 
expediency.   A  law  was  also  passed 
Leo's      concerning  compulsory  celibacy  in  the 

Reformt.  priesthood,  which  involved  little  sub- 
stantially new  but  proved  of  great 
consequence  as  it  initiated  the  reformed  papacy's 
warfare  against  the  marriage  of  priests.  Soon  after- 
ward, Leo  started  on  a  journey  to  Germany,  over- 
taking the  emperor  in  Saxony,  and  attending  him 
by  way  of  Ck>lqgne  to  Alx-la-Chapelle.  At  Reims, 
Oct.  3-6,  he  held  the  great  synod  which  has  peculiar 
interest  both  by  reason  of  the  preceding  situation 
and  of  its  enactments.  There  was  but  small  at- 
tendance from  France,  and  Leo  exercised  great  re- 
serve. The  celibacy  question  did  not  at  this  time 
come  up  for  discussion  at  all,  and  the  examination 
of  charges  in  case  of  the  bishops  under  suspicion  of 
simony  was  conducted  in  a  lukewarm  way.  Leo 
also  forbore  to  press  his  rigorous  conviction  in  re- 
spect to  simoniacal  consecrations.  On  the  other 
hand,  he  pursued  all  the  more  energetically  his  aim 
of  bringing  out  in  clearly  expressed  terms  the  au- 
thoritative position  of  the  papacy.  The  archbishop 
of  Santiago  in  Galicia,  northern  Spain,  had  as- 
sumed the  title  ApoHolicua,  and  was  therefore  ex- 
communicated. Many  French  bishops  and  abbots 
who  had  stayed  away  from  the  synod  were  likewise 
sentenced  with  the  ban,  while  others  were  siun- 
moned  to  Rome.  At  the  dose  of  the  synod  the 
first  investiture  law  by  the  reformed  papacy 
was  promulgated  (see  Invsstiturb).  Two  weeks 
later,  about  Oct.  19,  Leo  opened,  in  presence 
of  Emperor  Henry  III.,  a  brilliant  synod  at 
Mains,  which  likewise  took  measiires  against 
simony  and  the  marriage  of  priests.  He  then 
returned  to  Italy. 

In  the  spring  of  1050  Leo  was  in  southern  Italy, 
where  he  convened  a  synod  at  Salerno  and  at  Si- 
ponto,  southward  of  Monte  Gaigano.  The  Roman 
synod  which  met  under  his  presidency  on  Apr.  29 
continued  the  activity  for  reform.  A  few  weeks 
kter,  however,  he  was  again  in  southern  Italy, 
where  the  advance  of  the  Normans  was  inaugurating 
new  political  combinations.  The  synod  at  Vercelli 
then  recalled  him  to  the  north.  This  belongs  to 
the  conventions  tmder  Leo  IX.  which  are  of  great 
moment  in  the  history  of  dogma,  for  here  Berengar 
of  Tours  (q.v.)  was  condemned  anew.  Here  again 
the  difficult  question  came  up  as  to  what  course 
should  be  observed  in  the  matter  of  ordinations 
by  simonists,  but  once  again  the  pope  failed 
to  have  his  policy  adopted;  namely,  that  the 
actual  proof  of  a  simoniacal  ordination  required 
the  revocation  of  the  sacrament  thereof.  In  the 
autumn  Leo  journeyed  across  the  Alps  once 
more  to  France. 

Early  in  1051  he  was  present  in  Germany,  and 
had  interviews  of  political  importance  with  Henry 
III.  at  Cologne,  Treves,  and  Augsburg.  On  return- 
ing to  Rome,  Leo  finally  resigned  hiis  bishopric  of 
Toul.  The  third  of  the  Roman  synods  convened 
by  him  sat  in  April,  after  Easter.  Once  again  the 
administration  of  the  sacraments  by  simonists  was 
discussed  without  any  understanding  being  reached. 
During  the  following  months  all  the  pope's  energy 


was  called  forth  in  southern  Italy,  where  the  issue 

was  to  meet  the  dangers  of  the  Norman  invasion. 

Leo  first  attempted,  by  alliance  with 

The  Ror-    Prince  Weimar  of  Salerno  and  Count 

man  In-  Drpgo,  chief  of  the  Apulian  Normana, 
▼tsfon.  to  secure  the  acquisition  of  Benevento 
by  pacific  means,  but  did  not  succeed. 
Claims  on  Benevento  coukl  be  made  effectual  by 
force  alone,  and  to  this  end  the  pope  sought  help 
from  King  Henry  I.  of  France  and  Emperor  Henry 
III.  of  Germany.  Later,  in  the  early  summer  of 
1052,  Leo  attempted  to  lead  the  conflict  with  the 
Normans  in  person,  but  was  unable  to  keep  his 
army  together.  In  this  difficult  situation  he  de- 
sired a  personal  understanding  with  the  German 
emperor,  and  being  appealed  to  at  this  very  tizne 
by  King  Andrew  of  Hungary  as  mediator  in  the 
war  with  Henry  III.,  he  hastened  to  the  imperial 
camp  at  Pressburg.  Although  his  intervention 
brought  no  advantage  to  the  German  empire,  and 
though  the  Hungarian  expedition  issued  unfavor- 
ably, the  good  understanding  between  Henry  and 
Leo  was  not  impaired  and  they  returned  together 
to  Germany.  While  pope  and  emperor  were  cele- 
brating the  Christmas  festival  together  at  Worms, 
they  came  to  the  important  agreement  that  Henry 
ceded  Benevento  and  other  imperial  tenure  in 
southern  Italy  to  the  pope,  in  return  for  which  Leo 
renoimced  the  rights  of  the  Roman  Church  to  a 
number  of  foundations  and  cloisters  in  Germany 
(the  bishopric  of  Bamberg,  abbey  of  Fulda,  etc.). 
The  value  of  this  bargain  for  Leo,  however,  de- 
pended on  whether  the  German  emperor  would  also 
vouchsafe  him  the  help  of  the  empire  to  maintain 
these  territories  against  the  Normans.  At  the  out- 
set Hemy  intended  this,  but  Bishop  Gebhard  of 
Eichstftdt  brought  it  about  that  the  army,  already 
started  on  its  march  to  Italy,  was  recalled.  Never- 
theless a  good  many  German  troops,  especially  from 
Swabia,  were  in  the  pope's  train  when  he  returned 
to  Italy  in  Feb.,  1053. 

Leo's  time  of  successes  was  past.  When  he  con- 
vened the  Lombard  episcopate,  which  had  proved  far 
from  responsive  to  his  reforming  efforts,  in  synod  at 
Mantua  on  Feb.  24,  1053,  turbulent  scenes  ensued 
rendering  all  business  impossible  and  even  men- 
facing  the  pope's  life.  After  the  (fourth)  Roman 
Easter  synod,  in  April,  Leo  made  preparation  for  a 
decisive  blow  at  the  Normans.  The  battle  at  Gyv- 
tate  in  Norman  Apulia,  Jime  18,  brought  the  de- 
cision— the  papal  army  was  almost  armihilated,  and 
Leo  himself  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  enemy.  He 
was  detained  nearly  nine  months  at  Benevento  as 
captive  of  war,  but  without  being  subjected  to  re- 
strictions of  open  communication.  Unbroken  by 
his  misfortune  he  urged  the  E^astem  Empire  and 
Germany  to  a  great  action  against  the  Normans, 
but  did  not  achieve  his  object.  Upon  his  falling 
dangerously  ill,  he  was  aUowed  to  return  to  Rome. 
He  left  Benevento  on  Mar.  12,  and  died  at  Rome 
on  Apr.  19,  1054. 

The  pontificate  of  Leo  IX.  covers  few  years,  but 
in  this  brief  span  of  time  he  managed  to  win  a  posi- 
tion of  commanding  respect  for  the  Roman  primate 
in  western  Christendom,  indicated  new  and  uni- 
versal tasks  for  the  same,  and  by  adoption  of  the 


468 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


LmZZ-X 


pseudo-Isidorian  code  (see  Pbbudo-Isidorian  Db- 
€:retau9)  in  the  practical  life  of  the  Church,  paved 
the  way  for  the  later  supreme  domina- 
Leo's       tion  of  the  papacy  under  Gregory  VII. 
Achieve-    His  extensive  journeys  were  a  well^ 
ments.      chosen  means  of  coming  into  personal 
contact  with  the  various  parts  of  the 
Church;  and  his  plan  of  combining  with  his  visits 
church  consecrations  and  translations,  in  so  far  as 
these  festivals  afforded  opportunity  for  the  vast 
multitude  to  see  the  head  of  the  Church,  not  only 
enhanced  the  popularity  of  Leo  himself,  but  like- 
wise the  prestige  of  the  papacy  as  an  institution. 
Of  no  smaller  significance  was  the  revival  and 
further  development  of  church  synods.    Under  Leo 
the  synods  again  became  vehicles  and  centers  of 
ecclesiastical  life,  at  the  same  time  proving  an 
available  arm  for  strengthening,  or  at  least  reviving, 
the  connection  between  the  episcopate  and  Peter's 
throne.     This  result  was  also  effected  through  the 
manifold  honors  which  Leo  was  wont  to  bestow  on 
occasion  of  his  journeys;  and  no  less  so  by  his  man- 
ner of  having  himself  escorted  by  devoted  prelates, 
such  as  Archbishop  Halinard  of  Lyons,  Archbishop 
Hugo  of  BesanQon,  and  Abbot  Hugo  of  Climy. 
There  can  be  no  doubt  that  these  measures  were 
part  of  a  systematic  policy  on  the  part  of  the  pope. 
Nevertheless  this  tendency  toward  centralization 
of  the  church  life  had  no  disquieting  effect  upon 
Leo's  contemporaries,  as  it  was  associated  with  an 
eneigetic  procedure  against  the  vice  of  simony  and 
the  custom  of  saceidotal  marriage,  wherein  the 
circle  of  the  Cluny  reform  party  discerned  the  great- 
est perils  to  the  life  of  the  Church.     When  Leo  aa- 
cended  the  throne,  he  was  the  trusted  advocate  of 
this  group,  and  he  thoroughly  fulfilled  the  hopes 
that  were  entertained  of  him  from  that  quarter. 
There  could  be  no  question,  again,  of  a  real  jeop- 
ardizing of  the   independence   of  the  episcopate 
under  Leo  IX.,   or  of  an  aggressive  movement 
against  the  temporal  State,  although  some  attempts 
in  this  direction  and  the  germs  of  complications 
may  be  remarked;   but  they  did  not,  as  jret,  ma- 
ture, nor  was  the  situation  with  reference  to  Henry 
III.  clouded  by  the  recognition  of  a  fundamental 
antagonism.    It  is  true  that  Leo's  achievements  are 
offset  by  too  decided  attention  to  Italian  terri- 
torial politics,  and  by  the  initiation  of  the  great 
schism  of  the  Eastern  Church  (see  CiERULARius, 
Michael;  Eastern  Church,  IL,  {  4).    However,  it 
must  not  be  overlooked  that  this  catastrophe  was 
the  culmination  of  developments  embracing  hun- 
dreds of  years ;   and  in  so  far  as  the  personalities  then 
on  the  stage  can  be  made  accountable  for  the  same  at 
all,  it  is  not  so  much  Leo  IX.  who  incurs  the  bur- 
den of  blame  as  his  representatives.   Carl  Mirbt. 
Bibuoorapht:   For  the  Epiatola^  dipUmuUa  et  decreta  con- 
sult:   MPL,  cxlui.;    MGH,  EpUt,   iii   (1883),   261-728; 
NA,  iy.  192-195;    Jaff«,  Regetta,  I  529^549.  ii.  749;    Tor 
bularium  Cannente,   i.   378  sqq.,   Monte   Caaino,    1887; 
P.  Kehr,  NathritJUen  von  der  kOniolichen  OeaeUachaft  der 
Wiueruehaften     tu     OdUingen^     phUoaophiadinhUtorische 
Klaue,  1898,  part  i,  p.  311.  1899.  part  i.  pp.  216-218. 
1900.  part   il  142-146,  part  iu.  309-310.  1901.  part   i. 
pp.  83-84.     Bibliographies  are  found  in  F.  Cerroti.  Biblio- 
gfr^ftadiRomamedievaUemoderna^  i.  353  eqq..  Rome,  1893; 
U.  Chevalier,   Repertoire  dee  soureea  hittoriquee  du  moyen 
doe,  p.  1373,  and  SuppUment,  p.  2706.  Paris,  1877-188a 


An  early  anonsrmoua  Vita  is  reproduced  in  S.  Borgia. 
Memorie  iaioriehe  delta  porUifleia,  ii.  299-^348.  Rome,  1764. 
Other  lives,  including  those  by  Bruno  and  Guibert.  with 
accounts  of  his  death  and  miracles,  are  found  in  MPL, 
cxliu.  466-548.  dzv.  1109-1122,  and  in  A8B,  April,  iL 
642-674.  A  Germ,  transl.  of  Guibert  was  issued  by 
P.  P.  Brucker.  Strasburg.  1902;  cf.  J.  May.  Zur  Kritik 
miUeldUerlidter  GeechidUequeUen,  Oifenbuig,  1889.  Mod- 
em lives  are:  L.  Spaeh,  Strasburg,  1864;  O.  Delarc. 
Paris,  1876;  L.  Winterer,  Rixheim.  1886;  W.  Martens, 
2  vols.,  Leipoic  1894;  XL,  vii  1787^)6.  On  the  place 
of  his  birth  consult:  Fischer,  Recherdiee  eur  le  Ueu  de  la 
naieeanee  du  .  .  .  Lion  IX.,  Nantes,  1873;  P.  P.  Dexen. 
OileetnS  .  ,  .  Leon  IX.,  Strasbuxg.  1884;  L.  G.  GlAckler. 
Oiinaieort  dee  ...  Leo  IX.,  ib.  1892.  Further  material 
on  the  general  subject  will  be  found  in  C.  WiH,  Die  AnfOnge 
der  ReetawraJtion  der  KirAe  im  11,  Jahrhundert,  Marburg, 
1859;  L.  Duhamel.  Uon  IX.  et  lee  monaethree  de  Lorraine, 
Epinal.  1869;  R.  Bazmann,  Die  Politik  der  P&pete,  ii. 
213  sqq..  Elberfeld,  1869;  J.  Hergenrdther,  PhoHue,  m, 
735  sqq..  Regensburg,  1869;  W.  Martens,  Die  BeeetMung 
dee  pOpeOiehen  Stuhlee  unter  .  .  .  Heinrieh  III.  und  IV., 
pp.  25  sqq.,  Freiburg,  1887;  W.  BrGcking,  Die  franedeiedte 
PolUik  Papet  Leoe  IX.,  Stuttgart,  1891;  J.  Langen,  Oe- 
eehicKte  der  rdmieehen  Kirehe,  iii.  445-485.  Bonn,  1892; 
C.  Mirbt.  Die  Publixieiik  im  ZeUalter  Gregor  XII,,  Leipsic, 
1894;  F.  Gregorovius.  Hiet.  ^  the  City  <4  Rome,  iv.  74- 
90.  London,  1896;  H.  Gerdes.  Oeeehichte  der  ealieehen 
Kaieer  und  ihrer  ZeU,  pp.  100-111,  Leipsic,  1898;  J.  von 
Pflugk-Harttung.  Die  BuUen  der  POpeie,  pp.  160  sqq.. 
Gotha.  1901;  J.  Drehmann.  Papet  Leo  IX,  vnd  die  Si- 
monie,  Leipsic,  1908;  Ceillier,  Auteure  eacrSe,  xiil  19SK214; 
Hefele,  ConcUienoeeehicKte,  iy.  716  sqq.;  Neander,  Chrie- 
tian  Chvrdi,  iii  378-386;  Moeller.  ChrieHan  Church,  ii. 
229-230;  Bower,  Popee,  ii  343-361;  MiJman,  Latin 
Chrietianity,  iii.  240-283;  and  the  literature  under  Bbr- 
bnoar;  Grsoort  XIL 

Leo  X.  (Giovanni  de'  Medici,  second  son  of  Lo- 
renzo the  Magnificent):  Pope  1513-21.  He  was 
bom  in  Florence  Dec.  11,  1475,  and  was  destined 
by  his  father  for  the  spiritual  career  with  the  in- 
tent that  he  should  eventually  attain  to  the  high- 
est office  in  the  Church.  This  was  anticipated  in 
1489  when  Innocent  VIII.  on  Lorenzo's  motion 
nominated  the  lad  of  fourteen  cardinal  in  petto. 
Four  years  later,  when  Giovanni's  humanistic  edu- 
cation, directed  by  Angelo  Poliziano,  Marsilio  Ficino, 
Pico  della  Mirandola,  and  the  author  (subsequently 
Cardinal  Bibbiena)  of  the  immoral  play  II  Cortp- 
gianOf  was  completed,  and  after  a  supplementary 
course  of  tlieology  and  canon  law  at  Pisa,  he  put 
on  the  cardinal's  insignia,  and  became  occupied  in 
affairs  of  the  Curia.  He  also  took  part  in  the  con- 
clave which,  very  much  against  his  wish,  chose 
Alexander  VI.  to  succeed  Innocent  VIII.  after  the 
unexpected  death  of  the  latter  in  1492.  Rome  had 
now  little  attraction  for  Giovanni  and  he  scarcely 
visited  the  city  until  1500,  spending  his  time  in 
Venice,  Germany,  and  Flanders.  His  ascendency 
with  the  Curia  did  not  set  in  till  the  time  of  Julius 
II.,  in  1503,  when  the  pope's  eagerness  to  aggran- 
dize his  family  ran  parallel  with  like  interests  of  the 
Medici,  and  on  both  sides  a  comprehensive  culture 
of  humanistic  and  artistic  endeavors  appeared  as  a 
matter  of  course.  The  Medicean  cardinal  gained 
important  political  influence  in  1509,  when  ap- 
pointed governor  in  Bologna,  though  this  was  ended 
by  the  defeat  of  the  papal  power  at  Ravenna  Apr. 
11,  1512,  when  the  governor  himself  was  captured. 
While  being  transported  to  Milan,  however,  he 
escaped  the  French  and  reached  Florence,  where 
the  pope  also  was  present. 

When  Julius  II.  died  in  the  early  part  of  1513, 


Lao  X-XIU 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


454 


after  a  brief  conclave  Giovanni  was  elected.  His 
family  now  stood  doubly  high,  since  in  Florence, 
too,  the  leader  of  a  conspiracy  against  them  had 
just  been  seized  and  executed.  In  Rome  the  elec- 
tion was  hailed  with  jubilation.  The  **  Holy " 
League  against  France  was  concluded  by  Henry 
VII.  of  England  with  Ferdinand  the  Catholic  and 
Maximilian  Sforza,  though  Leo  X.  had  as  little  part 
in  it  as  in  the  matter  of  accepting  an  offer  of  alli- 
ance with  Louis  XI.  of  France.  The  defeat  of  the 
French  at  Novara,  however,  in  June,  1513,  served 
the  pope's  cause.  Meanwhile  the  Fifth  Lateran 
Council  was  in  session  at  Rome;  this  was  to  in- 
stitute "  reform,"  and  it  has  been  aflEumed  by 
some  later  Roman  Catholic  historians,  conceding 
the  corrupt  state  of  contemporary  church  affairs, 
that  even  without  Luther,  and  better  than  he,  the 
ooimdl  would  have  attained  this  object,  had  it  only 
been  allowed  complete  operation.  But  there  was 
no  suggestion  of  thoroughgoing  reform;  the  sole 
consequence  of  weight,  and  that  important  only 
for  the  Curia,  was  the  fact  that  the  schismatic 
Coimcil  of  Pisa  (see  Julius  II.)  suffered  its  death- 
blow, in  that  the  leaders  of  the  schismatic  prelates 
submitted  to  the  Curia.  At  the  eighth  and  ninth 
session,  the  reform  question  was  treated,  and  cer- 
tain amendments  in  respect  to  the  filling  of  eccle- 
siastical offices  were  introduced;  there  were  also 
some  further  ameliorations  in  particular  points; 
but  touching  what  constituted  the  very  fulcrum 
of  the  Lutheran  Reformation,  that  is,  a  religious 
renewal  and  quickening,  there  was  no  discussion 
whatever — ^at  the  utmost,  a  speaker  here  and  there 
suggested  the  necessity  and  manner  of  laboring 
toward  that  end. 

After  the  dark  clouds  of  the  political  situation 
had  been  dispelled,  Leo  X.  felt  himself  at  the  sum- 
mit of  his  power;  the  Turks  were  to  be  actively 
resisted,  funds  for  a  crusade  were  to  be  collected, 
and  a  fleet  made  ready.  While  he  was  planning 
all  this,  likewise  collecting  money  for  continuation 
of  the  building  of  St.  Peter's  and  other  objects,  an 
event  occurred  in  Germany  which  was  to  shake 
the  position  and  power  of  the  papacy  most  pro- 
foundly— the  beginning  of  the  Reformation.  Un- 
doubtedy  Leo  X.  against  his  will  promoted  its 
progress,  because  he  failed  to  understand  its  nature 
and  aim;  and  that  he  did  not  understand  is  ex- 
plained by  the  fact  that  his  whole  interest  was 
directed  upon  other  matters  than  the  question  as 
to  how  religious  life  could  be  reawakened.  He  did 
not  discern  that  the  Reformation  was  ushering  in  a 
new  era,  and  his  bull  of  exconmiunication  against 
Luther  (1520),  as  well  as  his  cooperation  in  the 
Edict  of  Worms  (1521)  were  vain  attempts  to  re- 
tard the  movement.  Leo  died  in  Rome,  Dec.  1, 
1521.  K.  Benrath. 

Bibuoorapht:  Soutom  are:  P.  Bembo,  EpUtola  .  .  . 
qwMrum  libri  16  Leortia  JT.  .  .  .  nomine  acripH  aunt,  Basel, 
1639;  Leonia  X,  retfeata,  ed.  J.  HergenrOther,  8  parts. 
FreibuiK.  1884-01  (reaches  only  to  1515);  the  Vita  by 
P.  Oiviro,  in  Latin.  Florence,  1548,  in  Italian,  ib.  1540, 
in  French.  Paris,  1675.  The  best  life  is  by  W.  Rosooe, 
London,  1806,  reissue.  1886  (was  translated  into  Fr.  and 
G'*nn.).  A  work  of  distinct  value  is  H.  M.  Vau^ian.  The 
Medici  Popaa,  New  York.  1008  (deals  principally  with  Leo 
X).  Other  lives  are:  A.  Fabroni,  Pisa,  1707;  Audin. 
Paris.  1844;  and  Life  and  Timea  of  Lao  X..  London,  1860. 


Conault  also:  T.  Dandolo,  II  Saeolo  di  Leone  X.,  3  voU.. 
Milan,  1861;  Cambridge  Modem  Hiaiory,  vol.  ii..  chap.  I, 
New  York,  1004;  Ranke.  Popes.  I  57-48.  iu.  11-22; 
Creighton,  Papacy,  v.  203^vi.  213  (essential);  Bower. 
Popea,  iii.  201-200;  Schaff,  Ckrialian  Churdk,  voL  vi- 
*  vii.;  Pastor,  Popea,  vol.  iv.;  and  much  of  the  literature  on 
LirrHER;  RcroBMATioN. 

Leo  XL  (Alessandro  Ottaviano  de'  Medici): 
Pope  Apr.  1-Apr.  27,  1605.  He  was  bom  in  Flor- 
ence 1535,  and  was  archbishop  of  his  native  city, 
when  chosen  to  succeed  Clement  VIII.  by  a  com- 
bination of  Italian  and  French  cardinals  and  against 
the  wish  of  the  king  of  Spain.  The  French  tri- 
umph, however,  was  frustrated  by  his  death  after 
a  pontificate  of  but  four  weeks.  K.  Benrath. 
Biblioorapht:     F.    Petrucelli   della   Gattina,   HiaL   dipUh 

moii^ue  dea  eondavea,  ii.  404  eqq..  Paris,  1864;  M.  Broech, 

GeaeMehU  dea   Kirchenataidea,   Gotha,    1880-82;     Ranks. 

Popea,  ii.  106;   Bower,  Popea,  iil  327. 

Leo  Xn.  (Annibale  della  Genga):  Pope  1S23- 
1829.  He  was  bom  at  the  castle  of  the  Genga, 
near  Spoleto,  Aug.  22,  1760.  Pius  VI.  and  Pius 
VII.  employed  him  in  various  missions  in  Germany, 
the  latter  particularly  in  the  negotiations  for  con- 
cordats in  the  early  years  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury (see  Concord ATB  and  Dbumitino  Bulls, 
VI.,  2,  §  1).  Pius  VII.  nmde  him  cardinal  in  1816. 
He  was  chosen  pope  to  succeed  Pius  VII.  after  a 
five  weeks'  conclave  on  Sept.  28,  1823,  and  forth- 
with transferred  the  high  office  of  secretary  of 
state,  till  then  held  by  Cardinal  Ercole  Consalvi 
(q.v.),  to  one  of  the  Zelanli,  the  octogenarian  Car- 
dinal della  Somaglia.  The  government  and  ad- 
ministration of  the  States  of  the  Church  now  as- 
sumed a  narrowly  ecclesiastical  character  which 
disordered  the  finances  and  irritated  the  adherents 
of  the  party  of  progress.  The  episcopal  jurisdic- 
tion was  extended  into  civil  affairs;  the  compe- 
tency of  the  provincial  courts,  as  well  as  the  right 
of  women  to  inherit,  was  restricted;  and  vaccina- 
tion was  forbidden.  On  the  other  hand,  the  need- 
lessly large  corps  of  pubUc  servants  was  reduced, 
better  training  of  officials  was  required,  and  stricter 
surveillance  was  exercised.  The  segregation  of  the 
Jews  in  ghetti — a  practise  which  had  been  done 
away  during  the  French  control — and  restraint  of 
their  mercantile  activities  was  again  enforced. 
The  secret  revolutionary  leagues  in  the  Romagna 
were  summarily  dealt  with;  in  the  course  of  three 
months  Cardinal  Rivarola,  who  was  dispatched  to 
Bologna  in  1825,  passed  507  sentences,  condemn- 
ing seven  to  death,  the  others  to  hard  labor  for 
Ufe  or  long  terms  of  imprisonment.  A  murderous 
attempt  on  Rivarola  moved  him  to  flight,  and  the 
pope  then  commissioned  Monsignor  Invemizxi  in 
his  place,  who  pursued  the  same  object,  with  re- 
course to  denunciation,  false  promises  of  indemnity, 
and  the  like.  Leo's  administration  of  the  Church 
was  characterized  by  the  same  extreme  reactionary 
policy,  shadowed  forth  in  his  very  first  encyclical, 
May  3,  1824,  wherein  he  issued  the  invitation  to 
the  next  jubflee  festival  at  Rome.  The  same  spirit 
was  also  operative  in  connection  with  the  concor- 
dats concluded  during  his  pontificate  with  Hanover, 
the  ecclesiastical  province  of  the  Upper  Rhine,  and. 
especially,  several  of  the  South  American  goven>> 
ments  (see  Conoordatb  and  Dbuhitino  Bulls, 


466 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


LeoZ-xm 


VI.  2,  {{  4-5).  In  France,  Lamennais  (q.v.),  who 
embodied  all  the  neo-Catholicism  and  Ultramon- 
tanism  just  then  in  vogue,  evoked  the  pope's  ap- 
proval. He  came  to  Rome  in  1824  and  Leo  offered 
him  a  cardinal's  hat.  The  pope's  relations  with  the 
French  government  were  not  cordial.  He  carried 
on  tedious  negotiations  with  the  Netherlands  over 
the  question  of  the  nomination  of  bishops  and  the 
closing  of  the  clerical  seminaries,  which  came  to 
nothing  because  of  the  revolution  in  Belgium  (cf. 
O.  Mejer,  Die  Propaganda,  ii.  98  sqq.,  G6ttingen, 
1853;  F.  Nippold,  Die  rdmisck-katholische  Kirche 
im  Kdnigreich  der  Niederlande,  Leipsic,  1877,  149- 
151).  K.  Benrath. 

Bxblioorapht:  A.  de  Montor,  Hiat.  du  Pope  Lion  XII.,  2 
volfl..  Paris,  1843;  J.  G.  Kfiberle,  Leo  XII,  und  der  OeUt 
der  rdmiechen  Hierarchies  Leipsic,  1846;  N.  P.  8.  Wise- 
man, ReeoUeetiona  of  the  Last  Four  Popee,  London,  1859; 
A.  von  Keumont,  Oeediiehte  der  Sladt  Rom,  iii  2,  p.  679, 
Berlin,  1870;  L.  von  Ranke,  Hietoriechrbiographiedie 
Studien,  pp.  143-157,  Leipsic.  1877;  M.  Brosoh,  GeedtichU 
dee  KirdtenekuUee,  ii.  308  sqq.,  Gotha,  1881;  F.  Nippold. 
Handbueh  der  neueelen  Kirchengeeehiehte,  ii.  70-79,  Elber- 
feld.  1883;  F.  Nippold,  Papacy  in  ihe  19lh.  Ceniury,  pp. 
71-81,  New  York.  1900;  F.  Nielsen,  Papacy  in  Ihe  19lh 
Ceniury,  2  vols.,  ib.  1906;   Bower.  Popee,  iii  434-464. 

Leo  Xm.  (Joachim  Vincent  Pecci):  Pope  1878- 
1903.  He  came  of  a  noble  Siennese  famUy,  and 
was  bom  at  Garpineto  (42  m.  s.e.  of  Rome)  Mar. 
2,  1810.  At  the  age  of  eight  he  was  sent  to  the 
Jesuit  college  at  Viterbo  where  he  remained  six 
years  and  then  entered  the  famous  Roman  College 
in  1825.  He  proved  himself  a  dUi- 
Early  gent  as  well  as  a  brilliant  student  and 
Life  and  developed  early  an  extraordinary  apti- 
Training,  tude  for  the  Latin  classics.  In  1830 
he  matriculated  for  divinity  in  the 
Gregorian  University  at  Rome  and  received  his 
doctor's  degree  two  years  later.  Having  decided  to 
prepare  himself  for  a  diplomatic  career,  he  entered, 
in  1833,  the  Academy  or  College  of  the  Nobles  at 
Rome  where  he  remained  until  1837,  devoting  him- 
self to  the  study  of  canon  and  civil  law,  taking 
courses  in  these  branches  at  the  University  of  the 
Sapienza.  In  1837  he  was  made  a  domestic  prelate 
by  Gregory  XVI.,  who  also  appointed  him  to  the 
office  of  Referendary  of  the  papal  signature,  and 
at  the  end  of  the  same  year  he  was  ordained  to  the 
priesthood.  The  following  year,  being  only  twenty- 
eight  years  of  age,  he  was  appointed  to  the  diffi- 
cult post  of  governor  of  the  province  of  Benevento, 
which  for  some  time  had  been  in  a  very  disturbed 
condition,  being  infested  by  smugglers  and  brigands, 
but  the  young  prelate  at  once  asserted  his  authority, 
and  by  severe  and  decisive  measures  speedily  sup- 
pressed lawlessness  and  restored  order  to  the  prov- 
ince. In  1841  he  was  recalled  and  appointed  to  the 
more  important  charge  of  delegate  of  Spoleto, 
having  his  administrative  headquarters  in  Perugia. 
He  filled  this  position  until  1843,  when  he  was  con- 
secrated titular  archbishop  of  Damietta  and  ap- 
pointed papal  nuncio  to  the  court  of  Brussels. 
This  post  he  occupied  three  years,  and  in  the  mean 
time  he  became  quite  popular  in  academic  as  well 
as  in  diplomatic  circles.  In  1846  he  spent  a  few 
months  in  England,  and,  returning  the  same  year 
to  Rome,  then  to  Paris,  was  appointed  bishop  of 
Perugia.    His  episcopate  in  this  diocese  lasted  thirty- 


two  years  through  a  period  of  much  political  and 
religious  disturbance  connected  with  the  various 
movements  set  on  foot  for  the  unification  of  the 
Italian  states.  As  a  bishop,  besides  taking  an 
active  part  in  the  social  and  religious  movements 
of  the  day,  he  showed  more  than  ordinary  zeal  for 
the  reform  of  abuses,  and  paid  special  attention  to 
the  hitherto  much  neglected  education  of  the  peo- 
ple in  secular  as  well  as  religious  matters.  He  was 
created  cardinal  by  Pius  IX.  in  1853,  and  he  re- 
mained in  charge  of  his  diocese  until  1878,  when, 
on  the  death  of  Pius  IX.,  he  was  elected  pope  and 
took  the  name  Leo  XIII. 

During  his  pontificate,  which  was  one  of  the  long- 
est and  most  distinguished  in  the  history  of  the 
papacy,  he  continued  to  display  marked  diplomatic 
and  administrative  ability.  A  lover  of  peace  and 
imity,  he  applied  himself  with  much  tact  to  im- 
prove the  rather  strained  relations  between  the 

papacy  and  the  various  powers,  which 
His  Pon-  had  resulted  from  the  reactionary  ideas 
tificate.      and  policy  of  his  predecessor.    While 

he  has  been  criticized  for  having  shaped 
much  of  his  diplomacy  with  a  view  to  bringing  about 
a  restoration  of  the  temporal  power,  it  must  be  ad- 
mitted, in  view  of  the  far-reaching  results  achieved, 
that  his  motives  and  policy  far  transcended  this 
secondary  object.  It  was  mainly  through  his  dip- 
lomatic ability  that  in  Germany  an  end  was  put 
(1886)  to  the  famous  religious  strife  called  the  Kul- 
turkampf  which  had  lasted  for  nearly  twenty  years. 
In  harmony  with  his  general  policy  of  conciliation 
he  early  favored  a  loyal  acceptance  of  the  repub- 
lican form  of  government  on  the  part  of  the  French 
people,  and  though  he  was  not  a  little  blamed  for 
this  attitude  by  the  royalists  who  were  then  counted 
the  most  enlightened  and  influential  of  French 
Catholics,  he  remained  firm  in  his  convictions  which 
he  set  forth  in  an  encyclical  to  the  French  people 
in  1892.  As  a  churchman  he  was  characterized  by 
broad,  tolerant  and  irenic  views,  and  his  policy  was 
shaped  not  only  with  a  view  to  the  uplifting  of 
those  within  the  Church,  but  also  to  the  ultimate 
reunion  of  all  Christendom.  Thus  he  evinced  a 
lively  and  efficient  interest  in  the  religious  welfare 
of  the  Slavonic  races,  and  in  the  reimion  with 
Rome  of  the  various  eastern  churches.  It  was  in 
a  great  measure  through  his  efiforts  that  the  Ar- 
menian schism  was  extinguished  in  1879,  in  con- 
nection with  which  event  he  issued  in  1881  a  bull 
decreeing  the  foundation  of  an  Armenian  college 
in  Rome.  His  appeal  in  1895  to  the  "  Illustrious 
English  Race  "  was  dictated  by  the  same  irenio 
spirit  and  desire  for  unity,  but  whatever  effect  it 
might  otherwise  have  produced  was  counteracted 
by  his  bull  on  Anglican  orders  issued  the  following 
year,  which  denied  their  validity.  A  fitting  recogni- 
tion of  his  zeal  for  peace  as  well  as  of  his  diplomatic 
ability  was  his  appointment  in  1885  to  be  arbiter  in 
a  dispute  between  Germany  and  Spain  concerning 
the  Citroline  Islands.  He  took  a  deep  interest  in  the 
intellectual  and  social  problems  of  the  day  and  did 
much  for  the  promotion  of  learning.  In  this  con- 
nection may  be  mentioned  the  publication  of  an 
encyclical  on  Christian  philosophy  in  1879;  the 
foundation,  shortly  after,  of  the  Academy  of  St. 


Leon 


tins  of  Byaantium 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


466 


Thomas  Aquinas  in  Rome,  together  with  the  creation 
of  a  Congregation  of  Studies;  the  [partial]  opening 
of  the  Vatican  archives  (1884)  [Protestant  sdiolars, 
however,  are  debarred  from  examining  the  papal 
archives  in  the  period  immediately  prior  to,  in,  or 
since  the  Protestant  revolt];  the  encyclical  "  Provi- 
dentissimus  Deus  "  on  Scripture,  and  the  appoint- 
ment of  the  Biblical  Conmiission  in  1902.  His  inter- 
est in  social  questions  and  his  seal  for  the  betterment 
of  social  conditions  were  manifested  not  only  in  his 
encyclical  on  Socialism  issued  in  1878,  in  his  letter 
to  the  bishops  of  Brazil,  and  his  encyclical  on  the 
condition  of  working  men,  but  also  in  his  attitude 
of  tolerance  with  r^^rd  to  the  Knights  of  Labor, 
and  in  the  encouragement  and  support  given  to 
Cardinal  Lavigerie  (q.v.)  in  his  campaign  against  the 
African  slave-trade. 

Among  the  more  important  official  acts  of  his 
administration  besides  those  already  mentioned  are 
the  following:  In  1878  a  bull  reestablishing  the 
Roman  Catholic  hierarchy  in  Scotland;  in  the  same 
year  the  encyclical  **  Inscrutabili  "  dealing  with  the 

evils  which  beset  society  in  Christian 

Official     countries;  in  1880,  the  encyclical  '*  Ar- 

ActL        canum  '*   on   Christian   marriage;     in 

1881  the  encyclical  "  Diutumum  "  in 
defense  of  the  principle  of  rightful  authority  in  the 
Church;  in  1884  a  bull  authorising  the  assembly  of 
the  third  plenary  Council  of  Baltimore;  in  1893, 
sending  of  the  first  apostolic  delegate  to  the 
United  States.  During  his  pontificate  he  remained 
alwajrs  within  the  precincts  of  the  Vatican,  and  in 
his  private  life  he  was  simple,  studious  and  devout. 
He  was  exceptionally  well  versed  in  scholastic  phi- 
losophy, and  his  Latin  poetry,  written  by  way  of 
pastime,  is  quite  classical  in  its  ease  and  elegance. 
Among  his  favorite  devotions  was  that  of  the  ro- 
sary, which  by  official  letters  he  did  much  to  pro- 
mote throughout  the- Church.  He  passed  away 
after  a  long  and  fruitful  pontificate  on  July  20, 
1903.  Jambs  F.  Dribcoll. 

Bzbuoorapht:  Leo's  Oreai  Sneifdiad  LeUmr9  have  been 
temnalftCacl.  New  York.  1903;  aim  his  Poenu,  Charade* 
and  IfueripHona,  ib.  1902.  Among  the  many  lives  which 
have  been  written,  mention  may  be  made  of  J.  McCarthy, 
London.  1896;  J.  Oldcastle.  ib.  1887;  B.  O'ReiUy.  ib. 
1887;  J.  de  Narfon.  ib.  1899;  G.  Frewid,  MOnster.  1902; 
B.  D'Acen.  Paris,  1907;  De  T'Serdaes,  Bruges,  1907.  Also 
ef.  F.  Nippold.  OetehiehU  des  KathdiziBmtu,  pp.  166  sqq., 
Berlin,  1901. 

LEON  (BONCA  DE  LEON),  LXnS  DE:  Spanish 
poet  and  theologian;  b.  at  Belmonte  (00  m.  8.e.  of 
Madrid)  1527;  d.  at  Madrigal  (50  m.  e.n.e.  of  Salar 
manca)  Aug.  23,  1591.  He  joined  the  Augustinians 
at  the  age  of  sixteen,  having  already  begun  the  study 
of  theology  under  Melchior  Cano  at  Salamanca, 
where  he  became  professor  in  1561  and  proved  a 
brilliant  expounder  of  ^stematic  theology.  His 
method  of  always  going  back  to  the  sources,  espe- 
cially the  Scriptures  and  the  Fathers,  furnished  oc- 
casion to  two  envious  colleagues  and  other  enemies 
to  accuse  him  falsely  of  inclinations  toward  the  Ref- 
ormation and  he  was  committed  to  the  prison  of  the 
Inquisition  at  Valiadolid  in  1572,  charged  with  ex- 
pressing offensive  and  heretical  opinions  in  his  lec- 
tures and  in  an  attempt  to  correct  the  text  of  the  so- 
called  edition  of  the  Vulgate  of  Franciscus  Vatablus 


(q.v.)  and  in  a  conmientary  on  the  Song  of  Songs. 
After  weaiy  waiting  he  was  acquitted  on  Dee.  15, 
1576,  and  restored  to  his  professorship.  He  began 
his  first  lecture  after  his  long  imprisonment  with  the 
words,  Heri  dicebamus  (''  As  we  were  saying  yester- 
day ").  The  acts  of  his  trial  are  printed  in  Docu- 
merUos  inedito$f  vols.  x.  and  xi.  (Madrid,  1847). 
His  Spanish  writings,  which  include  his  poems,  were 
issued  by  the  Augustinian  Antonio  Merino  (6  vols., 
Madrid  1804-16),  and  recently  the  Augustinians 
have  edited  his  Latin  writings  (7  vols.,  Salamanca, 
1801-95).  K.  Benrath. 

Biblioobapht:  Sourees  are  the  Doeumenioa  inmiitot,  ut 
sup.  Consult:  Jos<  Gonsftles  de  Tejada.  Vida  de  Pny 
UmM  de  Leon,  Madrid.  1863;  C.  A.  WUkens,  Fray  Luia  de 
Leon,  HaUe,  1866  (of.  H.  Reusoh.  in  TLB,  1867.  po.  47S 
sqq.) ;  F.  H.  Reusoh,  Luu  de  Jjton  und  die  spaiiwcAc  In- 
quieition,  Bonn,  1873;  G.  Ticknor.  Hiet.  of  Spanish  Uten- 
ture,  a.  76-87,  Boston.  1864. 

LEONARD,  len'ord,  DELEVAN  LEVAHT:  Cod- 
gregationalist;  b.  at  Pendleton,  N.  Y.,  July  20, 
1834.  He  was  graduated  at  Hamilton  Ck>llege  in 
1859  and  Union  Theological  Seminary  in  1862.  He 
was  ordained  in  1863,  and  held  pastorates  at  New 
Preston,  Conn.,  1863-65,  Darlington,  Wis.,  1865- 
1870,  Normal,  lU.,  1870-74,  Hannibal,  Mo.,  1874- 
1875,  and  Northfield,  Minn.,  1875-81.  He  was  then 
superintendent  of  home  missions  in  Utah,  Idaho, 
Montana,  and  adjacent  territories  1881-87,  after 
which  he  was  pastor  of  the  Congregational  church 
at  Bellevue,  O.,  until  1892.  Since  1893  he  has  been 
associate  editor  of  The  Missumary  Review  cf  the 
World.  In  theology  he  classes  himself  **  among  the 
liberal-conservatives,  not  canng  for  mere  novelties 
in  speculation,  but  ready  to  accept  new  statements 
of  Christian  truth  if  seemingly  established  by  evi- 
dence, even  in  the  realm  of  higher  criticism."  He 
has  written:  The  Story  of  Oberlin  (Boston,  1895); 
A  Hundred  Years  cf  Misnons  (New  York,  1895); 
Mieeionary  Annals  qfihe  Nineteenth  Century  (Cleve- 
land, O.,  1899);  and  HUtary  of  Ccarletan  CoUese 
(Chicago,  1904). 

LEONARD,  WILLIAM  ANDREW:  Protestiuit 
Episcopal  bishop  of  Ohio;  b.  at  Southport,  Coon., 
July  15,  1848.  He  was  educated  at  St.  Stephen's 
College,  Annandale,  N.  Y.,  from  which,  however, 
he  was  not  graduated,  and  Berkeley  Divinity  School, 
Middletown,  Conn.,  from  which  he  was  graduated 
in  1871.  He  was  curate  of  Holy  Trinity,  Brooklyn 
(1871-72),  rector  of  the  Church  of  the  Redeemer, 
Brooklyn  (1872-^1),  and  of  St.  John's,  Washing- 
ton (1881-89).  In  1889  he  was  consecrated  bishop 
of  Ohio.  He  was  chaplain  of  the  Twenty-third 
Regiment  of  the  New  York  State  National  Guard, 
and  from  1897  to  1906  was  in  charge  of  the  Ameri- 
ican  Episcopal  churches  on  the  continent  of  Europe. 
In  theology  he  is  a  High-chiu-chman.  He  has  writ- 
ten: Via  Sacra  (New  York,  1875);  History  d[  the 
Christian  Church  (1883);  and  Witness  ef  the  Amer- 
ican Church  to  Christ  (New  York,  1895). 
Bibuooraphy:    W.  8.  Perry,  The  Bpieeopaie  in  Amerioa, 

p.  317.  New  York,  18©6. 

LEORTIUS,  le-en'shias,  OF  BYZAHXIXm:  One 
of  the  most  important  Greek  theologians  of  the 
first  half  of  the  sixth  century;  d.  about  543.  So 
many  points  in  regard  to  his  life  and  works  are  still 


457 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Leo  XTTT 

LeontiuB  of  Bysantium 


open  questions  that  it  is  impossible  to  do  more 
than  give  a  somewhat  disjointed  aocoimt  of  the 
present  state  of  knowledge  concerning  both.  Among 
the  works  in  MPGy  bcxxvi.  1185-2100,  imder  the 
name  of  *'  Leontius  of  Byzantium  or  of  Jerusalem/' 
there  are  four  of  unequal  length  which  occur  in 
manuscript  collections  earlier  than  the  year  1000 
among  the  works  of  "  Leontius  the  Monk  "  or  "  the 
Hermit."  These  are:  (1)  the  tripartite  work 
''  Against  the  Nestorians  and  Eutychians  ";  (2)  the 
"  Solution  of  the  Syllogisms  Proposed  by  Severus  "; 
(3)  the  "  Thirty  Chapters  against  Severus  ";  (4) 
the  treatise  "  Against  the  Frauds  of  the  ApoUina- 
rians."  The  first  two  undoubtedly  belong  to  the 
same  author,  who  wrote  the  first  between  529  and 
544.  He  had  been  a  Nestorian  in  his  youth,  but 
had  seen  the  error  of  his  ways  and  become  a  zeal- 
ous opponent  of  both  the  Monophysites  and  all 
whom  he  called  "  concealed  Nestorians/'  meaning 
the  adherents  of  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  and  Dio- 
dorus  of  Tarsus.  The  "  Thirty  Chapters  "  are  also 
by  the  same  author,  but  do  not  seem  to  have  been 
published  as  a  substantive  work.  The  last-named 
treatise  is  a  masterpiece  of  patristic  learning,  pos- 
sibly though  by  no  means  certainly  from  the  same 
hand.  The  treatise  De  aectiSf  the  longest  known 
of  the  works  ascribed  to  Leontius  in  Migne,  was 
formerly  thought  to  be,  according  to  the  Greek 
title,  a  work  conceived  on  the  basis  of  utterances  of 
the  Abbot  Theodore,  and,  according  to  the  time 
of  the  work  as  a  whole,  the  date  of  Leontius  was 
frequently  put  as  late  as  600.  It  is  now,  however, 
generally  admitted  that  it  contains  genuine  Leon- 
tian  material  in  a  later  recasting,  made  between 
579  and  607.  In  spite  of  much  recent  discussion,  it 
still  seems  safe  to  regard  it  as  based  upon  a  sub- 
stantive work  by  Leontius,  and  not  (as  with  M6ller) 
upon  mere  lecture-notes  of  his  worked  into  literary 
shape  by  his  disciple  Theodore,  or  (as  with  Zahn) 
the  conception  of  a  third  writer  from  information 
given  by  Theodore.  It  may  be  taken  as  demon- 
strated that  the  treatises  of  a  Leontius  of  Jerusa- 
lem Contra  Nestarianoa  (MPG,  Ixxxvi.  1396-1768) 
and  Cardra  ManophysiUu  (ib.  1769-1901)  ofiFer  in 
some  way  indubitably  Leontian  material — perhaps 
they  also  are  a  recasting  of  the  treatise  on  which 
the  De  aedia  is  based.  One  thing  seems  sure,  viz., 
the  Doctrina  ariiiquoerum  pairum  de  verbi  incamatione 
edited  by  F.  Dekamp,  Miinster,  1907,  compiled  in 
the  seventh  century,  quotes  this  fundamental  work, 
not  the  De  sectia;  all  that  appears  in  the  latter  to 
suggest  a  date  later  than  that  of  Leontius  is  absent 
in  the  Doctrina  quotations.  It  is  not  possible  to  go 
further  into  detail  as  to  the  nature  of  this  fimda- 
mental  work  until  more  textual  investigations  have 
been  made;  but  the  hypothesis  that  the  **  Solution  " 
and  the  "  Thirty  Chapters  "  originally  formed  part 
of  it  still  seems  not  improbable.  It  may  have  been 
a  dogmatic-polemical  treatise  directed  principaUy 
against  Arians  and  Sabellians,  Nestorians  and 
Monoph3r8ites,  perhaps  consisting  of  separate  chap- 
ters against  particular  heresies,  in  which  the  pa- 
tristic citations  were  followed  by  explanations  in 
the  nature  of  dogmatic,  polemical,  and  historical 
scholia,  thus  accoimting  for  the  quotations  **  from 
the  scholia  of  Leontius,"  of  which  five  exist  in  the 


Doctrina,  and  for  the  use  of  the  word  scholia  in  the 
Greek  title  of  the  De  sectis. 

Whoever  Leontius  may  have  been,  it  is  clear  that 
he  was  not  merely  an  accomplished  theologian  but 
an  influential  man.  The  proposition  that  one  of 
the  Trinity  suffered  in  the  flesh,  on  the  orthodoxy 
of  which  Justinian  insisted,  was  evidently  defended 
by  him;  the  edict  of  the  Three  Chapters  con- 
denmed  Theodore  (and  Diodorus),  whom  he  labored 
to  confute;  Justinian's  policy  followed  the  path  of 
the  orthodoxy  of  Cyril  and  of  Chalcedon,  which 
Leontius  represented;  the  later  orthodoxy  took 
up  many  Leontian  thoughts;  and  his  Aristotelian- 
ism  was  the  parent  of  scholasticism.  Yet,  strangely 
enough,  tradition  tells  nothing  certain  of  his  life. 
The  most  one  can  do  is  to  attempt  to  identify  him 
with  four  bearers  of  the  name  in  the  reign  of  Jus- 
tinian. (1)  The  Leontius,  a  relation  of  the  influen- 
tial Cornea  Vitalian,  who  came  forward  at  Constan- 
tinople in  519  with  the  Scythian  monks  led  by 
John  Maxentius,  resisted  the  **  Nestorianizing " 
tendencies  of  the  Roman  legates  then  in  Constan- 
tinople, and  went  to  Rome  to  obtain  a  confirma- 
tion of  the  proposition  just  cited  and  a  condeoma- 
tion  of  Faustus  of  Riez,  disappearing  in  520.  (2) 
The  Leontius  who  in  531  (or  533),  together  with 
H3rpatius  of  Ephesus  and  a  certain  Eusebius,  ap- 
peared as  an  orthodox  participant  in  the  confer- 
ence with  the  Severians  arranged  by  Justinian. 
(3)  The  Leontius  who  in  536  appeared  among  the 
monks  of  Jerusalem  before  the  council  held  in  Con- 
stantinople, together  with  Domitian,  later  bishop 
of  Ancyra,  and  Theodore  Ascidas,  to  obtain  the 
condemnation  of  Anthimus  for  Monophysite  tend- 
encies. (4)  The  "  Origenist "  Leontius,  "  a  By- 
zantine in  race,"  of  whom  Cyrillus  Scythopolitanus 
recounts  in  his  Vita  Sabcs  that  he  was  received  into 
the  "  new  laura  "  between  519  and  521,  went  with 
Sabas  in  531  to  Constantinople,  was  there  convicted 
of  Origenism,  returned  later  to  the  monastic  settle- 
ments under  Sabas  and  became  a  leader  among  the 
opponents  of  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  and  his  ad- 
mirers, went  again  to  Constantinople  in  541  in  the 
interests  of  his  cause,  and  died  there  not  long  after. 
The  last  three  of  these  are  easily  connected,  and 
harmonize  with  the  theological  position  of  the 
writer  Leontius,  while  the  second  is  closely  related 
to  the  first.  The  foiuth  identification  alone  offers 
positive  difficulties — although  the  fact  that  the  ex- 
tant works  of  Leontius  do  not  portray  an  "  Origen- 
ist "  in  the  sense  of  the  Vita  Saba  is  not  an  insu- 
perable objection;  and  the  silence  of  tradition  as 
to  the  career  of  Leontius  is  most  easily  explained 
on  the  assumption  that  he  was  held  to  some  ex- 
tent to  have  compromised  himself.  If  these  iden- 
tifications are  accepted,  the  only  period  of  his  life 
left  dark  is  that  before  519;  and  the  "  Byzantine 
monk  "  of  the  Doctrina  receives  its  confirmation 
from  the  "  Byzantine  in  race  "  of  the  Vita  Saba. 

(F.  LoovB.) 

BxBuooRArar:  The  Mrller  information  ia  summed  up  in 
J.  Feaaler,  iTuUtuUonet  patraloffia,  ii  934-935,  Imubmek, 
1861,  ed.  B.  Jungmann.  oonmilt  ii.,  part  2,  1896.  For 
later  studies  consult:  F.  Loofs,  in  TU,  iil.  1-2,  Leipsie, 
1887,  cf.  T.  Zahn.  in  Theolooiadiea  LiteraturbUiiU,  1887, 
pp.  89-92,  and  W.  MOller.  in  Theologiache  lAtenOurMeU' 
ung,  1887.  pp.  336-339:    F.  Loofs,  Studim  Hber  die  d*m 


X««ontias  of  VeapoUa 
Leprosy 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


468 


Johannea  von  DamatkuM  momehriebenen  ParaOden, 
Halle.  1892;  W.  ROgamer,  LmnU%u»  von  Byzatu,  Mn 
Polemiker  au9  der  ZeU  JuMtinian*,  WOrsbtirs,  18M:  V. 
Ermoni.  De  LeonUo  ByManHno  et  de  eiua  doetrina  tkngUh- 
loffiea,  PariB,  1895;  K.  Holl.  Die  Sacra  paraUela  dea  Jo- 
hannsM  DamoMeenua,  in  TU,  zvi..  1,  Leipdc,  1896,  cf. 
XX..  2.  pp.  xii.  0qq..  1900;  Krumbaeher.  OeeekidUe,  pp. 
54  aqq..  et  paaaiin;  F.  Diekamp.  Die  on^viiMfucAen  Strep- 
tigkeiten  im  6.  Jahrhundert,  MOnater.  1899;  O.  BardeiH 
hewer,  Patrtdogie,  Freibuis.  1901 ;  J.  P.  Junglaa,  Leoniiae 
von  Bymne;  StwHen  gu  eeinen  Schriften,  Quetten,  und  An- 
eehauungen,  Piderborn,  1906. 

LEORTIUS  OF  NBAPOLIS:  Bishop  of  Neapolis, 
Qypnis;  flourished  in  the  seventh  century.  Of  his 
life  little  is  known,  except  that  he  was  bom  in 
Cyprus  and  was  educated  by  his  fellow  country- 
man, John,  archbishop  of  Alexandria  (611-619). 
He  was  alive  in  the  reign  of  Constans  II.  (642- 
668).  He  was  a  prolific  author,  and  at  the  Second 
Council  of  Nicfea  (787)  his  compatriot  Constantinus, 
bishop  of  Constantia,  spoke  highly  of  his  eulogies. 
Two  homilies  of  this  claiss  have  been  published,  one 
on  the  presentation  of  Christ  in  the  Temple  and 
the  other  on  the  feast  of  Mid-Pentecost.  More  in- 
terest attaches  to  a  work  in  five  books  against  the 
Jews,  of  which  two  fragments  have  been  edited, 
two  others  being  extant  in  manuscript.  In  614 
Jerusalem  was  betrayed  to  the  Persians  and  the 
Holy  Cross  was  carried  away.  The  consequent 
excitement  called  forth  a  wide-«pread  persecution 
of  the  Jews,  and  Leontius'  book  was  apparently 
evoked  by  disturbances  in  Alexandria.  His  most 
important  works,  however,  were  biographies  writ- 
ten in  popular  style  for  readers  of  general  culture, 
such  as  his  life  oi  Spyridion  of  Trimithus,  extant 
only  in  a  revamping  by  Metaphrastes,  but  appar- 
ently comprising  originally  a  naive  collection  of 
marvels.  He  also  wrote  a  biography  of  Johannes 
Eleemon,  archbishop  of  Alexandria  (q.v.),  which  is 
of  value  for  its  portrayal  of  Alexandrian  life  just 
before  the  Arab  conquest.  It  was  extremely  popu- 
lar and  was  translated  into  Latin  at  the  instance 
of  Pope  Nicholas  I.  Leontius'  biography  of  Sym- 
eon  of  Emesa  is  likewise  valuable  for  its  presenta- 
tion of  current  ideas,  but  otherwise  historically 
worthless.  It  is  based  on  the  Oriental  belief  that 
madmen  are  divinely  blessed,  and  did  much  to 
spread  this  conception  among  the  Greeks  and  Rus- 
sians, whose  monasteries  in  succeeding  centuries 
presented  numerous  examples  of  **  inspired  idiots." 
Many  other  works  still  extant  in  manuscript  are 
ascribed  to  this  Leontius,  but  he  is  frequently  con- 
fused by  scribes  with  others  of  the  name,  such  as 
Leontius  the  Presbyter,  Leontius  of  Byzantium, 
and  Leontius  of  Jerusalem.  (H.  Gelzer  f.) 

Bxblioorapht:  The  Opera  are  in  MPO,  xciii  Hia  "  Life 
of  John  the  Merciful  "  was  edited  by  H.  Qelier,  Freiburg, 
1893.  CoDBuIt:  F.  Loofa,  Leontiae  von  Byeam  und  die 
gleiehnamioen  Schrifteteller  der  ffriechiechen  Kirdie^  Leipsio, 
1887;  Krumbaeher.  Geechichte,  pp.  112,  389,  468;  H. 
Qelier,  in  Hietorieehe  ZeUetkrifi,  Ixi  (1889),  1-32. 

LEORTOPOLIS:    The  name  of  a  place  in  Lower 
Egypt  important  in  connection  with  Jewish  his- 
tory as  the  site  of  the  temple  built 
Reporti  of  by  an  Onias  (III.  or  IV.)  either  c.  170 
Josephus.    or  c.  154  b.c.    The  place  mentioned  is 
apparently  located  by  Josephus  (Wear, 
VII.,  X.  3)  180  stadia  (about  twenty  miles)  from 
Memphis,  in  the  nome  of  Heliopolis.    The  sources 


of    information  are  Josephus,  War,  T.,  i.  1,  VII., 
X.  2  sqq.;  Ant,,  XII.,  ix.  7,  XIII.,  iu.  1-3,  cf.  XU., 
V.  1.    According  to  War,  I.,  i.  1  "  Onias  the  high 
priest  "  was  compelled  under  Antiochus  Epiphany 
to  flee  from  Jerusalem  and  took  refuge  in  Egypt 
with  Ptolemy  Phllometor,  who  gave  him  a  location 
in  the  nome  of  Heliopolis,  where  he  "  built  a  city 
resembling  Jerusalem,  and  a  temple  that  was  iil^ 
its  temple."     In  ArU.,  XII.,  ix.  7  Josephus  says 
that  it  was  the  son  of  *'  Onias  the  high  priest  " 
who,  being  *^  left  a  child  when  his  father  died  .  .  . 
fled  to  Ptolemy,''  and  received  the  gift  in  the  nome 
named  wherein  he  built  a  temple  like  that  at  Je- 
rusalem.   With  this  agrees  Aid.,  XII.,  v.  1,  which 
says  that  the  son  whom  Onias  left  ^'  was  yet  but 
an  infant."    ArU.,  XIII.,  iii.  1-3  affirms  that  Onias 
"  the  son  of  Onias  the  high  priest  "  fled  to  Ptolemy 
Philometor,  and  that,  stimulated  by  the  prophecy 
of  Isaiah  (xix.  19)  uttered  600  years  earlier,  this 
Onias  wrote  a  letter  to  Ptolemy  and  Cleopatra, 
which  letter  Josephus  professes  to  give.    In  this 
Onias  asks  that  a  ruined  sanctuary  be  given  him 
that  he  may  puige  it  and  erect  on  its  site  a  temple 
which  may  serve  as  a  place  where  the  Jews  may 
meet,  implying  that  this  will  gain  for  the  king  the 
favor  of  the  Jews  against  the  Syrian  king.     The  re- 
ported  reply  of  the   two   sovereigns  grants    the 
ruined  temple  at  LeontopoUs,  ''  named  from  .  .  . 
Bubastb."    The  second  of  these  letters,  at   any 
rate,  is  generally  recognized  as  spurious.    In  War, 
VII.,  X.  2  Josephus  affirms  that  "  Onias,  son  of 
Simon,  one  of  the  Jewish  'high  priests  "  fled  from 
Antiochus,  was  received  kindly  by  Ptolemy,   ob- 
tained leave  to  build  a  temple,  saying  that  "  the 
Jews  would  be  readier  to  fight  against  Antiochus," 
built  the  temple  not  like  that  at  Jerusalem  but  to 
resemble  a  tower,  sixty  cubits  high,  furnished  it  in 
the  same  manner,  only  substituting  a  suspended 
golden  lamp  for  the  candlestick,  and  surrounding 
the  structure  with  a  wall  of  burnt  brick,  though 
the  gate  (ways)  were  of  stone.    The  king  also  gave 
a  large  endowment  in  lands  to  furnish  the  requisite 
revenues  for  the  support  of  the  temple.    In  §  4  of 
this  chapter  Josephus  reports  that  Lupus,  governor 
of  Alexandria,  and  his  successor  Paulinus  (which 
places  the  date  at  70-73  a.d.)  stripp)ed  and  closed 
the  temple  after  it  had  been  open  for  worship 
"  343  years." 

These  accoimts  by  the  same  writer  raise  three 

difficulties.     (1)  Who  was  the  Onias  who  built  the 

temple?     Two   of   the   accounts   distinctly  imply 

Onias  HI.,  especially  Ant.,  VII.,  x.  2, 

Three      which  calls  him  **  son  of  Simon."  With 

DifllcultieB.  this  goes  War,  I.,  i.  1, ''  Onias  the  hi^h 

priest,"  since  the  son  of  this  Onias 

never  served  as  high  priest,  at  least  in  Jerusalem, 

being,  as  Josephus  says  elsewhere  {Ant.,  XII.,  v. 

1),  left  an  infant.     But  the  other  passages  cited 

oppose  this,  stating  that  it  was  the  son  of  Onias 

the  high  priest,  commonly  known  as  Onias  IV. 

This  latter  position  is  supported  by  the  testimony 

of  II  Mace.  iv.  33-^,  according  to  which  Onias  III. 

was  slain  after  being  enticed  from  the  well-known 

sanctuary  of  Daphne  near  Antioch.     (2)  The  sec^ 

ond  difficulty  concerns  the  date  of  the  building  of 

the  temple,  and  its  solution  depends  upon  the  so- 


459 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDU 


I<eontiu8  of  Keapolis 
Leprosy 


lution  of  the  first  difficulty.  If  Onias  III.  was  the 
builder,  170-163  must  be  the  period  of  erection;  if 
Onias  IV.,  then  c.  154  must  be  accepted.  The 
statement  in  Ant.,  VII.,  x.  4  that  the  temple  was 
open  for  343  years  is  usually  regarded  as  a  mistake 
for  243,  which  would  place  the  founding  of  the 
structure  c.  170  B.C.  But  this  calculation  may  be 
bound  up  with  Josephus'  evident  confusion  as  to 
tlie  person  of  the  founder,  and  the  later  date  may 
be  regarded  as  correct.  (3)  The  site  is  by  the 
statements  of  Josephus  and  all  earlier  indications 
left  a  matter  of  doubt.  Ant.,  XIII.,  iii.  2  seems  to 
fix  it  definitely  at  ^*  LeontopoUs,  in  the  nome  of 
Heliopolis  .  .  .  named  from  the  country  Bubastis." 
This  can  not  be  the  well-known  Leontopolis,  which 
was  the  capital  of  a  province  north  of  that  of  Heli- 
opolis. Moreover,  in  War,  VII.,  x.  3  the  location 
is  given  as  180  stadia  (about  twenty  miles)  from 
Memphis.  But  a  Leontopolis  is  not  known  in  the 
region,  apart  from  the  capital  already  mentioned. 

In  the  Itinerarium  Antanini  (ed.  G.  Parthey  and 
M.    Pinder,  Berlin,    1848)   appears  mention  of  a 
Vicu8  JttdcBorumf  which  is  placed  thirty-four  Ro- 
man   miles   northeast    of   Heliopolis.     E.    Naville 
finds  that  in  this  neighborhood  a  temple  to  Bast 
(the  lion-headed  goddess  from  whom  Leontopolis 
took  its  name)  once  stood,  and  that  near  by  is  a 
Tel    al-Yehudiyeh,    "Mound    of    the 
The        Jew,"  though  at  the  time  he  investi- 
Temple     gated  (1887)  he  found  no  traces  of  a 
Found.      Jewish  temple  there   (The  Academy, 
Feb.  25, 1888,  pp.  140-141;  Egypt  Ex- 
ploration Fund,  Seventh  Memoir y  pp.  20,  22).    An- 
other place  of  the  same  name  is  found  farther  south, 
where  a  sepulchral  inscription,  Oniou  pater,  was 
discovered  (The  Academy,  1888,  pp.  49-50,   140- 
142,  193-194;    Egypt  Exploration  Fund,  ut  sup.). 
The  Notitia  digniiatum  orientis,  chap,  xxv  (ed.  E. 
Bocking,  Bonn,  1839),  knows  a  Castra  JudcBorum, 
possibly  identical  with  the  more  southern  of  the 
two  places.     Finally,  in  1905,  near  the  station  Shi- 
bin  al-Kanater,  20  miles  from  Cairo  (Baedeker's 
Egypt,  p.  166, 1908),  investigation  at  a  moimd  called 
Tel  al-Yehudiyeh   (20   miles   from    Cairo)    found 
the  traces  of  the  temple  in  question.     The  groimd 
showed  a  settlement  roughly  in  the  shape  of  a 
triangle,  on  the  east  side  a  wall  of  stone  767  feet 
long,  with  the  entrance  to  the  endosiu^  at  the 
west  acute  angle,  while  the  temple  ruins  were  at 
the  south  point.    The  entire  enclosiu^  covered  be- 
tween three  and  four  acres.     The  temple  showed 
a  structure  of  which  the  inner  court  was  sixty- 
three  feet  long  by  thirty-two  to  twen4y-seven  feet 
wide,  and  an  outer  court  forty-four  feet  long  by 
twenty-seven  to  twenty-one  feet  wide;  the  archi- 
tecture was  Corinthian  in  style   with  Syrian  fea- 
tures;  the  area  was  proportioned  like  that  of  the 
temple  at  Jerusalem.    The  traces  of  sacrifice  were 
present  in  the  shape  of  huge  sunken  cylinders  of 
pottery  which  show  that  they  were  used  for  sacri- 
fice, alternate  layers  of  earth  and  burnt  material 
showing  that  fresh  earth  was  thrown  on  each  sac- 
rifice of  fire  so  as  to  deaden  it.     The  pottery  of 
the  moimd  outside  the  old  town  belongs  to  the 
second  century  B.C.,  the  coins  are  of  the  period  of 
Ptolemy  Philometor,  and  sherds  show  Jewish  names. 


These   data,  reconciling   differences   and  agreeing 

with  the  conditions  required,  set  finally  at  rest  the 

question  of  the  fact  and  the  place  of  this  interesting 

episode  of  Jewish  history.       Geo.  W.  Gilmore. 

Bibliography:    Egyptian  Research  Account,  vol.  xii.,  W. 

M.  Flindera  Petrie,  Hykao9  and  Im-aeliU  Cities,  London, 

1906;    SchOrer.  Oetchichte,  iii.  07-100.  Eng.  transl.,  II.. 

ii.  286-288  (contains  older  literatiu^);    A.  BQchler.  Die 

Tobiaden  und  die  Oniaden  in  II.  MakkahULerbuch,  Vienna, 

1899;    Jews'  CoUege  JvbHee  Volume,  pp.  39-77.  London, 

1906  (collects  discussions  of  the  Onias  Temple);   G.  H.  H. 

Wright,    lAgkt  from  Egyptian  Papyri  hejare   Christ,   ib. 

1908;    J.  G.  Duncan.  Exploration  of  Egypt  and  the  O.  T., 

New  York,  1909;   EB,  iu.  3507-11. 

LEPROSY. 

Geographical  Distribution  (|  1). 

Biblical  Conception  (§  2). 

General  Treatment  of  Lepers  (|  3). 

Lepra  Mosaica  (§  4). 

Lepra  Tuberosa  ($  5). 

Lepra  Maculosa,  Lepra  Anaeflthetica  (|  6). 

This  disease  has  existed  from  times  preceding  the 
ages  of  which  history  takes  cognizance  in  its  back- 
ward sweep,  has  spread  widely  over  the  civilized 
and  barbarous  world,  and  still  exists  endemically 
in  some  regions.  The  Hebrews  were 
X.  Geo-  sorely  afflicted  with  it  before  leaving 
graphical  Egypt  (indeed,  the  banks  of  the  Nile, 
Distribu-  with  their  humid  atmosphere,  seem  to 
tion.  have  been  a  cradle  of  the  disease) ;  so 
much  so,  that,  according  to  the  histo- 
rian Manetho  (Josephus,  Apion,  i.  26),  the  Egyp- 
tians drove  them  out  on  account  of  this  plague  of 
leprosy.  It  probably  existed  in  Syria  before  the 
Hebrews  came  bringing  it  with  them  into  that 
country.  From  Egypt  and  Palestine  it  spread  to 
Greece  and  Italy,  and  other  countries  bordering 
upon  the  Mediterranean.  It  appears  to  have  been 
introduced  into  Central  and  Western  Europe  some- 
where between  the  twelfth  and  thirteenth  centuries, 
probably  through  the  agency  of  the  returning  cru- 
saders, and  spread  with  alarming  rapidity.  Toward 
the  end  of  the  fifteenth  century  it  had  almost  dis- 
appeared from  those  sections  of  Europe.  At  pres- 
ent, leprosy,  or  Elephantiaeis  Grecorum,  is  found 
on  the  coasts  and  islands  of  the  Mediterranean, 
Black,  and  Caspian  Seas,  in  Norway,  Asia  Minor, 
Syria,  and  Palestine,  on  the  coasts  of  the  Indian 
and  China  Seas,  in  the  islands  of  the  Australian 
Archipelago,  in  South  and  Central  America,  in 
Hawaii,  in  some  parts  of  the  United  States,  and  in 
Iceland. 

By  almost  all  peoples  and  races,  leprosy  has  been 
regajxled  as  a  visitation  of  God  on  account  of  some 
sin,  and  the  lepers  have  been  kept  apart  from  the 
rest  of  the  people.  The  Jews  were  told  that  it 
came  upon  a  man  for  idolatry,  blasphemy,  un- 
chastity,  theft,  slander,  false  witness,  false  judg- 
ment, perjury,  infringing  the  borders  of  a  neighbor, 
devising  malicious  plans,  or  creating  discord  be- 
tween brothers.  Lepers  were  considered  unclean 
(Lev.  xiii.  44-46),  had  to  rend  their  garments  (ex- 
cepting in  the  case  of  the  women) ,  cover 
2.  Biblical  their  faces,  go  with  unkempt  hair. 
Conception,  and  cry,  ''  Unclean,  unclean  I  "  They 
had  to  live  without  the  camp  or 
city;  had  a  special  part  of  the  synagogue  reserved 
for  them;  and  any  thing  they  touched,  or  any  house 


X««pro«7 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


460 


into  which  they  entered,  was  declared  unclean. 
An  elaborate  ceremonial  was  prescribed  for  the 
cleansing  of  the  leper  when  the  disease  had  left 
him  (cf .  Lev.  xiv.,  and  see  Disbabb8  and  the  Hsai/- 
INO  Art,  Hebrew).  Among  the  Jews,  not  only 
was  leprosy  considered  as  attacking  human  beings, 
but  also  it  was  declared  to  be  in  garments,  houses, 
and  vessels  (Lev.  xiii.  47-59,  xiv.  3^53);  and  cere- 
monies were  prescribed  for  their  cleansing.  The 
exact  natiue  of  this  leprosy  of  garments  and  houses 
is  not  known.  Its  distinctive  signs  were,  in  a  gar- 
ment, greenish  or  reddish  spots  which  spread;  in  a 
house,  greenish  or  reddish  streaks  lower  than  the 
surface  of  the  wall  which  spread.  This  was,  prob> 
ably,  in  either  case,  a  species  of  mildew,  or  else  in- 
dicated the  presence  of  some  fungus,  which,  by  con- 
tact, would  generate  disease  in  the  human  (see 
House,  Tbo  Hebrew,  and  Itb  Apfointhentb). 
The  Jerusalem  Targum  regarded  it  as  a  visitation 
on  a  house  built  with  imjust  gains. 

The  Persians  went  even  further  than  the  Jews, 
and  excluded  foreign  lepers  from  their  country. 
The  Greek  writers  thought  leprosy  was  a  punish- 
ment for  some  sin  against  Phcebus.  The  Arabs 
will  neither  sleep  near  nor  eat  with 
3*  Oeneral  lepers,  nor  marry  into  families  known 
Tnatment  to  be  leprous.  By  the  Church  of  Rome 
of  Lepen.  in  early  ages,  lepers  were  regarded  as 
dead,  and  the  last  rites  of  the  Chim^h 
were  said  over  them.  In  757  a.d.  it  was  declared 
a  ground  for  divorce,  and  the  sound  party  could 
marry  again.  In  France,  at  different  times,  laws 
were  passed  forbidding  lepers  to  marry.  The  leper 
lost  all  control  of  his  property,  and  could  not  in- 
herit any;  he  could  not  act  as  a  witness,  nor  chal- 
lenge to  a  duel.  Oddly  enough,  while,  in  general, 
leprosy  was  regarded  as  a  pimishment,  in  some 
parts  of  Europe  it  was  held  to  be  a  sign  of  divine 
preference  for  those  attacked;  as,  in  a  woman,  it 
was  to  preserve  her  chastity.  Lepers  were  regarded 
as  saints,  and  received  much  honor  and  alms.  All 
over  Europe  the  lepers  had  to  live  apart,  and  had 
special  churches,  priests,  etc.  In  the  fifteenth  cen- 
tury a  special  dress  was  prescribed  for  them.  The 
houses  in  which  these  unfortimate  ones  lived  were 
called  "  lazar-houses."  They  were  generally  lo- 
cated just  outside  the  gates  of  the  cities,  in  close 
proximity  to  some  body  of  water,  so  that  the  in- 
mates could  bathe.  They  were  usually  religious 
in  character.  The  inmates  had  to  be  silent,  and 
attend  morning  prayer  and  mass;  and  in  some  of 
the  houses  they  had  to  say  so  many  prayers  each 
day  that  they  had  very  little  time  for  anything 
else.  No  woman  was  allowed  to  enter  the  male 
lazar-houses,  excepting  the  washerwoman;  and  she 
had  to  be  of  sober  age  and  good  manners,  and  must 
enter  the  house  at  a  fixed  time  of  day,  when  she 
could  be  seen  of  all.  A  female  relative  had  to  ob- 
tain special  permission  before  she  could  speak  to 
a  male  leper.  These  houses  were  supported  largely 
by  begging,  entirely  by  alms. 

Between  what  is  called  "  leprosy  "  in  the  Eng- 
lish Bible,  and  the  leprosy  as  described  by  the  best 
authorities  on  skin  diseases,  there  is  very  little 
correspondence:  indeed,  the  writer  is  inclkied  to 
adopt  the  theory  advanced  in  the  article  on  lep- 


rosy in  Smith's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible  (AmerieaD 

edition,  ii.  1630),  that  the  leprosy  of  the  Mosaic 

dispensation  {Lepra  Moeaiea)   is  not 

4.  Lepn    one  disease,  but  an  enumeration  of 
Mosaka.    certain  symptoms,  which,  on  account 

of  their  frightful  character,  and  tend- 
ency to  spread,  would  render  the  individual  an  ob- 
ject of  aversion,  and  demand  his  separation.  It  is 
certainly  but  in  few  points  akin  to  Elephantiani 
Grecorum,  the  modem  leprosy.  The  symptoms  of 
leprosy,  as  in  Lev.  xiii.,  and  the  expressions  used 
there  and  elsewhere,  ''  leprous,"  ''  white  as  snow," 
lead  one  to  conjecture  that  Lejpra  Moeaiea  is  analo- 
gous to  Lepra  vidgariey  more  conunonly  called  Peori- 
asie.  Of  Lepra  Moeaiea  (Heb.  zara'ath),  the  lep- 
rosy of  Lev.  xiii.,  xiv.,  the  most  marked  symptoms 
were  "  a  rising,  a  scab,  or  a  bright  spot,"  ''  in  the 
skin  of  the  flesh  "  (Lev.  xiii.  2),  with  a  hair  turned 
white  in  the  rising,  scab,  or  bright  spot,  these  being 
deeper  than  the  scarf-sldn  (xiii.  3),  and  spreading 
of  the  scab,  etc.  (xiii.  7,  8).  As  a  more  advanced 
case  "  quick  raw  flesh  in  the  rising  "  (xiiL  10)  is 
noted.  Verse  18  implies  that  the  disease  may 
take  its  origin  in  a  boil,  with  the  same  symptoms. 
In  verse  29  the  disease  appears  in  the  beard,  or 
hair  of  the  head,  coming  in  the  form  of  a  scall, 
with  thin  yellow  hairs  in  the  patches.  These  are 
all  the  symptoms;  they  are  probably  given  merelj 
as  initial  symptoms,  so  that  the  priest  might  recog- 
nise the  onslaught  of  different  diseases  in  their 
earliest  stages.  The  "  rising  "  may  correspond  to 
the  tubercles  of  Lepra  tybereuloea,  or  the  bulla  of 
Lepra  anculhetioa  of  recent  authors.  The  scall  of 
the  head  may  be  the  Morphaa  alopeciaia,  or  Foj- 
mange,  placed  by  Kaposi  (Hauticrankheiten,  Vienna, 
1880)  as  a  subdivision  of  the  second  form  of  lep- 
rosy. Lepra  maadosa.  Verses  12-17  state  that  if 
the  patient  is  white  all  over  he  is  clean,  no  doubt 
because  the  disease  had  then  run  its  course.  In 
this  case  it  is  probably  a  general  Peoriaeie. 

Modem  leprosy,  Elepkanliaeie  Qrecorum,  is  di- 
vided into  three  varieties:  (1)  Lepra  tttberoea,  the 
tubercular  fonn;  (2)  Lepra  maculoea,  the  spotted 
or  streaked  form;  (3)  Lepra  antesthHicaf  the  an- 
esthetic form.  For  months  or  years  before  the 
outbreak  of  the  disease,  the  patient  may  have 
vague  prodromal  symptoms,  as  weakness,  loss  of 
appetite,  sleeplessness,  lassitude,  slight  fever,  diar- 
rhea and  sometimes  pemphigus  hUbe  (little  blisters). 

In  Lepra  tuberoea  the  disease  begins  with  the  out- 
break, on  the  general  surface  of  the  body,  of  irregu- 
lar or  round-shaped  spots,  in  size  from  a  finger-nail 
to  the  paln^of  the  hand;  at  first  red,  and  disap- 
pearing unoer  pressure;  soon  becoming  gray  to 
sepia  brown  or  bronse  color.  Over  the  spots  the 
skin  is  smooth  and  glistening  (as  if  painted  with  oil), 
or  bronsed  and  thickened,  or  slightly  prominent, 
and  painful  on  pressure.  The  spots  are  distributed 
over  the  trunk  and  extremities,  face,  hands,  and 
feet.  In  some  situations  they  become  confluent; 
in  some,  disappear;  in  others,  disappear 

5.  Lepra    in  the  center,  while  the  peripheries  ex- 
Tttberosa.   tend,  thus  forming  ring  shapes.    The 

tubercles,  the  distinctive  type  of  this 
form,  appear  after  the  disease  has  lasted  months 
or  years;  are  of  various  sizes,  up  to  that  of  a  hasel- 


461 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Ii6proBy 


nut,  and  are  either  slightly  raised  above  the  level 
of  the  skin,  or  quite  prominent;  dirty-brown- 
red  in  color  and  glistening;  hard-elastic  to  soft 
to  the  touch;  covered  with  epidermic  scales;  dif- 
fused or  closely  pressed  together,  and  forming 
either  irregular  uneven  plaques,  or  regular  circles. 
They  are  principally  located  on  the  face  and  ears. 
On  the  eyebrows  they  form  thick  parallel  rows, 
projecting  over  the  eyes;  on  the  cheeks,  nose,  and 
chin  they  are  massed  into  irregular  heaps.  The 
lips  become  thick,  swollen,  and  protruding;  the 
under  lip  hangs  down;  and  this,  with  the  promi- 
nent, overhanging,  knotty  eyebrows,  and  the  deeply 
wrinkled  forehead,  gives  the  countenance  a  morose 
and  stupid  appearance.  Sometimes  the  eyelids 
are  everted,  and  the  lobes  of  the  ears  hang  down 
in  thick  masses.  Consequent  upon  the  eversion 
of  the  eyelids,  disease  of  the  eye  sets  in.  The  ex- 
tremities also  become  tuberculated,  though  not  so 
much  as  the  face;  and  the  presence  of  tubercles  in 
the  palms  of  the  hands  and  soles  of  the  feet  render 
handling  and  walking  very  painful.  Tubercles  appear 
in  the  mucous  membrane  of  the  mouth,  pharynx, 
and  upper  part  of  larynx;  the  tongue  becoming 
thick  and  cracked,  with  loss  of  taste  ensuing;  the 
larynx  becoming  narrow,  with  loss  of  voice;  the 
breath  becoming  sweetish.  After  many  months, 
these  tubercles  may  be  absorbed,  leaving  behind 
dark  pigmented  atrophic  places;  sometimes  they 
soften  centrally,  and  spread  out  peripherally; 
sometimes  break  down,  and  form  leprous  ulcers, 
which  tend  to  skin  over,  only  to  break  down  again. 
Sometimes  the  ulceration  goes  deeper;  necrosis 
joins  itself  to  it;  a  diffused  inflammation  sets  in, 
leading,  in  the  under  extremities  especially,  to  deep 
excavation,  and  finally  opening  of  joints,  and  self- 
amputation  of  entire  members  (Lepra  mutilaru). 
Earlier  or  later  anesthesia  develops  in  different 
parts  of  the  body,  and  the  ulnar  nerve  will  be 
found  enlarged  and  cord-like.  The  disease  is  gen- 
erally chronic,  lasting  some  eight  to  ten  years,  the 
patient  dying  of  specific  marasmus,  or  some  com- 
plicating dis^ise  of  internal  organs.  Or  the  disease 
may  be  more  acute,  with  high  fever,  and  reaching 
in  a  few  months  to  a  state  which  in  other  cases  is 
not  reached  in  years. 

Lepra  maculo9a  is  characterized  by  the  appear- 
ance on  the  skin  of  a  large  number  of  red  or  brown 
glistening  spots,  or  by  diffuse  dark  pigmentation, 
intermixed  with  which  are  white  points,  spots,  or 
stripes;  so  that  the  body  seems  streaked.  This 
frequently  changes  into  the  former  variety,  or  into 
Lepra  ancBstheticaf  in  which  anesthesia  is  the 
marked  feature.  It  succeeds  to  the  preceding 
forms,  or  else  begins  with  an  outbreak  of  pemphi- 
gus bulla  (water-blisters),  which,  on  healing,  leave 
white,  glistening,  and  anesthetic  places,  or,  break- 
ing, leave  ulcerations.  Sometimes 
6.  Lepra    anesthesia   appears   on   fully   normal 

Maculosa;  places;  sometimes  the  spot  has  been 
Lepra      red    and    hyperesthetic    for    months 

Aiuesthet-  before.     Over    the   anesthetic    spots 

ica.        the  skin  often  becomes  wrinkled,  the 

wrinkled  places  being  bounded  by  a 

red,  hyperesthetic  border;  the  wrinkling  only  taking 

place   where  the    anesthetic    spots  have    become 


stable,  for  at  first  they  tend  to  change  their  loca- 
tion. The  anesthesia  is  complete,  the  patient  not 
feeling  a  needle  thrust  deep  into  the  muscles.  The 
chief  nerve-trunks  become  swollen,  and  painful  to 
pressiue.  Sometimes  hyperesthesia  precedes  an- 
esthesia to  such  a  degree,  that  the  patient  is  not 
able  to  sit  or  lie  for  any  length  of  time  in  one  place, 
can  not  take  anything  in  his  hands,  and  walking 
and  standing  give  him  the  greatest  pain.  The  an- 
esthesia is  followed  by  atrophy  of  muscles,  and 
wrinkling;  the  sphincter  muscle  of  the  eye  becomes 
lamed;  the  under  eyelid  and  the  under  lip  hang 
down;  the  tears  flow  over  the  cheeks;  and  the 
saliva  runs  dribbling  out  of  the  mouth;  and  thus 
the  face  oftentimes,  already  swollen  and  out  of  shape 
by  the  presence  of  the  tubercles,  assumes  a  peculiar, 
old,  idiotic,  or  foolish  expression.  The  flexor  muscles 
of  the  hand  not  being  atrophied  so  much  as  the 
extensor,  the  fingers  become  half  bent,  the  hollow 
of  the  hand  becomes  convex  and  pressed  forward, 
the  back  of  the  hand  bent  in;  the  finger-ends  be- 
come clubbed,  finger-nails  thinned;  the  hair  falls 
out.  Ulceration  finally  sets  in  at  the  anesthetic 
places,  or  the  tissues  gradually  atrophy  away  till 
the  skin,  foscis  and  tendons  disappear,  one  or  an- 
other joint  is  laid  bare,  when  suddenly  a  whole 
foot ,  hand,  or  extremity  falls  off.  The  patient  grows 
foolish  and  apathetic,  and  dies  after  some  years. 
Treatment  is  largely  symptomatic.  The  best  is  to 
remove  the  patient  from  leprous  regions. 

The  lepers  whom  our  Lord  healed  were  probably 
not  afflicted  with  Elephantiana  Grecorum,  but  with 
Elephaniiaeis  wlgaris  (Psoriasis). 

The  cause  of  leprosy  is  the  invasion  of  the  skin 
by  the  baciUus  2epr<F,  an  organism  discovered  by 
Hansen  in  1874.    The  disease  is  contagious,  and 
not  hereditary.    It  occurs  in  both  sexes,  but  rather 
more  frequently  in  men.    Its  period  of  incubation 
is  very  long.     While  it  is  wide-spread  over  the  world 
it  is  endemic  in  certain  regions.    It  seems  that 
either  a  damp  and  cold  climate,  or  a  hot  and  moist 
one,  favors  its  development  and  spread,  and  that  food 
bears  no  relation  to  it.    Some,  however,  insist  that  it 
is  due  to  the  eating  of  fish.    G.  T.  Jackson,  M.D. 
Bibuoobapht:    K.  Wolff,  Lepraatwiien,  Leiprio,  1886;    H. 
Leloii,  Traits  .  ,  .  de  la  Ikpre,  Faria,  1886;   A.  Luts,  Zur 
MorphologiB  dsa  LejtrabaeiUtu,  Hamburg,  1886;    G.  Thin, 
Leproty,  London,  1891;    E.  A.  Senft,  Soixant-guinM  an- 
niet  parmi  let  Upreux,  NeuehAtel,  1893;    G.  A.  Hansen 
and  C.  Looft,  Leprowy  in  ite  Cliniad  and  Paiholooioal  At- 
pecte.  Bristol,  1895;    E.  Besnier,  Sur  le  Upre;    rdle  Hio- 
logiguB^  Paris,  1897;    V.  Babes,  Unterntehunoen  Hber  den 
LeprabaciUtte  und  aber  die  Hialoloffie  der  Lepra^  Berlin, 
1898;    J.  Hutchinson,  Leproey  and  Fith  Eating^  Chicago, 
1906.     An  important  pamphlet,  Becbachiunoen  Hber  den 
AueeaUimheOigenLande  (Hermhut,  1908),  is  by  Dr.  Eins- 
ler,  for  neariy  twenty  years  head  of  the  Jesus  Hilfe  Hos- 
pital for  Leprosy  in  Jerusalem. 

For  the  Biblical  side  consult:  J.  R.  Bennett,  Dieeaaee 
of  fhe  BiUe,  London,  1887;  G.  N.  MQnch,  Die  Zaraath  der 
hebrdiaehen  Bibel;  Einleiiuno  in  die  Oeadiichte  dee  At*e- 
•oiMfl,  Leipsio,  1893;  W.  M.  Thompson,  The  Land  and 
the  Book,  il  516-520,  200,  New  York,  1859;  E.  C.  A. 
Riehm,  Handwdriarbuth  dee  hiblieehen  AUertume,  pp.  155- 
159,  Leipsio,  1893;  J.  F.  Schamberg.  The  Nature  of  the 
Leproey  ef  the  Bible,  in  Philadelphia  Polychrome,  vii  (1898), 
nos.  47-48;  Bensinger.  ArchOolooie,  PP.  481-482;  DB, 
iii  95-99;  EB,  iii.  2763-68;  and  literature  under  Di»- 
EA8B8  AND  THK  HsAXjNG  Art,  Hebrxw.  On  the  Bib- 
lical prescriptions  regarding  it  the  one  book  is  A.  Dill- 
mann  and  V.  Ryssel,  Die  BUeher  Sxodue  und  Levitieue, 
pp.  553  sqq.,  Leipsio,  1897. 


M^*" 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


468 


For  the  hiatorical  side  of  the  medioal  pneCiae  oonsult: 
E.  Vignat,  Lea  Lipreux  et  let  ehe9alur§  <U  S.  Ixuan  de 
J4ruMUm,  Orleans.  1884;  R.  Hdry,  Lm  l4pro§eriM  datf 
Vandenne  FruncB,  Paris,  1896;  E.  N^ret,  La  Prophylaxis 
de  la  Ikpre  ou  moyen^^oe,  ib.  1800;  L.  Le  Gnuid,  Le» 
MaUonM-Dieu  et  UpromritM  .  .  .  <U  ParU,  14-  9Ude^  Paris, 
1806;  E.  Ehlera,  DaniaK  Latar  H<nm9  in  the  Middle  AgM, 
London,  1901. 

LE  QUISIf,  le  kt^'On',  MICHEL:  French  Do- 
minican; b.  at  Boulogne  Oct.  8,  1661;  d.  at  Paris 
Mar.  12,  1733.  He  became  a  Dominican  at  the 
age  of  twenty,  and  throughout  the  long  period  of 
his  literary  activity  was  librarian  of  the  monastery 
of  his  order  in  the  Rue  St.  Honor6,  Paris.  His 
principal  polemical  works,  which  are  of  minor  in- 
terest, are  Defense  du  texU  hibreu  el  de  la  version 
vulgate  (Paris,  1690);  Stephani  de  AlHmura  pan- 
aplia  contra  echiema  GrcBcum  (1718),  a  defense  of 
the  papal  claims  to  supremacy  against  Nectarius, 
patriarch  of  Jerusalem;  La  NuUiU  dee  ordinations 
anglicanes  (2  vols.,  1725);  and  La  NvUiU  des  or- 
dinations  anglicanes  derrumtr^e  de  nouveau  (2  vols., 
1730).  Far  more  important  was  his  edition  of 
John  of  Damascus  in  Greek  and  Latin  (2  vols., 
Paris,  1712;  reprinted,  with  additions,  MPG, 
xciv.-xcvi.);  and,  above  all,  his  Oriens  Christianas 
in  quatuor  patriarchatus  digesttis  (3  vols.,  Paris, 
1740),  modeled  on  D.  de  Sainte-Marthe's  Gallia 
Christiana,  and  treating  in  the  first  volume  of 
Pontus,  Asia,  and  Thrace  as  dioceses  of  the  patri- 
archate of  Constantinople,  in  the  second  of  Illyri- 
cum  (as  the  fourth  Constantinopolitan  diocese)  and 
the  patriarchates  of  Alexandria  and  Antioch,  and 
in  the  third  of  the  dioceses  of  the  Chaldean  and 
Jacobite  Churches.  (O.  ZOcKLERf.) 

Biblioorapht:   J.  Qu^tif  and  J.  Echard,  Seriptorea  ordinit 

pntdieatorum,   ii.  808-809.  Paris,  1721;    H.  Hurter,  No- 

mendator  liierariua,  ii  1064-66,  Innsbniok,  1893;   XL.  vii. 

1827-28. 

LERHfS,  I^ran  (LERHfUM),  MONASTERY  OF: 
An  old  monastery  on  the  island  of  Saint-Honorat 
(one  of  the  L^rins  group),  off  the  coast  of  southern 
France,  opposite  Cannes,  founded  by  St.  Honora- 
tus  about  400.  Honoratus  was  of  Gallo-Roman 
origin  and  appears  to  have  belonged  to  an  aristo- 
cratic family.  In  early  youth  he  began  a  monastic 
routine  on  an  island  near  Marseilles;  later  he  trav- 
eled in  the  East,  and  on  his  return  he  visited  Italy 
and  contracted  a  friendship  with  Paulinus  of  Nola 
(q.v.).  He  then  settled  on  the  island  of  Lerinum 
(now  Saint-Honorat).  The  number  of  his  com- 
panions soon  increased,  and,  though  great  free- 
dom prevailed  in  the  manner  of  life,  Honoratus 
continued  general  superior.  Johannes  (Tassianus 
(q.v.),  founder  of  the  slightly  younger  monastic 
commimity  at  Marseilles,  dedicates  to  him  a 
portion  of  his  CoUationes  patrtmif  and  styles  him 
president  of  the  great  cloister  of  brethren.  As 
presbyter,  HonoratHs  also  discharged  the  spiritual 
functions. 

It  is  doubtful  what  cloistral  rule  was  in  force  on 
Lerinum  before  the  introduction  of  the  Benedictine 
rule  about  661.  Arnold  has  demonstrated  that  the 
founder  composed  no  rule,  but  that  the  order  of 
living  which  he  had  established  after  I^yptian 
precedents  was  transmitted  by  tradition.  The 
spiritual    exercises    included    fasting,    singing    of 


hymns,  and  prayer  at  appointed  hours.  The  monks 
also  tilled  the  soil  and  attended  to  the  education  of 
youth.  It  is  probable  that  the  monastic  atudks 
consisted  mainly  in  the  introduction  of  auziliaiy 
means  for  the  understanding  of  the  Bible. 

The  foundation  of  Honoratus  quickly  attained 
great  renown,  becoming  the  hearth  of  rejuvenation 
for  the  secularized  Gallic  Church  and  filling  the 
bishops  with  a  more  earnest  ascetic  spirit.  Tis 
island  of  Lerinum  came  to  be  the  nursery  of  the  so- 
called  Semipelagianism.  Eucherius  of  Lyons,  Vin- 
oentius,  and  Salvianus,  spent  some  time  as  monks 
of  Lerinum.  Honoratus  himself  became  bishop  of 
Aries  in  426,  but  died  in  429.  Maximus  and  Fau>- 
tus  of  Riez  were  his  able  successors,  the  latter  bekx 
one  of  the  most  eminent  upholders  of  Semipela- 
gianism. Cssarius  of  Aries  spent  considerable  time 
at  Lerinum  under  Abbot  Porcerius.  Amid  th^ 
ravages  of  the  sixth  century  (Provence  fell  into  the 
hands  of  the  Franks  in  537)  the  discipline  of  th^ 
cloister  declined.  Abbot  Marinus  desired  to  in- 
troduce the  milder  Agaunensian  rule;  and  under 
Abbot  Stephen,  who  entertained  St.  Augustine  of 
Canterbury  on  his  way  to  the  Anglo-Saxons,  thei^ 
set  in  a  total  decay  of  discipline.  About  661  Aigulf, 
of  the  cloister  of  Fleury  (Saint-Benolt-sur-Loire\ 
reformed  Lerinum  according  to  the  Benedictine 
rule;  but  the  ardent  Benedictine  was  assassinatei 
by  an  opposing  faction.  By  690,  however,  Lerinum 
had  again  reached  such  a  flourishing  8tat«  thst 
St.  Amandus,  then  abbot,  is  said  to  have  had  tmder 
him  3,700  monks. 

About  730  the  wealthy  cloister  was  plundered  by 
the  Saracens.  It  indicates  a  depressed  state  of 
affairs  again,  when  in  964  the  Buigundian  Eics 
Conrad  ceded  Lerinim:!  to  the  abbot  of  Mont-Majeur 
in  behalf  of  the  restoration  of  order.  Soon  after- 
ward, however.  Pope  Benedict  VII,  made  over 
Leriniun  to  Abbot  Bfayolus  of  Cluny.  Afterward 
Odilo  of  Cluny  appears  as  abbot  of  Lerinum,  which 
he  visited  in  1022.  Then  followed  local  abbots; 
but  with  the  union  with  the  congregation  of  Cluny 
there  began  for  Lerinimi  a  new  period  of  splendor. 
At  all  events,  the  wealth  and  influence  of  the  mon- 
astery were  still  growing  in  the  thirteenth  century. 
In  the  fourteenth  century  the  monks  were  no 
longer  disposed  to  be  /ra/res,  but  desired  to  be 
domini,  and  at  a  general  chapter  in  1319  they  re^ 
solved  that  it  be  left  free  to  every  monk,  prior,  and 
conventual,  to  acquire  and  administer  property. 
Urban  IV.  and  the  popes  of  Avignon,  John  XXII. 
and  Clement  VI.,  bestowed  the  rich  benefices  in 
commendam.  Attempts  at  reform,  in  connection 
with  the  efforts  of  Benedict  XII.,  proved  of  Httle 
avail. 

During  the  Great  Schism  the  cloister  stood  on  the 
side  of  the  Roman  obedience.  After  having  again 
been  consigned  in  the  second  half  of  the  fifteenth 
century  to  commendatory  abbots,  the  monastery 
entered  upon  a  new  period  in  1515.  To  speed  the 
cloister's  reform,  the  incumbent  at  that  time,  Au- 
gustus of  Grimaldi  (later  bishop  of  Grasse),  im- 
ported some  monks  of  Cluny  and  contrived  the  an- 
nexation of  Lerinum  to  the  Italian  Benedictine 
congregation  of  St.  Justina  of  Padua.  After  his 
death,    however,   Francis   I.   again   bestowed   the 


468 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


li^ 


^iil«n 


abbey  in  commendam.  Du  Bellay  was  the  first  in 
tenure;  Cardinals  Lavalette  and  Mazarin  were  in 
possession  in  the  century  following.  When  after 
the  death  of  Philip  of  Vend6me,  in  1727,  the  monks 
promised  the  bishop  of  Grasse  a  pension  of  4,000 
livres  if  he  would  effect,  with  Caidinal  de  Fleury, 
the  restoration  of  free  abbatical  election,  the  latter 
prelate  preferred  rather  to  appropriate  the  monas- 
tery outright;  and  in  1732  he  procured  a  royal 
brief,  by  the  terms  of  which,  on  condition  of  the 
bishop's  obtaining  confirmation  thereof  by  the 
pope,  the  monastery  was  to  be  conveyed  in  per- 
petuity to  him  and  his  successors.  In  1788  the 
monastery  was  secularized,  and  in  1791  the  island 
of  Saint-Honorat  was  sold  at  auction  for  37,000 
livres.  In  1853  the  bishop  of  Fr^jus  bought  back 
the  island;  and  in  1859  the  church  was  restored  to 
divine  service  and  monks  from  Saints  Pierre  de  Mar- 
seille were  stationed  on  the  premises. 

G.  GRt^TZMACHER. 
Bibuoobapht:  Hilary  of  Aries'  Sermo  de  vita  S.  Honorati 
18  in  ASB,  Jan.,  ii.  17-24,  and  in  MPL,  1.  1240  sqq.  Con- 
sult: L.  PiemiKues.  Vie  de  S.  Honarat,  Paris,  1875;  8il- 
fersberg,  Hietoria  numaaterii  Lerineneia,  Copenhagen, 
1834;  Berengier,  in  Revue  de  Vart  dirHien,  1870,  pp.  176 
sqq.;  F.  Arnold,  C&eariue  von  ArelcUe  und  die  .  .  .  Kirche 
aeiner  Zeit,  pp.  04  sqq.,  Leipsie,  1804;  A.  Malnorg,  St. 
Cieaire,  pp.  5  sqq..  Paris,  1804;  Ceillier,  AtUeurt  aacrH, 
viil  433,  430-442,  462,  x.  377;  DCB,  iii.  138;  Helyot. 
Ordree  monaetiquea^  v.  116  sqq.;  Heimbucher,  Orden  und 
Kongregationen,  L  passim. 

LESLIE,  CHARLES:  Nonjuror  and  contro- 
versialist; b.  at  Dublin,  Ireland,  July  17,  1650;  d. 
at  Glasslough  (70  m.  n.n.w.  of  Dublin),  Ck>unty 
Monaghan,  Apr.  13,  1722.  He  studied  at  the  En- 
niskillen  school  and  at  Trinity  College,  Dublin 
(M.A.,  1673),  and  began  the  study  of  law  at  the 
Temple,  but  took  holy  orders  in  1680.  He  was  pre- 
ferred to  the  chanoeUorship  of  Connor  July  13, 
1686.  Though  a  ssealous  Protestant  he  was  a 
stanch  supporter  of  the  Stuart  dynasty,  and  for 
refusing  to  take  the  oath  of  allegiance  to  William 
and  Mary  was  deprived  of  his  benifioe  in  1689. 
He  then  removed  to  London  and  entered  upon  a 
period  of  controversial  writing  that  extended  over 
some  twenty  years.  He  attacked  the  king.  Whig 
divines,  Jews,  Quakers,  Papists,  Dissenters,  and  es- 
pecially the  Deists.  In  1693  he  visited  St.  Ger- 
mains  and  obtained  from  the  pretender  the  congi 
d'dire  for  the  consecration  of  the  nonjuring  bishops. 
When  in  1710  his  Jacobite  zeal  had  led  to  the  issu- 
ing of  a  warrant  for  his  arrest,  he  secluded  himself 
at  White  Waltham,  Berkshire,  and  in  Apr.,  1711, 
fled  to  St.  Germains.  Later  he  returned  to  Eng- 
land and  passed  under  the  alias  of  Mr.  White,  but 
in  Aug.,  1713,  he  repaired  to  Bar-le-Duc  and  took 
up  his  residence  in  the  household  of  the  pretender. 
Aiter  the  failure  of  the  Jacobite  rebellion  of  1715 
he  accompanied  the  pretender  to  Rome.  In  1721 
be  returned  to  Ireland.  He  is  now  remembered 
principally  for  one  book,  A  Short  and  Easy  Method 
vrith  the  Deists  (London,  1698,  and  often).  Other 
works  are:  Galltenus  redivivus  (Edinburgh,  1695), 
an  attack  on  William  III.;  The  Snake  in  the  Grass 
(London,  1696),  an  attack  on  the  Quakers;  A 
Short  and  Easy  Method  with  the  Jews  (1698);  The 
Case  of  the  Regale  and  of  the  Pontificate  (1700;   new 


ed.,  1838);  and  The  Truth  of  Christianity  Demonr 
straied  (1711).  He  expounded  his  political  phi- 
losophy in  a  periodical  founded  by  him  called  The 
Rehearsal  (1705-09;  reprinted,  4  vols.,  1708-09; 
also  6  vols.,  1750).  Before  his  death  he  collected 
his  Theological  Works  (2  vols.,  1721;  reprinted,  7 
vols.,  Oxford,  1832). 

Bibuoqrapht:  R.  J.  Leslie,  Life  and  Writings  of  Charlea 
LeaHe,  London,  1885;  the  Life,  prefixed  to  the  Oxford 
ed.  of  his  Thet^ogioal  Warke,  ut  sup.;  L.  Stephen,  Engliak 
Thought  in  the  18th  Century,  i.  196-201.  241,  New  York, 
1881;  DNB,  xxziiL  77-83  (contains  a  sood  list  of  author^ 
ities).  Consult  also  T.  Lathbury,  Hietorp  of  the  Non. 
jurort,  London,  1862. 

LESLIE  (LESLBT),  JOHN:  Scottish  Roman 
Catholic  historian  and  statesman;  b.  in  Scotland 
1527;  d.  at  Gurtenburg,  near  Brussels,  May  30, 
1596.  He  studied  in  Aberdeen,  Paris,  and  Poitiers, 
was  appointed  canon  of  the  cathedral  church  at 
Aberdeen,  1547,  canonist  in  King's  College,  Aber- 
deen, 1553,  official  of  the  diocese  of  Aberdeen  1558, 
and  in  1559  was  inducted  into  the  parsonage, 
canonry,  and  prebend  of  Oyne.  At  the  Reformar 
tion  he  became  a  champion  of  the  Roman  faith. 
He  was  one  of  Knox's  opponents  at  the  disputation 
in  Edinburgh  in  1561  and  also  one  of  the  commis- 
sioners sent  to  France  that  year  to  bring  over  Mary 
Queen  of  Scots.  He  returned  in  Mary's  train  and 
became  her  principal  ecclesiastical  adviser.  He  was 
named  professor  of  canon  law  at  King's  College  and 
University  of  Aberdeen  in  1562,  and  in  1565  he  was 
made  privy  councilor,  judge  of  the  court  of  session, 
and  bishop  of  Ross.  He  was  Mary's  chief  commis- 
sioner at  the  conference  at  York  in  1568,  and  later 
he  was  her  ambassador  at  the  court  of  Elizabeth. 
He  was  the  chief  means  of  communication  between 
Mary  and  her  supporters,  and  was  the  prime  mover 
in  numerous  intrigues  in  her  behalf.  It  was  he 
who  originated  the  scheme  of  a  marriage  between 
Mary  and  the  duke  of  Norfolk,  which  ended  with 
Norfolk's  execution.  For  his  part  in  the  Norfolk 
conspiracy  he  was  imprisoned  in  the  Tower  of  Lon- 
don. Afterward  he  was  transferred  to  Famham 
Castle,  and  at  the  close  of  1573  he  was  set  at  lib- 
erty, on  condition  that  he  leave  the  country.  On 
the  continent  he  continued  lus  efforts  for  Mary  and, 
after  a  year's  sojourn  in  Paris,  went  to  Rome  to 
represent  her  interests  at  the  oapal  court.  He  was 
sent  by  the  pope  on  various  missions  in  Mary's  be- 
half. In  1579  he  was  made  suffragan  and  vicar- 
general  of  the  diocese  of  Rouen,  and  in  1593  he  was 
appointed  bbhop  of  Coutances  in  Normandy. 
Unable  to  obtain  possession  of  his  see,  owing  to  the 
unsettled  condition  of  the  country,  he  retired  to  a 
monastery  of  Augustinian  monks  at  Gurtenburg. 
His  literary  fame  rests  upon  his  De  origine,  mori- 
bus,  et  re&us  gestis  Scatorum  (Rome,  1578),  which 
extends  from  the  earliest  times  to  the  year  1562. 
An  earlier  Scottish  version,  written  by  Leslie  in 
1568-70  and  presented  to  Queen  Mary  in  1571,  was 
edited  for  the  Bannatyne  Club  by  T.  Thomson 
under  the  title,  The  History  of  Scotland  from  the 
Death  of  James  I,  in  the  Year  1436  to  the  Year  1661 
(Edinburgh,  1830).  Leslie  wrote  much  in  defense 
of  Mary,  and  composed  for  her  Pioi  afflicti  animi 
consolationes  .  .  .  animi  tranquiUi  munimentum  el 
conservatio  (Paris,  1574). 


x!S^«m«r 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


464 


BnuooBAFirr:  An  important  and  eztenoiYe  list  of  touroM 
is  giTen  at  the  end  of  the  iketcb  in  DNB,  xudit  03-09. 
Leslie's  Diarv  was  published  by  the  Bannatyne  Qub  in  iu 
MiseeUany,  vol  iii,  Edinbui«h,  1827.  An  early  life  is 
republished  in  vols,  i,  iii.  of  James  Anderson's  CoiUcHonM 
ReUUing  to  the  HiH.  c/  Mary  Queen  of  Seotiand,  4  vols., 
ib.  1727-28.  Consult  also:  Life  and  Timee  ofRt  Rev,  John 
-    -    -       -        1886. 


LESS,  GOTTFRIED:  German  Lutheran  theo- 
logian; b.  at  Konits  (65  m.  s.w.  of  Danxig)  Jan. 
31,  1736;  d.  at  Hanover  Aug.  28,  1797.  He  was 
educated  at  the  Collegium  Friedericianumin  K6nigs- 
berg,  and  then  studied  theology  at  Jena  and  at 
HaUe,  where  he  was  the  pupil  of  S.  J.  Baumgarten. 
In  1767  he  removed  to  Danzig  where  in  1761  he 
was  appointed  extraordinary  professor  of  theology. 
After  a  scientific  journey  to  Holland  and  England 
in  1762,  he  was  appointed  professor  and  preacher 
of  the  University  of  Gottingen  (1763).  In  1791 
he  was  called  to  Hanover  as  court  preacher,  coun- 
cilor of  the  consistory  and  general  superintendent. 
His  theological  standpoint  was  that  of  a  rationalistic 
and  sentimental  religion  that  conceded  one  point 
of  the  positive  faith  of  the  Church  after  the  other 
to  the  spirit  of  the  time,  always  believing  that  by 
the  sacrifice  of  external  matters  there  could  be 
saved  the  principal  point — '*  Christianity  as  the 
moral  religion  of  nature."  His  numerous  works 
belong  mostly  to  the  departments  of  apologetics, 
dogmatics,  ethics,  and  practical  theology.  His 
principal  work  in  apologetics  is  Beweis  der  Wahr- 
heit  der  chrisUichen  Religion  (Bremen,  1768;  Eng. 
transl.,  AxUhenUcUy^  UncorrupUd  Preservation,  and 
CredibUihf  of  the  New  Testament,  London,  1804). 
The  sixth  edition  (Gdttingen,  1786)  was  to  form  the 
second  part  of  a  larger  unfinished  work  entitled 
Ueber  die  Religion,  ihre  Geschichte,  Wahl  und  Be- 
st&tigung,  of  which  two  volumes  appeared  (Gottin- 
gen, 1783).  Less  was,  however,  recognized  chiefly 
as  an  authority  in  ethics,  on  which  he  published 
Ausfukrliches  Handbuch  der  chrisUichen  Moral  und 
allgemeinen  Lebenstheologie  (1777).  In  the  sphere 
of  dogmatics  he  wrote,  Handbuch  der  chrisUichen 
Rdigionstheorie  fur  AufgM&rtere  (1789).  Of  ser- 
mons he  published  besides  other  collections  Pae- 
sionspredigten  (1778-84).  Besides  his  chief  works 
he  wrote  a  great  number  of  monographs  and  trea- 
tises on  special  topics  in  the  various  departments  of 
theology.  (Paul  Tbchackbrt.) 

Bibuoosapht:  Holsoher,  O.  Le$»,  ein  hiographiei^ee  Frafh 
mofU,  Hanover,  1797;  Q.  Frank,  OeechidUe  der  proieetanH- 
echen  Theolooie»  iii  100  sqq.,  Leipsio,  1875. 

LESSIN6,  GOTTHOLD  EPHRAIM:  German 
critic  and  dramatist;  b.  at  Kamenz  (20  m.  n.e.  of 
Dresden)  Jan.  22,  1729;  d.  at  Brunswick  Feb.  15, 
1781.  His  father  was  a  learned  and  respected 
Lutheran  pastor,  and  his  ancestors  for  generations 
had  been  clergymen.  He  attended  the  Fllrsten- 
schule,  St.  Afra,  at  Meissen,  and  while  there  began 
his  comedy,  Der  junge  Gdehrte.  In  1746  he  began 
to  study  theology  at  the  University  of  Leipsic;  his 
interest,  however,  lay  more  in  the  direction  of 
literature  and  the  drama.  Later  he  took  up  the 
study  of  medicine  and  philology,  but  again  busied 
himself  with  titerature  and  the  theater.  In  Janu- 
ary, 1748,  the  Actress  Neuber  produced  the  play 
already  named.    Between  1748  and  1751  he  was  at 


Berlin,  nominally  a  student  of  medicine,  but  actu- 
ally earning  his  living  by  writing.  He  made  trans- 
lations, edited  a  supplement  of  the  Voseieche  Zeit- 
ung,  and  began  his  critical  and  scholarly  works. 
He  translated  Voltaire's  defense  in  the  suit  with 
Abraham  Hirach  and  corresponded  with  the  French- 
man, but  later  lost  his  respect  for  him.  At  the  re- 
quest of  his  father  he  resumed  his  studies  at  Wit- 
tenberg for  a  few  months,  where  in  1752  he  took 
his  master's  d^ree.  His  ReUungen  was  written 
during  those  months.  He  returned  to  Berlin  in 
October,  1752,  and  continued  to  work  on  the  Vossi- 
srhe  Zeitung,  publishing  his  writings  in  six  volumes 
1753-55.  His  Miss  Sara  Sampson  was  the  first 
German  tragedy  of  every-day  life.  He  won  the 
recognition  of  eminent  scholars  and  the  friendship 
of  such  men  as  Nicolai,  Mendelssohn  and  Michaelis. 
He  then  took  part  in  writing  the  Brief e  die  neueste 
Litteratur  betreffend.  In  1760  he  accepted  a  posi- 
tion as  secretary  to  General  Tauentnen,  at  Bres- 
lau,  which  gave  him  a  feeling  of  security  as  to  his 
livelihood  while  leaving  him  time  to  pursue  his  lit- 
erary plans.  He  worked  at  his  Laokoon,  and  Mijina 
von  Bamhdm,  and  studied  Spinoza  and  the  Church 
Fathers,  but  resigned  his  position  in  1765.  In  1767 
he  went  to  Hamburg  to  become  dramaturg  to  the 
newly  founded  theater  of  Johaim  Friedrich  Loewe. 
The  theater  did  not  last  long.  A  printing  and  pub- 
lishing business  in  which  Lessing  became  intei^ 
ested  was  also  a  failure.  At  Hamburg  he  was  ul- 
timate with  Klopstock,  Hagedom,  Claudius,  and 
many  other  important  persons.  The  crown  prince 
of  Brunswick,  on  the  recorrmiendation  of  Ebert, 
offered  him  a  position  as  librarian  at  Wolfenbuttel, 
which  he  took  in  April,  1770,  but  the  life  there 
soon  lost  its  attraction  for  him.  In  1777  he  began 
a  series  of  theological  polemics,  which  continued 
until  the  end  of  his  life.  He  had  been  drawn  into 
the  strife  by  the.  publication  of  a  manuscript  of 
Berengar  of  Tours  bearing  on  the  controversy  con- 
cerning the  Eucharist  (see  Berengar  of  Tours, 
§  2).  His  cormection  with  the  library  occasioned  a 
number  of  scholarly  investigations,  the  results  of 
which  he  published  in  his  BeUrAge  zur  GeaehichU 
und  LUteraiur.  His  Nathan  der  Weise,  which  was 
to  some  extent  the  outcome  of  his  theological  con- 
troversies, was  finished  in  1779.  Emsi  und  Folk 
appeared  in  1778-80,  and  Ergiehung  dee  Men- 
schengeschlechtes  in  1780.  To  the  year  1778  belongs 
a  work  published  by  his  brother  after  his  death: 
Neue  Hypothese  tiber  die  Evangelisten  aU  Uoss 
menschliche  Oeackichtsschreiber  betrachtet,  in  which 
he  assumes  the  existence  of  an  Aramaic  oiigiiial  of 
Matthew  which  Matthew  followed  and  condensed, 
and  Mark  and  Luke  supplemented  with  f  reeh  mate- 
rial. Some  features  of  this  theory  have  proved 
permanent. 

Lessing  stands  beside  Goethe  and  Schiller  as  one 
of  the  Gierman  classical  writers  who  is  read  by  all 
educated  persons  as  well  as  by  mere  students  of 
literature.  This  fact  is  due  in  large  measure  to  the 
perfection  of  form  of  his  masterpieces,  and  also  to 
his  truthful,  manly  qualities.  His  influence  on  the 
German  language  has  been  very  considerable. 
Various  opinions  have  been  expressed  upon  Les- 
sing's   attitude   toward  Christianity.    Those   who 


466 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Ii6  TeUier 


still  distinguish  between  the  religion  of  Christ  and 
the  Christian  religion,  holding  to  the  former  alone, 
may  regard  Lessing  as  the  inaugurator  of  a  new  era 
in  theology.  But  if  it  be  maintained  that  the  es- 
sential thiog  in  Christianity  is  one's  attitude  toward 
the  Savior,  considering  him  as  the  object  of  Chris- 
tian worship  and  not  merely  its  teacher,  Lessing's 
position  can  hardly  be  called  a  Christian  one. 
Nevertheless,  it  can  not  be  denied  that  his  ethical 
views,  and  even  his  religious  conceptions,  were 
rooted  in  Christian  soil.  His  religious  opinions  did 
not  radically  change,  as  some  have  suggested,  to- 
ward the  end  of  his  life;  nor  was  he  a  Spinozist,  he 
was  rather  a  follower  of  Leibnitz.  He  believed  in 
a  conscious  God,  who  ruled  above  the  world.  In 
the  revealed  religions  he  saw  preparatory  stages  to 
the  truths  of  natural  religion.  He  expected  a  third 
stage  in  religious  history,  following  Judaism  and 
Christianity,  in  which  a  new  and  everlasting  evan- 
gel should  be  promulgated,  a  period  in  which  every 
man  would  do  right  for  right's  sake. 

(Carl  Berthbau.) 
Biblioobapht:  The  editions  of  Letfliiis's  works  are  very 
numerous  and  easily  aooesstble;  Eng.  transls.  of  his  works 
are  also  numerous,  e.g.,  Ijaocoon,  by  Sir.  R.  I^iillimore, 
London,  1876;  SeUcUd  Pnm  Work;  by  E.  C.  Beesley 
and  Helen  Zimmem.  ib.  1879;  DramaJtic  Worka,  in  Bohn's 
Library,  2  vols.,  ib.  1875-78;  EducaHon  of  the  Human 
Race,  by  F.  W.  Robertson,  ib.  1858.  Among  the  many 
biographies  may  be  named:  T.  W.  Dansel  and  G.  E. 
Guhrauer,  2d  ed.  by  W.  von  Maltsahn  and  R.  Boxberger, 
2  vols.,  Berlin,  1884;  A.  Stahr.  Boston.  1866;  H.  Zim- 
mem, London,  1878;  J.  Lime,  2  vols.,  London,  1870; 
E.  Schmidt.  2  vols..  Berlin,  1884;  T.  W.  Rolleston,  Lon- 
don, 1889;  A.  W.  Ernst.  Stuttgart,  1903;  and  ADB, 
zix.  756-802.  Varioiis  phases  of  his  literary  and  theo- 
logical activities  are  discussed  in:  H.  Ritier,  l/e&er  Lee- 
aing'e  philotophieche  und  religidae  OrundeOiMe,  GAttingen, 
1847;  W.  Beyschlag,  Leetinoe  Nathan  der  Weiae  vnd  doe 
poeUive  ChriatenOium,  Berlin,  1863;  J.  W.  Loebell,  Q.  E. 
Leaeino,  Brunswick,  1865  (deals  with  his  relations  to  Ger- 
man literature);  I.  A.  Domer.  Oeachichte  der  proteatanti- 
aehen  Theologie,  pp.  721  sqq.,  Munich,  1867,  Eng.  transl., 
Hial.  of  Proteatant  Theoloov,  2  vols.,  Edinburgh,  1871; 
E.  Niemeyer,  C7e6er  Leaainga  POdagogik,  Dresden,  1874; 
T.  W.  H.  Rolleston,  Laaaing  and  Modem  Oerman  LUera- 
ture,  London,  1900;  C.  Sell,  Die  Relioion  unaerer  Klaaai- 
ker,  TQbingen,  1904;  L.  Zschamak,  Laaaing  und  Sentler, 
Giessen,  1905. 

LESSIUS  (LEYS),  LEOIfARDUS:  Jesuit  theo- 
logian; b.  at  Brecht  (14  m.  n.e.  of  Antwerp),  Bel- 
gium, Oct.  1,  1554;  d.  at  Louvain  Jan.  15,  1623. 
He  studied  at  Louvain  and  entered  the  Society  of 
Jesus  in  1572.  After  teaching  philosophy  in  the 
Jesuit  College  at  Douai  for  seven  years  (1574-81) 
he  devoted  himself  for  four  years  to  the  study  of 
theology  in  Rome  and  in  1585  became  professor  of 
theology  at  the  Jesuit  college  at  Louvain,  remain- 
ing there  till  his  death.  In  1587  the  theological 
faculty  at  Louvain  attacked  Lessius  and  Jean  du 
Hamel,  his  colleague,  censuring  thirty-four  theses 
extracted  from  their  lectures,  especially  on  the  doc- 
trines of  inspiration,  and  grace  and  liberty.  Lessius 
defended  himself  in  Sex  antitheses  and  Responsio 
ad  AfUapologiam.  Against  the  Augustinian  doc- 
trine of  grace,  which  was  still  upheld  by  the  faculty 
of  Louvain,  Lessius  denied  the  sole  efficacy  of  grace. 
He  also  discarded  the  doctrine  of  inspiration  and 
based  the  canonidty  of  the  books  of  the  Bible  upon 
the  subsequent  testimony  of  the  Spirit.  But  in 
spite  of  his  liberal  views  he  had  no  sympathy  with 
VI.--30 


any  tendency  or  creed  outside  of  the  Roman  Catho- 
lic Church.  He  was  a  versatile  and  prolific  writer, 
and  owed  his  chief  fame  to  his  comprehensive  work 
on  ethics,  De  jure  et  institia  ceterisque  virtuHbus 
cardinalUms  libri  iv.  (Louvain,  1605).  Here  he 
treats  in  the  scheme  of  the  four  cardinal  virtues  all 
questions  of  ethics,  political  economy,  natural  law, 
etc.,  after  the  manner  of  Jesuit  morals.  He  wrote 
also:  De/ensio  poleHatis  summi  pantificis  (Sara- 
gossa,  1611);  Ihscussio  decreti  magni  consilii  Late- 
ranensis  et  quarundam  rationum  annexarum  de 
potestale  ecdesice  in  temponUibus  (Mains,  1613); 
Hygiasticon  seu  de  vera  ratione  valetudinis  bona  et 
vitoi  una  cum  sensuum  ludicii  et  memorice  integritale 
ad  extremam  senectutem  conservandce  (Antwerp, 
1613;  Eng.  transl.,  Cambridge,  1634).  A  collected 
edition  of  his  works  was  published  under  the  title 
Opuscula  guibus  pleraque  sacra  theologice  mysteria 
explicantur  el  vita  rede  instihLendce  prcecepta  tradun' 
tur  (Antwerp,  1623).  (R.  Seebero.) 

Bibuooraphy:  H.  Hurter,  Nomandaior  literariua,  i.  245 
sqq.,  Innsbruck,  1892;  F.  X.  Linsenmann,  M.  Baiua  und 
die  Orundlegung  dea  Janaeniamua,  TQbingen,  1867;  G. 
Schneemann,  Bntaiehung  und  Entwickelung  der  ffuMnia- 
tiaA-moliniaHaehen  Kontroveraa,  FreibuiSf  1879-^80;  idem, 
Controveraiarum  de  divina  graUa  liberi  arbUrii  eoneordia, 
ib.  1881;  KL,  vii  1844-51. 

LESSON  FOR  THE  DAT.    See  Pericopb. 
LESTINES,  SYNOD  OF.    See  Liftin jb.  Synod  of. 

LE  TELLIER,  le  ter'lyd',  MICHEL:  French 
Jesuit  and  confessor  of  Louis  XIV.;  b.  near  Vire  (36 
m.  s.w.  of  Gaen)  Dec.  16, 1643;  d.  at  La  Fl^he  (24  m. 
s.s.w.  of  Le  Mans)  Sept.  2,  1719.  He  studied  at  the 
Jesuit  college  of  Caen,  and  in  1661  entered  the  So- 
ciety of  Jesus.  While  teaching  at  the  College  Louis- 
le-Grand  he  became  distinguished  as  a  polemic  the- 
ologian, especially  against  the  Jansenists.  In  1672 
he  published  at  Rouen  his  (^servations  sur  la  ver- 
sion /ran^aise  du  Nouveau  Testament  imprimie  a 
Mans  (cf.  Bible  Versions,  B,  VI.,  §  4),  and  as- 
sisted Dominique  Bouhours  in  translating  the  New 
Testament  into  French  (1697).  In  support  of  the 
Jesuit  principle  of  making  certain  concessions  in 
order  to  convert  the  heathen,  especially  in  China, 
he  wrote  Defense  des  nouveaux  chritiens  et  des  mis- 
sianaires  de  la  ChinCf  du.  Japan  et  des  Indes  (2  vols., 
Paris,  1687);  in  his  Histoire  des  dnq  propositions 
de  Jansinius  (Li^,  1699),  written  under  the  pseu- 
donym Dumas,  he  assailed  Jansenism;  and  in  his 
Le  Pbre  Quesnel  siditieux  et  lUritique  (Paris,  1705) 
he  attacked  Pasquier  Quesnel  (q.v.).  Among  his 
other  works  special  mention  should  be  made  of  his 
RecueU  des  buUes  sur  les  erreurs  des  deux  demiers 
sxkcUs  (Mons,  1697). 

The  services  of  Le  Tellier  won  him  the  rank  of  a 
provincial  of  his  order,  and  in  1709  he  became  the 
confessor  of  Louis  XIV.,  over  whom  he  exercised 
a  profound  influence  against  the  Jansenists.  To 
him  the  destruction  of  Port  Royal  was  ultimately 
due,  as  was  the  resumption  of  efforts  to  suppress 
Protestantism.  He  was  also  a  potent  factor  in 
securing  the  promulgation  of  the  bull  UnigenUius, 
With  the  death  of  Louis  XIV.  (1715),  however,  his 
influence  was  at  an  end,  and  the  regency  banished 
him  from  court,  first  to  Amiens  and  later  to  La 
Fldche.  (EuGBN  Lachbnmann.) 


Letters  Blmieeoir 
Levi,  Leritee 


THE  NEW  SCHATF-HERZOQ 


466 


Bibuookafst:  H.  Rmiohlin*  (TMcAtcto  von  Port  Rcyal,  U. 
680,  503,  HAmburs.  1844;  A.  DorMime,  Journal,  2  rola,. 
Borne,  1763;  H.  J.  V.  de  Saint-Simon.  Mimairm,  Pwii, 
1820:  Ranke.  Pojm,  U.  437-438. 

LETTERS  DimSSORY  (lUera  dimisKricB  or 
dimissorialea) :  The  name  of  a  document  by  which 
a  person  belonging  to  a  certain  eccleaiasticAl  juriB- 
diction  (diocese,  congregation,  etc.)  is  formally  per- 
mitted to  withdraw  from  the  proper  authority, 
either  forever  (lUera  dimisaona  perpetua)^  or  for  a 
particular  purpose,  such  as  ordination  (liUra  dimU- 
9on<B  temparaUa). 

LBUSDEKy  lus'den,  JOHAHHES:  Dutch  Biblical 
scholar;  b.  at  Utrecht  Apr.  26,  1624;  d.  there  Sept. 
30,  1699.  He  studied  philosophy  and  theology, 
and  especially  Oriental  languages  at  Utrecht,  and 
then  went  to  Amsterdam  to  perfect  his  knowledge 
by  intercourse  with  Jews.  In  1650  he  became  pro- 
fessor extraordinary  of  Oriental  languages  at 
Utrecht,  and  in  1653  ordinary  professor.  He  was 
highly  esteemed  as  an  Orientalist,  and  as  an  aca- 
demic teacher.  Of  his  works  may  be  mentioned: 
Philoloffus  Hebrcnu  (Utrecht,  1652);  Jonas  tUus- 
tratus  (1656);  Joel  explicatua  .  .  .  adjunctus  Oba- 
dja  iUtutratuB  (1657);  Philologus  Hebrceo-mixtus 
(1663);  Pmdterium  H^aeum  (Amsterdam,  1666); 
Clavia  Graoa  Novi  TestamenH  (Leyden,  1672); 
Clavi$  Helmiiea  VeUria  TestamenH  (1673);  and 
Korie  Htkreutche  en  Chaldeuache  taatkonsi  (Utrecht, 
1686).  Leusden  rendered  valuable  service  to  later 
editors  by  his  edition  of  the  Old  Testament  (Am- 
sterdam, 1660;  2d  ed.,  1667),  which  he  published 
in  collaboration  with  Joseph  Athias,  a  rabbi  and 
printer  in  Amsterdam.  His  Novum  Testamentum 
Oracum  (Utrecht,  1675)  has  little  scientific  value. 

(S.  D.  VAN  Veen.) 
Bibuoobapbt:  C.  Burman,  7Vo|«e(um  eruditum,  vvrorum 
doeirina  inluMtrium,  pp.  186-191,  Utrecht.  1738;  J.  Fabri- 
eius,  Hittoria  hiblifOiKtca  FabrieiancB,  i.  244  sqq..  Helm- 
ttadt.  1718;  B.  Qlaaiua.  OodgeUtrd  Nederland,  ii.  306- 
867,  8  vols.,  '■  HertogenboMh.  1861-66;  G.  Sepp.  Met 
ChdifdMrd  Ondenriio  in  NeiUrland,  iL  172-174.  Leyden, 
1874;   Ltohtenbenw,  B3R,  vui.  106-106. 

LEVELLERS:  A  faction  with  radical  religious 
and  political  tendencies  which  appeared  in  Crom- 
well's army  at  the  time  of  the  break  between  the 
Independents  and  the  Long  Parliament  (1647). 
Their  aims  were  set  forth  by  one  of  their  number  in 
The  Leveller,  or  the  Prindplee  and  Maxima  concemr 
ing  Government  and  Religion  of  those  commonly 
ceiled  Levdlera  (London,  1658).  These  were  in 
politics  the  supremacy  of  the  law  without  regard 
to  party,  the  legislative  power  of  Parliament,  the 
absolute  equality  of  all  before  the  law,  and  the 
right  of  bearing  arms;  in  religion  they  sought  free- 
dom of  conscience,  liberty  for  each  individual  to 
act  according  to  his  best  judgment,  the  recognition 
of  two  aspects  of  religion  (one  the  correct  under- 
standing of  revelation  and  a  private  matter,  the 
other  works  of  mercy  and  justice  subject  to  the 
approval  of  mankind  and  the  authorities),  and  the 
condenmation  of  all  controversy  on  religious  faith 
and  practise.  The  sect  vanished  with  many  others 
at  the  Restoration.  (C.  ScHOELLtO 

Bibuoobatrt:  S.  H.  Church.  Olirer  Cromvell,  pp.  277- 
278.  306.  328.  New  York.  1807;  Eneyclopadia  Britannica, 
i.  02,  vi.  60Q  602;   and  the  literature  on  Cromwell. 


LEVI,  LEV1TE8. 

Oridna  (f  1). 

Leritai  in  the  Prieetly  Doeument  (|  2). 
Character  of  Their  Service  (|  3). 
LatOT  Historical  Noticee  (|  4). 
Modem  Critidam  ($  6). 

In  all  sources  Levi  appears  as  one  of  the  sona  of 
Jacob,  and  in  Gen.  xxix.  34,  zzxv.  23,  and  xlix. 
as  the  third  son  of  Leah.  Of  Levi  personally  little 
is  related  outside  of  his  union  with  Simeon  in  the 
cunning  and  cruel  vengeance  upon  the  Shechemites 
for  dishonoring  his  sister  Dinah  and  his  consequent 
dispersion  among  the  tribes  according  to  the  last 
oracle  of  Jacob  (Gen.  xxxix.  25  sqq.,  xlix.  5  aqq.). 

The  fact  that  he  had  no  inheritance 
I.  Origins,  among  the  tribes  goes  with  his  priestly 

calling  and  the  high  distinction  be  re- 
ceived under  Moses.  The  question  has  been  raLsed 
whether  Levi  was  originally  an  individual  and  per- 
sonal name  (cf.  Gen.  xxix.  34,  R.V.  margin),  and 
some  modem  scholars  do  not  regard  it  as  a  tribal 
or  local  name  but  as  derived  from  the  vocation— 
'*  joined  [to  a  sanctuary  or  a  divinity],"  **  one  de- 
voted.'' Hommel  cites  such  a  usage  of  the  word 
in  Mincean  inscriptions  in  connection  with  the  god 
Wadd.  But  this  usage  is  altogether  foreign  to  He- 
brew, and  such  a  connection  is  absent  in  the  un- 
favorable utterance  of  Jacob's  last  words,  where 
there  is  no  reference  to  the  later  honorable  calliru: 
of  the  tribe.  Wellhausen's  view  that  Jacob's  wo^d^ 
refer  to  a  tribe  (not  an  individual)  which  early 
sank  into  insignificance  while  Deut.  xxxiii.  8  sqq. 
blesses  its  priestly  position  is  (apart  from  the  other- 
wise unexplained  naming  of  an  unpriestly  tribe 
not  so  satisfactory  as  that  under  the  same  name 
quantitatively  different  conceptions  are  treated, 
since  the  Jacobic  and  Mosaic  blessings  are  closely 
related.  In  Mosaic  times  the  tribe  came  into  a 
clearer  light,  inasmuch  as  Moses  (q.v.)  belonged  to 
it  and  during  the  wandering  it  becsmiie  the  priestly 
tribe.  This  last  is  ascribed  to  two  drcumstanoes: 
first  Moses  made  his  brother  Aaron  priest  of  the 
sanctuary,  and,  second,  for  fidelity  to  the  covenant 
the  Levites  received  priestly  consecration  (Ex. 
xxxii.  29).  The  hereditary  character  of  the  Aaronic 
priesthood  not  only  depends  upon  the  setting  apart 
of  his  sons  as  his  helpers  at  the  sanctuary  and  the 
promise  of  an  everlasting  priesthood  in  conse- 
quence of  the  faithfulness  of  the  tribe  (Ex.  xxxii.; 
Num.  XXV.  11  sqq.),  but  is  in  accordance  with  the 
Semitic  usage  which  sets  apart  certain  families  for 
the  care  of  sanctuaries. 

The  priestly  document  describes  the  service  of 
the  tribe  during  the  wandering  as  definitely  or- 
dered for  the  care  of  the  sanctuary  and  its  belong- 
ings. The  period  of  service  is  given  in  Num.  iv. 
23,  30,  as  from  the  age  of  thirty  to  fifty,  but  in 
Num.  viii.  24  sqq.  as  from  twenty-five  to  fifty. 
Tradition  regards   this  as  dealing  only  with  the 

period  of  the  wandering,  and  affirms 
2.  Levitos  in  that  at  the  age  of  fifty  service  did  not 
thePriesfly  cease,  as  at  the  sanctuary  of  Shiloh. 
Document  The  express  statements  of  the  priestly 

document  concerning  Leviticid  serv- 
ice deal  in  general  with  the  time  of  the  wanderings:. 
In  this  the  consecration  of  the  Levites,  analogous 


467 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


liOttars  BlmiBSory 
I««vi,  Levites 


to  that  of  the  priests,  was  to  a  lower  grade  of  serv- 
ioe,  but  signified  a  setting  apart  to  Yahweh,  and 
consisted  of  a  sprinkling  with  water  of  expiation, 
a  shaving  of  all  hair  from  the  body,  and  the  wash- 
ing of  the  clothing.  Then  followed  the  laying  on 
of  hands  by  the  elders,  the  ofifering  of  the  wave 
offering  by  the  high  priest  and  *of  a  sin  and  burnt 
offering.  A  special  clothing  does  not  seem  to  have 
been  appointed  for  them  as  it  was  for  the  priests 
(but  cf.  I  Chron.  xv.  27;  II  Chron.  v.  12).  There 
is  lacking  a  description  of  their  personal  business 
and  manner  of  life  as  opposed  to  the  definite  regu- 
lations for  priestly  living  (Lev.  xxi.),  except  that 
they  were  not  possessors  of  land,  in  lieu  of  which 
they  received  part  of  the  tithes  of  the  people  and 
of  the  booty  of  war  (Num.  xviii.  24  sqq.,  xxxi.  30; 
see  Tithes).  For  their  dwellings  forty-eight  cities 
were  set  apart,  according  to  Num.  xxxv.,  with 
definite  dimensions  in  order  that  ground  should  be 
available  for  pasturage  and  support,  a  provision 
which  does  not  do  away  with  their  exclusion  from 
possession  of  land,  since  the  cities  were  not  inhab- 
ited exclusively  by  Levites  (but  cf .  Lev.  xxv.  32- 
33).  The  carrying  out  of  this  provision  is  given 
in  Josh.  xxi.  (P),  together  with  the  setting  apart  of 
thirteen  cities  for  the  priests;  of  these  cities  six 
were  cities  of  refuge.  The  idea  of  the  systematic 
distribution  of  a  tribe  among  all  the  other  tribes 
presents  that  of  a  bond  admirably  adapted  to  pre- 
serve the  conceptions  of  the  theocracy,  but  seems 
rather  ideal  tlum  real.  The  cities  named  were  not 
in  Israelitic  possession  till  long  after,  and  in  the 
time  of  the  Judges  the  Levites  were  in  the  position 
of  strangers  and  guests. 

The  tribe  consisted  bf  three  families,  those  of 
Gershon,  Kohath,  and  Merari  (Gen.  xlvi.  11;  Ex. 
vi.  16),  the  sons  of  Levi,  and  these  divided  into 
eight  branches.  In  Mosaic  times  the  number  of 
Levites  is  given  as  22,000  (Num.  iii.  39)  or  23,000 
(Num.  xxvi.  62).  The  Chronicler  traces  a  new  ar- 
rangement for  the  Levite  service  back  to  David, 
who  in  connection  with  the  placing  of 
3.  Chaiac*  the  ark  in  Jerusalem  is  said  to  have 
ter  of  assigned  to  special  duties  the  different 
Their  families  (I  Chron.  xxiii.-xxvii.),  and 
Service,  the  impression  is  given  that  this  was 
in  accord  with  prophetic  direction. 
The  objections  made  to  this  statement  as  a  merely 
fanciful  construction  are  answered  by  the  fact  that 
it  has  all  the  appearance  of  truth;  the  Chronicler 
might  have  attributed  the  assignment  to  Moses  or 
Solomon  were  the  representation  purely  hypo- 
thetical. It  is  evident  that  David  and  Solomon, 
the  projector  and  builder  of  the  temple,  and  the 
monarchs  who  organized  the  kingdom,  must  have 
given  special  attention  to  the  Levites.  It  is  wholly 
possible  that  at  that  time  suitable  persons  from 
other  tribes  were  incorporated  among  the  Levites, 
though  the  tribal  descent  remained  the  basis  of 
assignment.  In  David's  time  the  number  of  Le- 
vites was  38,000  (I  Chron.  xxxiii.  3),  of  whom 
24,000  were  assigned  to  sanctuary  service,  6,000 
became  officers  and  judges,  4,000  doorkeepers,  and 
4,000  were  assigned  to  musical  service.  The  class 
first  named  acted  as  assistants  to  the  priests, 
cleansed  the  temple,  prepared  the  offerings,  and  had 


general  supervision  of  the  sacred  precincts.  To 
this  end  a  further  division  was  made  into  twenty- 
four  courses,  corresponding  to  the  same  number  of 
priestly  coiuises.  The  officers  and  judges,  taken 
from  the  family  of  Kohath,  served  outside  the  sanc- 
tuary and  in  great  part  outside  Jerusalem.  The 
musicians  were  also  divided  into  twenty-four  choirs, 
and  among  their  leaders  are  mentioned  sons  of 
Asaph,  Jeduthun,  Heman,  and  Kohath.  The  door- 
keepers, one  of  Korahitic  descent  and  the  rest  of 
two  families  tracing  their  origin  to  Merari,  guarded 
the  four  sides  of  the  temple  at  twenty-four  posts. 
The  Nethinim  (the  word  means  "  given  over,"  trcL- 
diH,  cf.  the  hierodtUol  of  Josephus,  Ant,  XL,  v.  1; 
III  Elzra,  i.  3)  were  assigned  to  a  service  different 
from  that  of  the  Levites;  in  postexilic  times  they 
performed  the  menial  services  of  the  sanctuary,  in 
preexilic  times  the  heaviest  duties,  and  their  insti- 
tution appears  to  have  been  one  of  high  antiquity 
(compare  the  general  service  of  the  Gibeonites,  Josh, 
ix.  21  sqq.).  Prisoners  of  war  imder  the  kings  who 
followed  David  were  often  assigned  as  temple 
slaves  (Ezra  viii.  20),  and  Solomon  seems  to  have 
devoted  to  the  same  service  some  of  the  Canaanites 
(I  Kings  ix.  21;  cf.  Ezra  ii.  58).  During  the  con- 
tinuance of  the  kingdom  the  service  of  the  temple 
seems  to  have  been  in  part  performed  even  by  un- 
circumcised  persons  (cf.  Ezek.  xliv.  7-8). 

At  the  division  of  the  kingdom,  according  to 
II  Chron.  xi.  13  sqq.,  many  Levites  flocked  to 
Judah  and  Jerusalem  from  the  kingdom  of  Israel. 
Levites  accompanied  the  host  on  a  war  expedition 
under  Jehoshaphat,  and  served  at  the  same  time 
as  judges  and  teachers  of  the  people 

4.  Later     (II  Chron.  xvii.  8,  xix.  8,  xx.  19  sqq.). 

Historical    Jehoiada  employed  them  as  an  armed 

Notices,  guard  at  the  overthrow  of  Athaliah 
(II  Chron.  xxiii.  1-11,  an  office  as- 
signed in  II  Kings  xi.  4-12  to  the  royal  guard). 
To  the  Levites  the  Chronicler  gives  an  important 
part  in  the  reformation  of  Hezekiah  (II  Chron. 
xxix.),  and  tells  of  their  services  in  the  time  of 
Josiah  as  slaughterers  of  the  paschal  lamb  (II  C!hron. 
xxv.  11).  Hezekiah  is  said  to  have  reinstituted 
the  giving  of  tithes,  which  had  fallen  into  disuse, 
for  the  benefit  of  priests  and  Levites  (II  Chron. 
xxxi.  4),  and  the  Chronicler  gives  a  better  charac- 
ter to  the  Levites  than  to  the  priests  in  that  reign 
(II  Chron.  xxix.  34).  Ezekiel  (xliv.  9)  expressly 
excludes  them  from  priestly  service  on  the  ground 
that  they  had  confirmed  Israel  in  idolatry,  and 
allows  them  to  perform  only  the  lower  sanctuary 
services,  assigning  the  altar  service  to  the  Zado- 
kites.  The  effect  of  EzekiePs  legislation  is  that  of 
an  entirely  new  arrangement.  That  the  Levites 
had  fostered  the  high  places  is  suggested  by  their 
fewness  at  the  time  of  the  return  (Ezra  ii.  40); 
only  seventy-four  Levites  as  against  4,289  priests 
were  repatriated  under  Zerubbabel,  though  there 
appear  128  singers  and  139  doorkeepers.  These 
latter  had  been  more  closely  attached  to  the  temple, 
hence  their  greater  interest  in  the  return.  Under 
Nehemiah  the  number  of  Levites  in  Jerusalem  in- 
creased (Neh.  xi.  16  sqq.).  The  Levitical  cities 
are  not  mentioned  in  the  period  of  Ezra-Nehemiah. 
Nethinim,  regarded  as  a  lower  caste  of  the  Levites, 


i.«n,  I 


LeTitM 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ06 


468 


are  mentioned  as  returning  ezileBi  and  they  dwelt 
mainly  in  Jerusalem  (Enra  ii.  68,  vii.  7,  46).  The 
Mishna  (Shekalim,  Middoi,  Tamid)  preserves  the 
tradition  of  the  rc^gulations  affecting  the  service  of 
the  Levites  at  the  second  temple.  After  the  de- 
struction of  the  temple,  the  Levites  and  the  priest- 
hood lost  their  significance,  since  the  synagogue  did 
not  need  them,  though  in  the  ministrations  of  the 
synagogue  Levites  enjoyed  a  certain  distinction. 
The  employment  of  the  name  does  not,  however, 
involve  descent  from  that  tribe,  since  it  was  given 
to  members  of  other  tribes. 

Modem  criticism  has  brought  under  review  the 
prevalent  tradition  regarding  the  development  of 
the  Levites  and  their  service.  Since  the  sharp  dis- 
tinction between  priests  and  Levites  found  in  the 
priestly  legislation  does  not  appear  in  Deuteron- 
omy, one  school  throws  the  latter  book  into  a 
later  time  than  the  other  sources  of  the  Penta- 
teuch, on  the  ground  that  the  distino- 
5.  Kodem  tion  had  worn  away.    Another  school, 

Critioism.  working  upon  the  same  distinction  be- 
tween priests  and  Levites  and  holding 
that  in  prophetic  times  this  distinction  was  not 
existent,  places  the  separation  between  the  Aaronic 
priesthood  and  the  liturgical  Levites  in  the  post- 
prophetic  period.  A  separation  indicated  in  II 
Kings  xxiii.  8  sqq.  is  carried  farther  by  Esekiel 
and  placed  upon  moral  ground,  when  he  reduces 
to  the  rank  of  serving  Levites  those  who  had  en- 
gaged in  idolatry  (Ezek.  xliv.  10).  Then,  accord- 
ing to  this  school,  the  priestly  regulations  were  com- 
piled in  Babylon,  brought  by  Esra  to  Jerusalem, 
and  there  promulgated.  In  this  the  separation 
made  between  the  priestly  class  and  the  Levites 
was  dated  back  into  Mosaic  times.  The  Chroni- 
cler took  up  the  matter  and  developed  his  history  in 
accordance  with  the  scheme  of  the  priestly  legislar 
tion.  And  the  school  whose  teachings  are  here 
summarised  finds  these  results  illuminative  of  doc- 
umentary history,  and  places  the  development  in 
the  order  Deuteronomy,  Ezekiel,  the  priestly  legis- 
lation, the  Chronicler. 

If  sil  historical  worth  is  denied  to  the  ordinances 
of  the  priest  code,  if  the  same  position  is  taken  in 
respect  to  the  reports  of  the  Chronicler  and  to  such 
passages  as  I  Sam.  vi.  15,  II  Sam.  xv.  24  and  I 
Kings  viii.  6,  then  there  remains  little  concerning 
the  Levites  of  preexilic  times  except  subjective  hy- 
pothesis. Of  a  priestly  Levitic  stock  in  early  times 
nothing  remains.  In  the  time  of  the  Judges  and 
early  kings  there  is  no  separation,  so  far  as  the  cul- 
tus  goes,  between  sacred  and  profane — Gideon,  Ma- 
noah,  and  Saul  sacrifice,  and  the  Ephraimite  Samuel 
becomes  a  priest,  and  so  do  David's  sons  (II  Sam. 
viii.  18  R.V.).  A  numerous  lituqpcal  personnel, 
such  as  according  to  P  the  tribe  of  Levi  must  have 
had,  nowhere  appears  in  early  times.  Individ- 
uals assumed  the  functions  of  divine  service,  and 
later  came  to  their  exalted  position  as  in  Deut. 
xxxiii.  But  these  are  in  part  arbitrary  assump- 
tions. The  sources  indicate  that  the  tribe  of  Levi 
belongs  to  the  Mosaic  period  and  was  even  then  in 
sacred  service.  It  is  inconceivable  that  between 
this  tribe  and  the  priesthood  there  should  have 
been  no  line  of  separation.    The  union  between 


people  and  God  depends  upon  a  well-attested 
union  of  the  cultus  with  one  sanctuary  and  one 
priesthood,  and  the  priesthood  is  traced  in  the 
Pentateuch  to  a  family  and  not  a  tribe,  though  to 
the  tribe  during  the  wandering  something  of  priestly 
consecration  was  given  because  of  its  fidelity  to 
Yahweh.  This  does  not  involve  that  the  Mosaic 
basis  of  the  priestly  legislation  did  not  undergo 
in  the  course  of  time  some  modifications,  while 
practical  variations  appeared  from  time  to  time, 
as  has  been  indicated  above.  In  quite  early  times 
the  separation  between  sacred  and  profane  began 
to  fade  out  while  the  idea  of  a  universal  priesthood 
spread.  So  Judges  xvii.  furnishes  an  example  of 
consecration  of  a  profane  person,  who  is  later  re- 
placed by  a  Levite.  Many  sanctuaries  may  have 
existed  without  Levites  in  attendance.  The  sys- 
tematic ordering  of  the  temple  service  reintro- 
duced the  separation  between  sacred  and  profane, 
and  Levitical  priests  were  entrusted  with  the  sanc- 
tuary service.  In  the  popular  view  each  Levite 
had  the  reversion  to  the  priestly  office.  The  Le- 
vites of  the  temple  were  so  distinguished  that  for 
ordinary  menial  functions  lower  servants  were  pro- 
vided, and  were  brethren  of  the  priests.  This  is  the 
Deuteronomic  position.  The  conclusion  so  fre- 
quently drawn  from  II  Kings  xxiii.  9  and  Deut. 
xviii.  6  sqq.  that  the  priests  of  Jerusalem  resisted 
the  attempt  of  Josiah  to  install  there  the  priests  of 
the  high  places  is  not  justified;  all  that  is  dedudble 
is  that  Levitic  origin  alone  was  not  considered  suf- 
ficient ground  for  their  serving  as  priests. 

C.  VON  Oreiaa. 
Bxbuoobapbt:  The  mibject  b  so  Msentially  involwi  in  the 
oritioiflin  of  the  Pentateuch  that,  at  least  for  the  critical 
side  and  largely  also  for  the  historioal  data,  reference  to 
the  literature  on  the  Pentateuch  (Hexateudi)  is  neces- 
sary. It  is  also  discussed  in  treatises  on  the  history  of 
Israel  (see  under  Ahab),  on  Hebrew  archeoloKy  and  the 
theology  of  the  O.  T.  Consult  also:  £.  Riehm,  Die  Ge- 
mUgelmno  Mtm*  im  Lande  Moab,  pp.  31  sqq..  GoUia,  1854: 
J.  J.  St&helin.  in  ZDATO.  U  (1855).  708  sqq.;  J.  Orth,  in 
NowbMb  tUtfue  <U  theologie,  m  (1860).  384  sqq.;  K.  H. 
Graf,  in  Ardiiv  far  .  .  .  Erforaehuno  dea  A.  T.,  i  (1867- 
eO).  68-106.  206-236:  A.  Kuenen.  Oodadienat  van  land, 
iL  104  sqq..  Harlem.  1870.  Eng.  transL.  London.  1875; 
8.  I.  CHirtisB.  The  Levitieal  Prieata,  Edinburgh.  1877;  S. 
Maybaum,  Die  Entwiekeluno  dsa  aUiaraeliHaeken  Prieater- 
tuma,  Brsslau,  1880;  R.  Smend.  Dia  Liaten  der  Bfidkfr 
Kara  und  Nahemia,  Basel.  1881;  W.  H.  Graen,  Afosea  and 
Iha  Prophata,  New  York.  1882  (maintains  the  traditional 
view);  W.  W.  von  Baudissin,  Dia  Otachiehta  dea  alUeata- 
menUi^an  Prieateiihmna,  Leipsic,  1880;  C.  Piepenbring,  in 
RHR,  xziv  (1801).  1-60.  133-186  (summarises  the  ReusH 
Wellhausen  theory);  E.  Meyer.  Die  BnialekwHf  dea  Juden- 
fums.  pp.  168-183.  Halle.  1806;  A.  van  Hoonacker.  U 
Saoerdoca  laviiique,  Louvain,  1800;  F.  von  Hummelauer. 
Daa  vormoaoiadte  Priaalerthum  in  larael,  Freiburg.  1800:  J. 
KOberle.  Die  TempelaAnaer,  Erlangen.  1800;  J.  EL  GBrpent«Y 
and  G.  Harford-Battersby.  The  CompoaiHan  qf  the  Hexo- 
teuek,  London.  1002.  Smith.  OTJC;  SchQrer.  CfeaekidUe. 
ii.  237-242.  271-270.  Eng.  transL.  II..  i  223-229.  265-273; 
DB,  iU.  00-102.  iv.  67-07  (not  to  be  overlooked);  BB,  m. 
2770-2776.  3837-47;   JB,  viii  10-21,  40-60. 

LEVIRATE  MARRIAGE.  See  Fajolt  and  Mab- 
RiAQE  Relations,  Hebbew,  {  12. 

LEVmCUSb    See  Hbxatbuch. 

LEWIS,  ABRAM  HERBERT:  Seventh  Day 
Baptist;  b.  at  Scott,  N.  Y.,  Nov.  17,  1836;  d.  at 
Watch  Hill,  R.  I.,  Nov.  4,  1908.  He  studied  at 
Ripon  College,  Ripon,  Wis.,  Milton  College,  Milton, 
Wis.  (B.A.,  1861),  Alfred  Univereity,  Alfred  Cfentre, 


460 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Levi,  Levites 
LeyMr 


N.  Y.  (M.A.,  1863),  Alfred  Theological  Seminary 
(graduated  1863),  and  Union  Theological  Semi- 
nary (1870-71).  He  was  pastor  at  Westerly,  R.  I., 
1864-67  and  New  York  aty  1867-69;  general  agent 
of  the  American  Sabbath  Tract  Society  1869-73; 
pastor  at  Shiloh,  N.  J.,  1873-76;  professor  of  church 
history  and  homiletics  at  Alfred  University  1876- 
1880;  pastor  at  Plainfield,  N.  J.,  1880-96.  From 
1896  until  his  death  he  was  corresponding  secretary 
of  the  American  Sabbath  Tract  Society  and  editor 
of  The  Sabbath  Recorder,  He  was  editor  of  The 
Outlook  and  Sabbath  Quarterly  1882-94,  and  was 
corresponding  editor  of  The  Philanthropist.  In 
theology  he  was  a  liberal  orthodox  adherent  of  his 
Church.  He  wrote:  Sabbath  and  Sunday  (Alfred 
Centre,  N.  Y.,  1870);  Biblical  Teachings  concerning 
the  Sabbath  and  the  Sunday  (1884);  Critical  His- 
tory of  the  Sabbath  and  the  Sunday  in  the  Chris- 
tian Church  (1886);  Critical  History  of  Sunday 
Legislation  from  SSI  to  1888  A,  D,  (New  York,  1888); 
Paganism  Surviving  in  Christianity  (1890);  Swift 
Decadence  o/ Sunday;  PT^  iVearf  f  (Plainfield,  N.  J., 
1899);  and  Letters  to  Young  Preachers  and  their 
Readers  (1900). 

LEWISi  TAYLER:  Reformed  Dutch  lay  Biblical 
scholar  and  author;  b.  at  Northumberland,  Saratoga 
County,  N.  Y.,  Mar.  27,  1802;  d.  at  Schenectady, 
N.  Y.,  May  11, 1877.  After  graduating  from  Union 
College  in  1820  he  studied  law  and  b^n  to  prac- 
tise at  Fort  Miller  in  1824.  Having  become  inter- 
ested in  Biblical  and  classical  studies  he  gave  up 
the  law  and  in  1833  opened  a  classical  school  at 
Waterford,  N.  Y.,  which  he  moved  to  Ogdensbui^ 
in  1835.  He  was  professor  of  Greek  in  New  York 
University  1838-49,  and  from  1849  till  his  death 
professor  of  Greek  and  instructor  in  Oriental  lan- 
guages and  Biblical  literature  at  Union  College.  He 
was  a  member  of  the  Dutch  Reformed  Church. 
He  was  an  able  apologete  and  a  prominent  exponent 
of  Oriental  and  classical  studies.  His  more  impor- 
tant works  are:  Plato  contra  Atheos  (New  York, 
1845),  being  the  Greek  text  of  the  tenth  book  of 
the  dialogue  on  laws,  with  luminous  notes  and  dis- 
cussions; An  Essay  on  the  Ground  and  Reason  of 
Punishment  with  Special  Reference  to  the  Penalty  of 
Death  (1846);  The  Six  Days  of  Creation  (Schenec- 
tady, 1855);  The  Bible  and  Science  (1856);  The 
Divine  Human  in  the  Scriptures  (New  York,  1860); 
State  Rights,  a  Photograph  from  the  Ruins  of  Ancient 
Greece  (Albany,  1864);  and  The  Light  by  which  we 
see  Light  (Vedder  lectures,  New  York,  1875).  He 
also  translated  and  supplemented  the  notes  on 
Genesis  for  Schaff's  edition  of  Lange's  oonmientary 
(1868),  and  prepared  for  the  same  work  metrical 
versions  of  Job  and  Ecclesiastes. 
Bzbuoorapht:     W.    Wells,    in    the    Methodist    Quarterly, 

xxxviii  (1878),  604  sqq. 

LEWIS,  WILSON  SEELBY:  Methodist  Episco- 
pal bishop;  b.  at  Russell,  N.  Y.,  July  17,  1857. 
He  was  educated  at  St.  Lawrence  University,  N.  Y., 
and  Cornell  College,  Mount  Vernon,  la.  (B.A., 
1889),  after  which  he  was  principal  of  Epworth 
Seminary,  Epworth,  la.,  until  1897  and  president 
of  Momingside  College,  Sioux  City,  la.,  until  1908, 
in  which  3rear  he  was  elected  a  bishop  of  his  de- 
nomination. 


LEYDECKER,  Id'dek-er,  MBLCHIOR:  Dutch 
Protestant;  b.  at  Middelbuig  Mar.  11,  1642;  d.  at 
Utrecht  Jan.  6,  1721.  After  serving  for  fifteen 
years  as  pastor  m  different  places  of  Zealand  he 
became  professor  of  theology  in  Utrecht  in  1679 
and  labored  there  till  his  death.  He  was  perhaps 
the  last  representative  of  strict  Reformed  ortho- 
doxy. From  his  orthodox  standpoint  he  wrote 
polemical  works  against  Balthasar  Becker,  the 
Cartesians,  Hermann  Witsius,  and  especially  against 
the  federal  theology  of  the  Coooeians.  His  princi- 
pal works  are:  De  eeconomia  trium  personarum  in 
negotio  salutis  humance  (Utrecht,  16^2);  Synopsis 
cofUroversiarum  de  ftedere  et  testamento  Dei  (1690); 
Commerdarius  in  Catech.  Heidelberg,  sive  de  veritate 
et  sanctitate  fidei  Reformata  (1694);  and  De  repub- 
lica  HebroBorum  (2  vols.,  Amsterdam,  1704-10). 

(E.  F.  Karl  MCllbr.) 
Bxbuoorapht:    A.  J.  vn  der  Aa,  Biooraphiseh  WoanUtir 

boek  der  Nederlandett^  id.  387  sqq.,  Hmarlem,  1862  sqq.; 

Sammluno  ^ifon  atten  und  neuen  tKetriooiechen  Sathen^  pp. 

1012  sqq..  Leipno.  1721;   F.  W.  J.  H.  Gaaa;  Oeet^iehte  der 

proteeiatUieehen  Dogmatik,  m.  290.  Berlin,  1802. 

LEYSBR,  lai'zer  (LEISER,  LYSBR):  A  family 
of  Lutheran  theologians  and  learned  men,  which  in 
the  sixteenth  century  removed  from  Swabia  to  North 
Germany,  where  its  descendants  are  still  flourishing. 

1.  Caspar  Leyser:  The  oldest  known  member  of 
the  family,  was  bom  at  Winnenden  (12  m.  n.e. 
of  Stuttgart),  WQrttemberg,  c.  1527;  d.  at  Nart- 
ingen  (13  m.  s.s.e.  of  Stuttgart)  1554  or  1555.  He 
entered  the  University  of  TQbingen  in  1541,  in 
1550  became  pastor  in  his  native  city,  and  in  1553 
at  Nttrtingen.  He  joined  his  brother-in-law,  Jakob 
Andreft,  in  a  proposal  to  Duke  Christopher  of  WQrt- 
temberg to  introduce  a  church  discipline  modeled 
after  Calvin's  and  "  presbyteries,"  i.e.,  church  courts 
for  the  correction  of  offenders.  The  duke  received 
the  proposal  favorably,  but  Brenz  and  the  secular 
councilors  opposed  it,  and  it  was  not  carried  into 
effect. 

2.  Poly  carp  Leyaer  (the  Elder):  Only  son  of 
Caspar  Leyser,  was  bom  at  Winnenden  Mar.  18, 
1552;  d.  at  Dresden  Feb.  22,  1610.  In  1570  he 
became  master  and  repetent  at  TQbingen,  and  in 
1573  preacher  at  GeUersdorf  in  Lower  Austria, 
whence  he  was  frequently  called  to  preach  at  Vienna 
and  thus  became  known  to  Emperor  Maximilian 
II.  After  declining  a  call  to  Gras,  in  1577  he 
became  pastor,  superintendent,  and  theological 
professor  at  Wittenbei^.  Here  the  ungrateful  task 
devolved  upon  him  of  pacifying  the  excitement  pre- 
vailing since  the  overthrow  of  the  Cryptocalvinists 
in  1574  and  of  assisting  in  the  introduction  of  the 
Formula  of  Concord  bjs  well  as  in  the  reoiganisation 
of  the  university.  His  modesty,  amiability,  and 
oratorical  talents  soon  won  the  respect  and  love  of 
his  congregation,  of  the  university,  and  of  the  elec- 
tor. He  was  active  in  the  final  arrangement  of  the 
Book  of  Concord  (1577-80),  in  the  reform  of  the 
university,  and  the  revision  of  Luther's  translation 
of  the  Bible.  In  1582  he  attended  the  colloquy  of 
Quedlinbuig  (see  Chemnitz,  Martin,  {  3),  in  1583 
a  synod  at  Dresden,  in  1584  and  1585  conventions 
at  Biagdeburg,  Leipsic,  and  Heraberg.  When  the 
Philippists  regained  the  ascendency  after  the  death 


iss:? 


Pontiflolia 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


470 


of  Elector  Augustus  in  1586,  Leyser  went  to  Bruns- 
wick as  vice-superintendent.  Here  new  struggles 
awaited  him  since  Superintendent  Heidenreich 
confuted  the  doctrine  of  Ubiquity  (q.v.)  as  laid  down 
in  the  Formula  of  Ck>ncord.  The  majority  of  the 
congregation  and  preachers  took  Leyser's  part  and 
Heidenreich  was  deposed  to  make  way  for  Leyser 
(1589).  Professor  Daniel  Hoffmann  of  Hehnst&dt, 
however,  renewed  the  attack,  and  vehement  dis- 
cussions ensued  until  Leyser  was  recalled  to  Wit^ 
tenbeig  (1593)  after  the  death  of  Elector  Christian 
I.  and  the  rapid  overthrow  of  Cryptocalvinism. 
He  at  once  became  involved  in  the  controversy 
there  over  the  teachings  of  Samuel  Huber  (q.v.). 
In  1594  he  went  to  Dresden  as  court  preacher  and 
councilor  of  the  consistory. 

Leyser's  most  important  works  are  the  edition 
of  the  Loci  theoLogfid  of  Martin  Chemnitz  (Frank- 
furt, 1592)  and  Us  continuation  of  the  same  au- 
thor's Harmonia  evangdica  (1593).  He  also  wrote 
commentaries  on  Genesis,  Daniel,  the  minor  proph- 
ets, and  other  books  of  the  Bible.  The  greatest 
sensation  was  stirred  up  by  his  polemical  treatise 
against  the  Calvinists,  06,  wie,  und  warum  man  lie- 
ber  mil  den  Pajristen  Oemeinachaft  haben  .  .  .  toll 
denn  mit  und  zu  den  Calvinisten,  originally  an  in- 
troduction to  his  Chrittianiamua,  Papiemus  et  Col- 
viniemuSf  daa  ist  drey  unterschxedlidie  Auslegungen 
dee  Catechismi  Lutheri  (1595;  republished  by  Ley- 
ser's  successor,  Ho6  von  Hofinegg,  1620;  cf.  Tho- 
luck,  pp.  115  sqq.). 

8.  Polycarp  Leyser  (IL):  Elder  son  of  Polycarp 
Leyser  (the  Elder),  was  bom  at  Wittenbeig  Nov. 
20,  1586;  d.  in  Leipsic  Jan.  15,  1633.  He  was  pro- 
fessor at  Wittenbeig  and  Leipsic  and  later  was  en- 
trusted with  high  ecclesiastical  positions.  He  took 
part  in  various  theological  proceedings  and  dis- 
putes and  wrote  conmientaries  on  Galatians,  on  the 
Augsburg  Confession,  and  on  the  Formula  of  Con- 
cord; also  polemical  treatises,  sermons,  and  dis- 
putations. 

4.  WUhelm  Leyser:  Younger  son  of  Polycarp 
Leyser  (the  Elder),  was  bom  in  Dresden  1592;  d. 
in  Wittenberg  Feb.  8,  1649.  He  was  superintend- 
ent at  Torgau  and  professor  at  Wittenberg,  and 
wrote  a  Summarium  locorum  theologicorum,  a  Sys- 
tema  thetico-exegeticum,  a  Trifolium  verce  rdigionie 
veteria  teetamenti  AdamUiccB,  AbrahamiUccef  Isradi- 
iiccBf  and  other  works. 

6.  Johannes  Leyser:  Son  of  Polycarp  Leyser 
(II.)  was  bom  at  Leipsic  Sept.  30,  1631;  d.  near 
Paris,  1685.  He  was  for  a  time  pastor  and  inspec- 
tor in  Schulpforta,  Prussian  Saxony,  and  in  several 
writings  defended  polygamy,  which  cost  him  his 
position. 

6.  Polycarp  Leyser  (IIL):  Grandson  of  Poly- 
carp Leyser  (II.),  was  bom  at  Halle  July  1,  1656; 
d.  at  Cfelle  (23  m.  n.  of  Hanover)  Oct.  11,  1725. 
He  was  assessor  of  the  philosophical  faculty  at 
Leipsic,  later  pastor  at  Magdeburg,  superintendent 
at  Wunstorf  and  after  1708  general  superintendent 
at  Celle.  He  rendered  great  services  to  the  mem- 
ory of  his  great-grandfather. 

(J0H.\NNEB  KUNZE.) 

Bibuoobaprt:    1.  C.  F.  Battler,  Ouehu^^  dea  Hergogthtuiu 
WitrUmberg,  iv-    74.  and  appendixes    20-30.   10  vols.. 


Ulm.  176^79;  C.  F.  Schnuirer.  ErlAuUmngeH  der  van- 
tembergiaekan  Kireken-iUfornuMHotf-  und  OtUhrtetk-Ge- 
•ehichU,  pp.  234  eqq.,  Tabingen,  1798;  C.  F.  von  SUlLn, 
WQrttmnberffiaehe  OeaehiehU,  iv.  73^739.  Stuttsart,  1S70. 
2.  One  of  Leyser '■  own  traota*  uaeful  as  material,  was  given 
by  hta  graat-frandaon  W.  E.  Tentael  in  Cvrieuae  Bii^- 
liotKte,  1706,  ii  076-736:  a  selection  of  his  letters  wa» 
issued  by  another  great-grandson,  P.  Leyser  III.,  Sj^ 
loot  epUiolarum  Leymr,  i.  1706;  and  contemporary  ma- 
terial was  used  by  M.  Adam,  in  VUob  tKeoiooonim,  pp. 
379-381,  Frankfort,  1706.  Consult  P.  J.  Rethmeyer. 
BrautueKwrnouehe  KirdtenhiMtorie,  iw.  23  sqq.,  65-140. 
Brunswick.  1716;  A.  Tboluck,  Der  GeUt  der  lutiterUehen 
Tkeologen  Wittenberoe,  pp.  4-14,  Gotha,  1852;  a  careful 
sketch,  founded  on  early  data,  is  given  in  J.  A.  Gleich, 
Annalee  ecdeeiattiH.  t.  439-609,  Dreeden,  1730. 

L'HdPITAL  I6"pt"tal'  (L'HOSPITAL),  MICHEL 
DE:  Chancellor  of  France;  b.  at  Aigueperse  (SO 
m.  n.w.  of  Lyons),  Auveigne,  1504;  d.  on  his 
estate  at  Vignay,  near  £tampes  (30  m.  s.s.w.  of 
Paris)  Mar.  13,  1673.  L'H6pital,  who  was  of  a 
noble  family  from  Auveigne,  studied  law  at  Padua 
(1525-31),  where  the  last  year  he  lectured  on  civil 
Law  as  professor  extraordinarius.  After  spending 
a  year  in  Rome  as  member  of  the  papal  court  of 
justice  called  ''  Delia  Rota,"  be  came  to  Paris 
where  for  three  years  he  worked  hard  as  a  barris- 
ter and  (1537)  gained  a  seat  in  the  Paris  parlia- 
ment. Henceforth  his  career  became  more  and 
more  successful.  He  was  sent  (1547)  as  a  delegate 
to  the  Council  of  Trent  which  had  been  transferred 
to  Bologna.  He  was  appointed  (1553)  by  Mar- 
garet, the  future  duchess  of  Savoy,  first  as  chan- 
cellor of  the  duchy,  then  (1554-59)  lord  of  the  ex- 
chequer. At  last  (1560)  he  became  chancellor  and 
keeper  of  the  seal  in  France.  In  the  first-men- 
tioned ofiice  he  had  distinguished  himself  as  a 
fair,  impartial  judge,  and  as  chanceUor  (1560-68), 
in  the  midst  of  the  most  confused  period  of  the  his- 
tory of  France,  he  displayed  the  talents  of  a  states- 
man. He  became  the  leader  of  the  ''  Mod^rte " 
who  then  were  very  few  and  he  followed  inflexi- 
bly his  own  ideab.  He  formulated  the  edict  (Jan. 
17,  1562)  by  which,  although  it  forbade  the  Prot- 
estants to  build  churches,  they  could  hold  their 
meetings  outside  the  walls  of  cities  under  the  pro- 
tection of  the  law.  This  restricted  toleration, 
became  the  fundamental  law,  and  decided  the  legal 
position  of  Protestants  as  affected  by  all  other 
edicts. 

He  could  not  prevent  the  outbreak  of  the  civil 
war  (which  began  with  the  massacre  of  Vassy, 
1562),  but  in  the  frequent  negotiations,  as  for  in- 
stance in  the  Treaty  of  Amboise  (Mar.  19,  1563), 
his  influence  was  felt.  The  same  influence  re- 
mained powerful  till  the  Council  of  Trent,  which  by 
its  decrees  separated  definitely  the  two  denomina- 
tions. But  through  his  advice,  these  decrees  were 
not  accepted  in  France  (Feb.,  1564)  and  once  more 
his  conciliatory  spirit  can  be  traced  in  the  Treaty 
of  Longjumeau  (Mar.  23, 1568).  From  that  date  he 
withdrew  from  his  charge  as  councilor  and  left  the 
court  for  Vignay.  He  was  formally  discharged 
from  his  post  as  chanceUor  (Feb.  6,  1573),  but  all 
his  titles  with  their  income  were  left  to  him.  Faure 
and  others  edited  his  Epi9tol(B  (Paris,  1585);  and 
Dufey  his  (Euvres  (1624-26,  5  vols.). 

G.  Bonst-Maurt. 


471 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Iseywmt 

Liber  Pontifloalls 


Bibuoorapht:  P.  Bayle,  Dietianary,  Hutorieal  and  Cril- 
icoA  ui.  605-617.  London.  1736;  M.  J.  A.  N.  Garitat. 
£UH/e  <U  M.  VH&pUak  Paris.  1777.  ef.  his  ^logeB  du  Aca. 
dhnidenM,  vol.  v.,  ib.  1790;  E.  Dupr^Laaalle.  in  L« 
DroU,  March  and  June.  1868;  idem.  Midttl  de  VHo9pUal, 
Paris,  1899;  A.  H.  Taillandier,  NouvtUsa  redterdkea  At«- 
toriquM  nor  la  vie  de  .  .  .  L'HdpUal,  Paris,  1861;  A.  F. 
Villemain,  6tude9  d*hiBt.  modemt;  vie  de  L'HdpUal,  ib. 
1862;  P.  D.  L.,  idaireieeement  hiatorique  ei  gSnialoQique 
9ur  L'H&pUal  et  ea  famiUe,  Clermont-Ferrand,  1862;  H. 
Amphoux,  M.  de  L'H&pUcd  ei  la  liberti  de  eoneeienee  au 
xvi.  eiide,  Paris,  1900;   liohtenberser,  E8R,  vi.  366-374. 

LIAFWIlfE.    See  Lbbwin. 

LIBANIUS  li-bd'ni-us:  One  of  the  latest  and 
most  important  of  the  Greek  sophists;  b.  at  An- 
tioch  314;  d.  there  c.  395.  He  studied  for  four 
years  at  Athens,  then  opened  a  school  at  Constan- 
tinople, where  his  lectures  became  so  popular  that 
in  343  rival  teachers  of  rhetoric  secured  his  expul- 
sion from  the  city  on  a  charge  of  "  magic."  Alter 
teaching  for  five  years  in  Nicomedia  he  returned  to 
Constantinople,  but,  finding  his  adversaries  in  the 
ascendency,  he  finally  settled  in  Antioch  in  354. 
He  was  an  intimate  friend  of  the  Emperor  Julian, 
who  corresponded  with  him.  He  was  a  teacher  of 
Basil  the  Great  and  Chrysostom,  and  maintained 
friendly  relations  with  them  throughout  life.  His 
works  consist  of  declamations,  orations,  a  life  of 
Demosthenes,  an  autobiography,  and  letters,  of 
which  there  are  no  less  than  1,607  extant.  The 
letters  were  edited  by  C.  H.  Wolf  (Amsterdam, 
1738),  the  declamations  and  orations  by  J.  J. 
Reiske  (4  vols.,  Altenburg,  1791-97).  A  few  of 
his  writings,  including  sixteen  letters  to  Julian, 
were  translated  by  J.  Duncombe  and  published  in 
Sdect  Works  of  the  Emperor  Julian  (2  vols.,  Lon- 
don, 1784).  His  funeral  oration  on  Julian,  in  Eng- 
lish translation,  is  in  C.  W.  King's  Julian  the  Em- 
peror (London,  1888). 

Bibuoorapht:  L.  Petit,  Eteai  eur  la  vie  ei  la  eorreepon- 
dance  du  eophiet  Libanitu^  Paris,  1866;  G.  R.  Sievers. 
Dae  Leben  dee  Libaniue,  Berlin,  1868;  A.  Gardner.  Julian 
Philoeapher  and  Emperor,  London,  1895;  Q.  Nesri,  JuHan, 
the  Apoeiale,  passim.  New  York,  1903  (valuable). 

LIBELLATICL    See  Lapsed. 

LIBER  COMICn&    See  Pericope,  §{  5-6. 

LIBER  DIURNUS  ROMANORUM  PONTIFICUM: 

A  collection  of  formularies  used  at  Rome  in  con- 
nection with  the  principal  ecclesiastical  functions, 
such  as  the  coronation  of  a  pope,  the  consecration 
of  the  suburbicarian  bishops,  the  granting  of  the 
pallium  or  of  special  privileges.  Based  mainly 
upon  the  letters  of  Gelasius  I.  and  Gregory  I.,  the 
book  took  shape  between  685  and  751.  It  was 
used  down  to  the  eleventh  century,  in  fact  individ- 
ual formularies  are  found  from  it  in  the  collections 
of  canons  made  in  the  twelfth,  as  in  Gratian;  but 
after  that  period,  being  no  longer  applicable  to  the 
altered  position  of  the  Roman  see,  it  fell  into  dis- 
use and  oblivion.  It  was  rediscovered  by  Lucas 
Holste  (q.v.)  in  a  manuscript  belonging  to  the  Cis- 
tercian library  of  Santa  Croce  in  Gerusalemme  at 
Rome.  He  was  preparing  to  publish  it  in  1650, 
after  collation  with  another  version  sent  him  by 
Sirmond  from  the  CoU^  de  Clermont,  when  the 
Roman  censorship  forbade  him,  and  he  died  in 
1661  without  gaining  permission.    The  groimd  of 


this  refusal  was  the  "  profession  of  faith  **  con- 
tained in  it,  to  be  made  by  each  pope  on  taking 
office,  which  included  a  declaration  of  assent  to  the 
decrees  of  the  sixth  general  council  and  a  repudia- 
tion of  the  heresies  condemned  by  it,  mentioning 
Honorius  I.  among  the  supporters  of  the  latter. 
The  book  was  published  by  the  Jesuit  Gamier  in 
1680  at  Paris,  and  Mabillon,  who  on  his  visit  to 
Rome  examined  the  manuscript  found  by  Holste, 
and  gave  extracts  from  it  in  his  Museum  Italicum. 
Gamier's  edition  was  reprinted  by  Hofmann  (Leip- 
sic,  1733)  and  Riegger  (Vienna,  1762);  and  an  edi- 
tion meeting  the  requirements  of  modem  scholar- 
ship was  published  by  Eug^e  de  Rozidre  (Paris, 
1869),  including  the  necessary  textual  apparatus 
and  the  notes  of  Gamier,  Baluze,  and  Zaccaria. 
This  edition  is  based  on  a  collation  by  Daremberg 
and  Renan  of  the  Vatican  manuscript,  then  still 
supposed  to  be  the  only  one  extant,  which  accord- 
ing to  Mabillon  belongs  to  the  latter  half  of  the 
ninth  century.  Von  Sickel  then  published  another 
edition  (Vienna,  1889)  which  contained  important 
new  results,  denying  the  unity  of  the  composition 
and  taking  somewhat  different  views  as  to  its  date. 
But  he  was  unaware  that  the  Ambrosian  Library  at 
Milan  contains  another  manuscript,  so  that  his  con- 
clusions can  not  be  accepted  as  final.  In  the  centu- 
ries following  the  eleventh,  attempts  were  made  to 
supply  the  place  of  the  old  book,  which  was  now 
no  longer  serviceable,  and  collections  are  extant  in 
manuscript  under  the  titles  lAtera  quw  in  curia 
domini  papa  dari  consueverunl  and  Stylus  scripto- 
rum  cuHcB  Romanes,  extending  from  John  XXII.  to 
Gregory  XII.  and  John  XXIII. 

(J.  F.  VON  SCHULTE.) 
BiBUooKAnrr:  Consult,  besides  the  prolegomena  and  dis- 
cussions in  the  editions  named  in  the  text,  Sickel.  Site- 
ungeberiehte  der  Wiener  Akademie,  phQoeophisehrMetoriedte 
Klaeee,  vol.  cjcvil;  KL,  vii.  1881-86;  F.  Palackf.  C;e6er 
Formelbaeher,  Prague,  1842. 

LIBER  PONTIFICALIS:  The  Liber  ponHJUxdis 
contains  the  history  of  the  popes  from  St.  Peter 
down,  in  the  form  of  biographies.  The  oldest  work 
bearing  this  title,  to  which  it  is  most  properly  ap- 
plied, comes  down  to  Stephen  V.  (885-891),  with 
the  omission  of  the  three  predecessors  of  this  pope, 
John  VIII.,  Marinus  II.,  and  Adrian  III.;  the  text 
of  the  extant  manuscripts  stops  mid- 
Original  way  in  the  life  of  Stephen  V.,  so  that 
Form.  it  is  not  possible  to  say  how  it  origi- 
nally terminated.  As  to  its  origin  va- 
rious opinions  have  been  entertained.  In  the  Mid- 
dle Ages,  on  the  ground  of  the  letters  of  Damasus 
and  Jerome  appended  to  it,  Damasus  was  supposed 
to  be  the  author.  The  Humanists  (e.g.,  Onofrio 
Panvinio)  were  more  critical,  and  conjectured 
Anastasius,  librarian  of  Nicholas  I.;  though  this 
hypothesis  was  refuted  by  the  Vatican  librarian, 
Emanuel  Schelstrate  (in  1^  DisserUUio  de  antiquis 
Romanorum  pontificum  catalogiSf  Rome,  1692),  as 
well  as  by  G.  G.  Ciampini  (Examen  libri  pontifi- 
caliSf  ib.  1688)  and  by  F.  Bianchini  in  his  edition 
of  the  Liber  poniificalis  (ib.  1718  sqq.).  Duchesne 
has  proved  that  the  lives  were  the  products  of  a 
gradual  evolution;  and  the  only  debatable  ques- 
tion is  now  as  to  the  date  of  its  original  compila- 


tiflMT 

Qber 


_    Pontifloalls 
ber  Yiim 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


472 


tion.  The  decision  depends  on  the  question  of  its 
sources. 

The  names  and  dates  of  the  lives  are  drawn 

demonstrably  from  two  sources.    One  is  the  Cata- 

logua  lAberianua,  a  list  of  popes  ending  with  Li- 

berius  (352-^66).    This  is  a  part  of 

Sourcas     the  Chronographua  annt  SS4,  the  well- 

and  Date,  known  Roman  state  calendar,  and  is 
taken,  down  to  235  (Pontianus),  from 
the  Liber  generationia  of  Hippolytus,  and  later  from 
church  calendars. 

The  second  list  is  handed  down  in  different  forms 
of  various  length,  but  these  may  all  be  traced  back 
to  a  single  clearly  distinguishable  archetype  (desig- 
nated by  Mommsen  as  Index).  The  first  compiler 
adhered  in  the  main  to  the  CaUdogua  Liberianua, 
because  this  is  more  explicit  in  relation  to  the  ear- 
lier times;  and  (mly  from  Liberius  down  is  the  In- 
dex the  sole  source  for  the  dates.  At  all  events,  a 
collation  is  possible  down  to  Sixtus  III.  (d.  440), 
through  data  from  Prosper's  Chronicon,  which  ex- 
hibits an  agreement  in  dates.  The  student  of  papal 
chronology  will  natiutdly  turn,  not  to  the  Liber 
ponUficalia  but  to  its  sources,  as  the  former  is 
merely  a  secondary  authority.  Indeed,  even  the 
other  historical  matter  of  the  older  portion  is  de- 
rived from  other  works.  Their  nimiber  is  very 
great,  their  value  generally  very  small;  so  that  the 
historical  statements  are  untrustworthy  down  to 
about  the  time  of  Anastasius  II.  (496-498).  A 
single  exception  may  be  made  in  favor  of  the  enu- 
meration of  buildings  erected  and  gifts  made  by 
the  popes,  doubtless  dating  back  to  the  substance 
of  papal  archives,  and  constituting  the  best  feature 
of  the  oldest  portion.  From  Anastasius  II.  the 
accounts  of  the  political  history  of  the  popes  be- 
come more  trustworthy.  In  this  way  there  is  ob- 
tained a  criterion  for  deciding  the  question  as  to 
the  age  of  the  first  compilation.  It  is  safe  to  con- 
clude with  Duchesne,  against  Mommsen,  that  the 
oldest  form  of  the  LtW  pontificalie  dates  from  the 
be^nning  of  the  sixth  century;  a  deduction  fa- 
vored not  only  by  the  fact  that  the  lives  of  the  early 
sixth  century  afford  superior  historical  matter,  but 
also  by  the  existence  of  an  extract,  ending  with  the 
life  of  Felix  IV.  (526-530),  the  so-called  Catalogua 
Fdiciamu.  Possibly  this  may  afford  ground  for 
referring  the  original  compilation  to  the  time  of 
Boniface  II.,  successor  to  Felix  IV.  This  first  edi- 
tion then  came  to  serve  as  pattern  for  a  whole 
series  of  others,  e.g.,  an  edition  closing  with  the  life 
of  Omon  (d.  687),  the  existence  of  which  is  attested 
by  an  abstract,  ending  with  (Donon  (Catalogue 
Cononianue),  and  by  the  list  of  popes,  likewise  end- 
ing with  Oonon,  of  the  earliest  manuscript  of  the 
Lier  pontificalis,  dating  from  the  dose  of  the 
seventh  centiuy.  Another  recension  closed  with 
Constantine  I.  (d.  715),  and  still  others  with  Stephen 
n.  (d.  757),  Stephen  III.  (d.  772),  and  Adrian  I. 
(d.  795).  From  the  sixth  century  down,  the  biog- 
raphies were  for  the  most  part  begun  in  the  life- 
time of  their  subjects.  Specially  noteworthy  in 
this  respect  are  the  lives  of  Gregory  II.  (715-731), 
Valentine  (827),  and  Sergius  II.  (844-S47).  The 
life  of  Gregory  II.  was  used  by  Bede  (q.v.)  as  a 
source  for  his  chronicle,  and  thus  must  certainly 


have  been  begun  before  the  death  of  this  pope. 
The  life  of  Valentine  contains  very  full  particur 
lars  of  his  birth,  education,  election  and  virtues; 
but  as  he  died  only  a  few  days  after  his  election, 
it  must  have  been  written  immediately  upon  his 
elevation.  The  life  of  Sergius  II.  begins  with  ful- 
some praise  of  his  virtues,  then  suddenly  breaks 
off:  the  virtuous  pope  beccmes  the  direct  opposite, 
and  exaggerated  praise  turns  to  vehement  cen- 
sure; so  that  we  may  suppose  that  the  first  por- 
tion was  composed  in  his  lifetime,  the  second  after 
his  death.  Owing  to  this  contemporary  composi- 
tion, the  Liber  pontificalia  is  one  of  the  most  val- 
uable sources  for  the  history  of  those  centuries. 
It  is  true  that  in  consequence  of  the  ofiicial  charac- 
ter of  the  compilation — ^the  biographies  are  all 
composed  by  officers  of  the  papal  household — a 
certain  fixed  terminology  is  noticeable,  especially 
in  the  later  lives,  which  notably  prevails  in  the 
forms  of  introduction  and  conclusion,  as  well  as  in 
stereotyped  phrases  for  describing  the  pope's  per- 
sonality; but  still  the  careful  student  will  know 
how  to  appreciate  the  work,  despite  its  defects,  as 
an  excellent  witness  respecting  the  conceptions 
and  standpoint  of  the  papal  court.  In  this  period, 
if  at  all,  the  work  of  Anastasius  Bibliothecarius 
(q.v.)  must  have  been  done. 

The  old  Liber  pontifiMLia  stops  at  the  dose  of  the 
ninth  century.  For  the  tenth  and  eleventh,  there 
exist  only  meager  lists  of  popes.  The  Hildebrand- 
ine  epoch  produced  the  great  biographies  of  Leo 
IX.  and  Gregory  VII.  Boniso  of  Sutri,  in  his 
Liber  ad  amicum^  interweaves  the  history  of  the 
popes  from  Leo  IX.  to  Gregory  VII.  in  the  style 
of  the  early  Uber  pontifiMtlia,  smnmarizes,  in  the 

fourth  book  of  his  Decretala,  the  papal 

Continua-  history  to  Stephen  V.,  and  gives  an 

tions.       outline  as  far  as  Urban  II.    Cardinal 

Beno  writes  the  history  of  Gregory 
VII.;  the  compilers  of  Annalea  Romani  give  the 
history  of  the  years  1044-73,  1111,  1116-21.  But 
none  of  these  are  continuations  of  the  early  Liber 
pontifixxdia.  It  was  not  till  the  twdfth  oentuiy 
that  definite  continuations  were  imdertaken.  One 
of  these,  described  by  Duchesne  as  the  Liber  pon- 
tifiadia  of  Pierre  GuiUaume  (though  more  correctly 
termed  of  Pandulph  from  its  author,  a  cardinal  of 
the  party  of  the  Antipope  Anadetus  II.)  is  a  par- 
tisan tract  in  favor  of  Anadetus.  From  Peter  to 
Adrian  II.  he  copies  the  old  lAber  pontifiealia; 
from  John  VIII.  to  the  end  of  the  eleventh  century, 
a  papal  catalogue.  He  takes  the  biographies  of 
Gregory  VII.  and  Urban  II.  from  the  records  of 
these  popes;  and  only  with  Paschal  11.  does  lie 
begin  a  vivid  portraiture  of  his  contemporaries: 
it  is  probable  that  the  life  of  Paschal  II.  is  by  an- 
other (unknown)  author,  as  it  shows  a  different 
style  from  that  which  foUows,  and  espedaUy  lacks 
the  peculiar  cadence  of  the  papal  documents,  the 
so-called  Curaua  Leoninuaj  conspicuous  in  the  sub- 
sequent biographies.  On  the  other  hand,  the  fives 
of  Gelasius  II.,  Calixtus  II.,  Honorius  11.,  are  cer- 
tainly Pandulph's.  Written  as  a  partisan  tract, 
this  work  fell  into  oblivion  after  the  death  of  Ana- 
detus II.;  nor  was  it  employed  until  the  end  of 
the  fourteenth  century,  when  a  Frenchman^  Pierre 


473 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Liber  PontifioaUs 
Liber  Yitm 


Bohier,  transcribed  and  glossed  it,  and  dedicated 
it  to  Charles  V.  of  France.    Of  greater  literary  im- 
portance is  the  second  continuation,  Cardinal  Boso's 
Liber  pontificalts,  written  c.  1 178.    This  begins  where 
the  older  one  stopped,  with  Stephen  V.,  and  thus 
stamps  itself  as  a  direct  continuation.    By  way  of 
introduction,  Boso  utilizes  the  brief  outline  of  the 
papal  history  which  Bonizo  of  Sutri  included  in  the 
fourth  book  of  his  Decretals.    He  takes  the  first  part, 
from  John  XII.  to  Gregory  VII.,  word  for  word  from 
Bonizo's  Liber  ad  amicum,  omitting  Urban  II.  and 
Victor  III.    In  the  case  of  Paschal  II.  he  draws  on 
the  archives;    from  Gelasius  II.  he  gives  his  own 
narrative,  employing  a  wealth  of  documents  easily 
accessible  to  him  as  camerarius  of   the  apostolic 
see.    This   continuation,  because  incomplete,  was 
not  fused   with  the  early  Liber  ponHficalie,   but 
gained  significance  in  connection  with  the  Liber 
censuum  of  the  Church  of  Rome;    for  since  Boso 
had  most  probably  undertaken  to  write  a  Liber 
censuum,  it  was  a  natural  supposition  that  his  col- 
lection of  biographies  was  designed  to  serve  as  in- 
troduction to  that  work.     In  this  connection,  the 
work  was  repeatedly  copied,  the  best-known  edi- 
tion being  that  of  Cardinal  Nicholas  Roselli,  in  the 
middle  of  the  fourteenth  century,  which  was  dif- 
fused in  countless  manuscripts  all  over  the  world. 
In   the   thirteenth   and   fourteenth   centuries,   al- 
though private  works  in  the  sphere  of  papal  his- 
tory for  this  period  are  conunon  enough,  including 
lists  of  popes,  particular  biographies  (Innocent  III., 
Gregory  IX.,  Innocent  IV.,  Gregory  X.,  Celestine 
v.),  papal  chronicles  (Bemardus  Guidonis,  Ptol- 
emy of  Lucca,  Amalricus  Augerius  de  Biterris,  Pe- 
tnis  de  Herentals,  etc.),  there  was  no  thought  of 
continuing  the  Liber  ponHficalis.     Not  until  the 
beginning   of  the   fifteenth   centiuy,   and   anony- 
mously, was  the  attempt  made;   but  the  author  is 
thoroughly  dependent,  copying  the  work  of  Pan- 
dulph,  with  a  continuation  taken  word  for  word 
from   the   chronicle   of    Martinus   Polonus,    while 
from  Martin  IV.  (1281)  to  John  XXII.  (1328)  he 
copies  the  chronicle  of    Bernardus  Guidonis.     A 
more    meritorious    continuation,    likewise    anony- 
mous, dates  from  the  middle  of  the  same  century. 
In  general  the  author  copied  the  work  just  men- 
tioned down  to  1328;   he  took  the  last  part  of  the 
life  of  John  XXII.  and  those  of  the  three  follow- 
ing popes  (Benedict  XII.,  Clement  VI.,  Innocent 
VI.)  from  a  continuation  of  Bemardus  Guidonis, 
and    wrote     an    independent    continuation    from 
Urban  V.  to  Martin  V.  (1362-1431).    This,  how- 
ever, is  rather  a  history  of  the  great  schism  than  a 
Liber  pontificalis.     This  edition   was  soon  after- 
ward copied  again,  and  expanded  by  extracts  from 
Martinus  Polonus  and  Bemardus  Guidonis.    Two 
other  continuations  of  the  fifteenth  century  were 
never  combined  with  the  Liber  pontificalis,  though 
their  entire  scope  entitles  them  to  be  regarded  as 
continuations.    One  extends  from  Benedict  XII. 
to  Martin  V.  (1334-1431),  and  contains,  especially 
in  respect  to  the  history  of  Boniface  IX.,  Innocent 
VI.,  and  Gregory  XII.,  more  ample  information 
than  the  continuation  dating  from  the  middle  of 
the  fifteenth  century,  as  well  as  more  candid  ver- 
dicts ui>on  the  personal  characters  and  transactions 


of  the  popes  described.  It  appears  in  a  Vatican 
manuscript  with  the  additional  biography  of  £u- 
genius  IV.  The  second  continuation  begins  with 
Urban  VI.  and  extends  to  Pius  II.  (1378-1464), 
evidently  an  unfinished  work. 

Of  all  these  later  works,  the  only  ones  of  literary 
importance  toward  the  close  of  the  Middle  Ages 
were  the  continuation  dating  from  the  middle  of 
the  fifteenth  century,   and   that  of  Boso.    Both 
works  were  soon  supplanted  by  the  LQ)er  de  vita 
Christi  ac  de  vitis  summorum  pontificum  Romanorum 
of  Platina,  librarian  of  Pope  Sixtus  IV.  (Venice, 
1479).    He  transformed  the  early  Liber  pontifi^is 
and  its  continuations  into  a  book  which  even  Hu- 
manists could  read  with  pleasure,  and  thus  drove 
the  other  continuations  from  the  field.    It  was  not 
until  the  beginning  of  the  seventeenth  century  that 
attention  was  again  tumed  to  the  old  Liber  pon- 
tificalis.   At  this  time  it  was  first  printed,  and  has 
since,  in  its  tum,  caused  Platina's  book  to  be  for- 
gotten. A.  Brackmann. 
BiBuoaBAPHT:    The  two  editions  which  are  of  superlative 
worth  are  (1)  L.  Duchesne,  2  vols.,  Paris,  1886-02,  and 
(2)  T.  Mommsen,  in  MOH,  Ot9L  pont.  Rom.,  vol.  i.,  Ber^ 
iin,  1898.    Other  editions  are  mentioned  and  a  list  of  the 
best  literature  prior  to  1806  is  given  in  Potthast,  W^o- 
veiBcr,   pp.   737-730   (not   to  be   overlooked).     Further 
matter  of  importance  is  to  be  found  in:    X.  Chapman,  in 
Revue  bhUdictine,  zviii  (1001).  300-417;    T.  Lindner,  in 
Forachungen  tw  deuUchen  Oeechiehte,  xii  (1872),  236-260, 
666  sqq.;    P.  Fabre,  in  M&angee  d'archiologie  et  d*hu- 
toire,  vol.  vi.,  Rome,  1886;  idem,  £ttide  star  le  Liber  cen- 
auum  de  Vigliae  romaine,  Paris,  1802;   J.  B.  Lightfoot.TAs 
AjxMtolic  Faihere,  part  I.,  S.  Clement  <4  Rome,  I  201^346, 
London,  1800;    F.  H.  Glassschrfider,  in  Rdmieehe  Quar- 
laUehrift  fOr  AUerthumakunde,  iv.  126  sqq.,  v.  178;   idem, 
in  Hietorieehea  Jahrbuch  der  OGrreegeeeUechaft,  id  (1800), 
240-266:   T.  Mommsen,  in  NA,  ziz  (1804),  286-203.  xzi 
(1806).    333-367.    xzii    (1807).    646-663;     SftgmOUer,    in 
Hietoriaehea  Jahrbttch   der  Odrreaoeaetladu^ft,   xv   (1804), 
802-810;    F.   Q.   Rosenfeld.    Ueber  die  KompimHon  dee 
LiJber  pontifiealia,  Marburg,  1806;    L  Giorgi.  in  Arthivio 
della  aodetii  Romano  di  atoria  patria,  zx  (1807),  247  sqq.; 
A.   Hamack,   in  SiUunoaberidUe  der  Berliner  Akademie, 
1802.  pp.  761-778;    H.  Griser,  Analeda  Romano,  Rome. 
1800. 

LIBER  SEXTUS.    See  Canon  Law,  II.,  6,  §  3. 

LIBER  Vrr^  (DIPTYCHS):  The  official  register 
of  the  members  of  the  congregation,  also  a  list  of 
the  clergy,  and  others.  The  establishment  of  such 
a  register  was  inseparably  connected  with  the  rise 
of  the  ecclesiastical  organization.  Baptism,  which 
consummated  the  entrance  into  the  congregation, 
occasioned  at  once  the  necessity  and  the  right  of  en- 
rolment; death,  voluntary  withdrawal,  or  expulsion 
by  way  of  discipline,  caused  erasure.  Besides  this 
there  were  specdal  lists  of  the  clergy  and  of  other 
persons  in  the  service  or  under  the  care  of  the 
Church.  The  more  complicated  the  apparatus  of 
ecclesiastical  government  and  administration  be- 
came, the  more  these  registers  increased  in  number 
and  in  size.  A  special  group  was  formed  by  the 
lists,  with  the  names  of  the  spiritual  and  temporal 
rulers,  which  were  read  aloud  during  the  supplica- 
tions, and  also  by  those  containing  the  names  of 
persons  who  participated  in  the  eucharistic  offer- 
ings or  who  deserved  mention  for  some  other  rea- 
son. These  may  all  be  included  under  the  general 
designation  '*  book  of  life,"  "  book  of  the  living," 
in  which  may  be  seen  a  comiection  with  expressions 


Liter  yiUi 
Libwiufl 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HER20G 


474 


in  the  Bible  (cf.  Rev.  iii.  5,  xiiL  8;  Phfl.  iv.  3;  Ps. 
Ixiz.  28).  Purely  external  conmderstions  gave  rise 
to  the  opposite  designation  "  book  of  the  dead," 
originally  referring  only  to  those  whose  memory 
was  recalled  at  the  communion  service.  The  de- 
velopment of  worship,  both  in  the  Eastern  and  in 
the  Western  Church,  combined  with  the  growing 
length  of  the  lists,  led  to  the  abandonment  or  the 
restriction  of  the  older  custom. 

As  to  the  form  of  this  register,  the  Greek  name 
diptychon  implies  a  connection  with  the  wax  tab- 
lets used  by  the  ancients.  Two  or  more  of  them 
were  bound  together,  in  the  form  of  a  book,  the 
exterior  being  of  some  firm  material  and  forming 
the  covers.  At  the  same  period  papyrus  rolls  were 
abo  used.  These  covers  were  probably  in  most 
cases  of  wood.  Nevertheless,  in  the  fourth  cen- 
tury and  probably  earlier,  ivory  was  used  and  or- 
namented with  reliefs. 

Probably  the  oldest  (fourth  to  fifth  century?) 
Christian  example  which  has  been  preserved  is  the 
Carrand  diptych  in  Florence  with  the  naming  of  the 
beasts  of  the  field  by  Adam;  but,  in  general,  scenes 
from  the  New  Testament  predominate. 

The  use  of  diptychs  continued  in  the  East  far 
into  the  Middle  Ages,  and  the  same  is  true  of  the 
West,  especially  in  the  period  of  Carlovingian  art. 
Some  of  the  diptych  tablets  have  been  preserved 
as  ornamental  parts  of  book-covers;  for  the  artistic 
ecclesiastical  bindings  of  the  Middle  Ages  were  in- 
spired by  the  diptydis. 

From  these  diptychs,  with  religious  representa- 
tions, in  ecclesiastical  use  must  be  distinguished 
those  of  the  officials,  of  the  emperors,  and  of  pri- 
vate persons.  These  should  not,  however,  pass  un- 
noticed since  some  of  them  show  Christian  types, 
while  others  were  taken  for  ecclesiastical  use  and 
were  altered  for  that  purpose.  In  this  group  the 
first  place  is  occupied  by  the  diptych  of  the  Consul. 
Anidus  Probus,  from  the  year  406,  in  the  possession 
of  the  Cathedztil  of  Aosta.  One  tablet  shows  the 
emperor  holding  in  his  left  hand  the  imperial  orb 
with  a  winged  Victory,  and  in  his  right  the  labarum, 
inscribed  with  the  words  ''  In  the  name  of  Christ 
conquer  thou  ever."  Another  important  example 
is  the  Barberini  diptych  in  the  Louvre,  with  the 
equestrian  figure  of  Justinian.  On  one  leaf  of  a 
diptych  in  Monsa  the  costume  of  the  consul  has 
bc^n  changed  into  a  priestly  vestment  and  the  head 
has  been  given  the  tonsure;  an  inscription  has  also 
been  added  indicating  that  the  figure  is  that  of 
Gregory  the  Great.  On  the  other  leaf,  the  original 
figure  is  untouched  and  it  has  been  given  another 
meaning  only  by  means  of  the  inscription  **  King 
David."  There  is  in  Bologna  a  private  diptych 
Christianized  by  the  addition  of  an  inscription  des- 
ignating the  principal  figure  as  Peter  and  a  bust 
above  this  figure  as  Mark. 

It  may  also  be  remarked  that  the  various  forms 
of  the  altar-piece  are  called  diptych,  triptych,  etc. 

Victor  Schultze. 
Bzblioorapht:  Earlier  works  Btill  of  value  are:  G.  A.  Salig, 
Ds  diptychis  veterum,  Halle,  1731;  A.  F.  Gori,  Theaaurut 
veterum  diptychantm,  3  vols.,  Florence.  1750;  J.  O.  West- 
wood,  Description  €/  the  Ivaria,  Ancient  and  Mediotval^ 
in  tfis  South  Kensington  Muaeum,  London,  1876;  R. 
Gannoci  Storia  delta  arte  crittiana,  vol.  vi,  Prato,  1880; 


T.  G.  Bricfatman,  Liturgiea  BaUem  and  TTesfem,  glossary 
a.  V.  **  diptychs,"  Oxford,  1806;  H.  Graeven,  FrUhekritt' 
iieke  und  imttelalterlieke  ElfenUinwerke,  Rome,  1898  sqq.; 
G.  RieUchI,  LeMmck  der  Litwrgik,  i  231  sqq..  Berlin, 
1000;  DCA,  i.  560  sqq.;  and  for  the  secuUu-  use,  W. 
Smith,  W.  Wayte,  and  G.  £.  Marindin.  Dictionary  </ 
Greek  and  Roman  AntiquUise,  t.  643-644,  London,  1800. 

LIBERATUS:  Deacon  at  Antioch  and  eodesxas- 
tical  writer;  fl.  about  560.  He  was  the  author  of 
a  work  which  is  an  important  source  for  the  his- 
tory of  the  ecclesiasticaJ  controversies  of  the  fifth 
and  sixth  centuries,  Breviarum  causa  Nesloriar 
noTum  ei  Euiyehiatwrum  (ed.  J.  Gamier,  Paris,  1675; 
reprinted  in  MPLy  Ixviii.  963-1052).  The  book 
utilizes  the  history  of  the  preceding  century  to  dem- 
onstrate that  Justinian's  condemnation  of  the 
Three  Chapters  (see  Three  Chapter  Contbo- 
verst)  is  false  and  untenable.  The  history  begins 
with  the  ordination  of  Nestorius,  and  comes  down 
i^proximately  to  560.  The  date  is  shown  by  the 
mention  of  the  death  of  Pope  Vigilius  (555)  and  by 
the  fact  that  at  the  dose  of  the  last  chapter  Patri- 
arch Theophilus  of  Alexandria  (d.  566)  is  referred 
to  as  yet  alive.  The  work  mentions  as  sources  the 
Hittoria  eccUsiaatica  tripartita  of  Cassiodorus  (q.v.), 
Gesta  synodalia,  EpistolcB  mmdoram  patrum,  a  Getia 
de  nomine  Acacii  of  Pope  Gelasius  I.  (q.v.),  and 
finally  a  Gr cecum  Alexandria  ecriplum,  which  some 
have  identified  with  the  ecclesiastical  history  of 
Zacharias  Scholasticus  (q.v.).  The  style  is  conciae 
and  not  always  clear,  the  tone  judicious,  and  the 
general  treatment  trustworthy,  notwithstanding  its 
partisan  attitude  as  against  the  Monophysites. 

G.  KrCgeb. 
Bibuoobafht:     Fabridus-Harles,    Bibiliotkeoa    Ormea^   si 

686H)Q2,  Hamburg.  1800;    DCB,  iu.  71&-717;    XL,  Tii. 

1044;  Geillier.  Avlture  eaerie,  zi.  303-305w 

LIBERIA,  loi-bi'ri-a:  A  republic  on  the  west 
coast  of  Africa,  having  a  coast  line  of  about  350 
miles  from  Sierra  Leone  to  the  French  colony  of 
the  Ivory  Coast,  and  stretching  inland  to  a  dis- 
tance in  some  cases  of  200  miles.  The  total  area 
is  about  45,000  square  miles;  the  population  is  es- 
timated at  2,000,000,  all  of  African  race,  the  few 
whites  being  considered  foreigners.  It  was  founded 
as  a  colony  in  1822  by  free  blacks  sent  out  by  the 
American  O>lonization  Society.  According  to  the 
constitution  adopted  in  1847,  when  Liberia  was  de^ 
dared  an  independent  government,  electors  must 
be  of  negro  blood  and  owners  of  land.  The  Amer* 
ico-Liberians,  numbering  about  20,000,  hold  the 
chief  power,  the  native  races,  while  not  excluded 
from  the  franchise,  taking  little  part  in  political 
life.  At  one  time  it  was  thought  that  the  Amerioo- 
Liberians  were  dying  out,  but  intermixture  with 
the  more  civilized  aborigines  and  some  immlgrsr 
tion  from  the  west  has  strengthened  them,  lliey 
are  all  Protestants,  connected  chiefly  with  the 
Methodist,  Presbyterian,  Episcopal,  and  Lutheran 
Churches.  There  is  a  Roman  Catholic  Mission^ 
statistics  for  which  are  not  available.  The  earliest 
missionary  work,  apart  from  that  connected  with 
the  Colonization  Society,  was  begun  by  the  Meth- 
odist Episcopal  Church  in  1831,  followed  by  the 
Presbyterian  in  1833,  the  Protestant  Episcopal  in 
1836,  and  the  General  Synod  of  the  Lutheran 
Church  in  1859.    The  Presbyterian  Board  of  For- 


475 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Liber  Vitm 
Ziiberius 


eign  Missions  withdrew  in  1800,  transferring  all  its 
property  and  churches  to  the  presbytery  of  West 
Africa.  Educational  work  has  been  pushed  by  all 
these  Churches,  some  of  their  schools  being  of  high 
grade.  Apart  from  these,  elementary  schools  are 
numerous,  and  there  are  a  few  of  secondary  grade. 
Considerable  attention  is  paid  to  industrial  train- 
ing, notably  in  the  Lutheran  Muhlenberg  Mission. 
It  was  in  Liberia  that  the  Methodist  Bishop  Taylor 
inaugurated  his  scheme  for  African  industrial  mis- 
sions. The  fact  that  only  a  comparatively  narrow 
strip  of  land  along  the  coast  is  effectively  adminis- 
tered, and  that  the  inland  territory  is  occupied  by 
some  of  the  fiercest  African  tribes,  has  given  much 
prominence  to  the  missionary  enterprises  in  the 
country.  The  work  is  conducted  for  the  most  part 
by  the  negroes,  on  account  of  the  climate  and  the 
general  type  of  life,  although  there  is  a  considerable 
force  of  white  missionaries  on  the  coast.  The  four 
societies  report  over  5.000  conununicant  members, 
nearly  one  hundred  schools  with  6,000  pupils,  a  con- 
siderable portion  of  whom  are  from  the  inland  tribes. 
See  Africa,  II.  Edwin  Munsell  Bubs. 

Biblioorapht:   See  the  literature  under  Africa. 

LIBERIUS,  lai-bl'ri-T7s:  Pope  352^66.  He  was 
of  Roman  birth  and  parentage,  was  the  choice  of 
both  factions  in  the  Arian  controversy  and  of  the 
Emperor  Constantius  as  successor  to  Julius  I.,  and 
was  probably  consecrated  May  17,  352  (cf.  Liber 
pontificaiis,  ed.  Duchesne,  p.  ccl.).  The  favor  of 
Constantius  was  due  to  his  purpose. 
First  steadily  entertained  since  he  had  be- 
Period,  come  the  sole  ruler  (353),  to  achieve 
till  His  the  peace  of  the  Church  by  disavowal 
Exile.  of  Athanasius  and  abolition  of  the 
Micene  Creed  (see  Arianibm,  {  5),  a 
result  which  obviously  hinged  on  the  type  of  occu- 
pant of  the  Roman  see.  At  a  synod  at  Rome  con- 
vened by  Liberius,  the  majority  of  the  bishops  de- 
clared for  Athanasius;  but,  at  the  synod  called  by 
the  emperor  at  Aries  (353),  the  pope's  delegates, 
Vincentius  and  Marcellus  of  Campania,  as  a  peace 
measure,  consented  to  support  the  decision  of  the 
East  against  Athanasius.  Liberius,  dissatisfied 
with  the  action  of  his  own  representatives,  ad- 
dressed a  letter  of  uigent  remonstrance  to  the  em- 
peror (Epist.  ad  Con8tantiuin)f  and  furthermore 
managed  to  engage  Eusebius  of  Vercellffi  to  sup- 
port him.  Nevertheless,  the  Synod  of  Milan  (355) 
completed  the  victory  over  Athanasius,  and  the 
bishops  who  had  continued  steadfast  were  driven 
into  exile.  The  same  fate  awaited  the  pope  unless 
he  yielded.  The  imperial  eunuch  Eusebius,  who 
came  to  confer  with  him  at  Rome,  attempted  to 
move  him  by  argument  to  subscribe  adversely  to 
Athanasius  and  to  accept  ecclesiastical  fellowship 
with  his  opponents.  Liberius  resisted,  possibly 
relying  upon  the  sentiments  of  the  Roman  popu- 
lace, which  ran  counter  to  the  imperial  endeavors 
(Ammianus  Marcellinus,  XV.,  vii.  10).  Hereupon 
the  pope  was  apprehended  by  night  by  the  prefect 
of  the  city  and  removed  to  the  imperial  court.  In 
an  audience  with  the  emperor,  reported  by  Theo- 
doret  {Hist,  ecd.,  ii.  13;  NPNF,  2  ser.,  iii.  77-79), 
he  made  a  spirited  appeal  for  general  acceptation 
of  the  Nicene  Creed,  recall  of  the  exiles,  and  con- 


vention of  a  synod  in  Alexandria  to  examine  the 
charges  against  Athanasius.  The  one  consequence 
was  his  own  exile  to  Bersa  in  Thrace,  in  355,  when 
Constantius  had  the  Roman  archdeacon  Felix  con- 
secrated as  pope  (see  Felix  II.). 

The  new  pope  encountered  great  opposition,  not 
because  of  any  doubt  as  to  his  personal  orthodoxy, 
but  rather  because  people  believed  him  tainted  with 
irregular  ordination  and  ecclesiastical  fellowship 
with  the  contrary  party.  While  the  emperor  was 
in  Rome  in  May,  357,  in  answer  to  an  appeal  by 
some  ladies  for  the  return  of  Liberius  (Theodoret, 
II.,  xiv.),  the  emperor  let  it  appear  that  negotiar 
tions  with  the  exiled  pope  had  led  to 
Acceptance  the  desired  result.  Liberius  did  not 
of  Homoi-  return  to  his  congregation,  however, 
ousianiam.  till  the  summer  of  358.  The  emperor 
wished  that  he  and  Felix  superintend 
the  Church  in  common;  but  this  was  found  impos- 
sible, and  Felix  had  to  yield.  Various  explana- 
tions have  been  given  of  the  emperor's  change  of 
mind.  Some  speak  of  a  collapse  on  the  part  of 
Liberius,  and  assert  that  he  reversed  his  dogmatic 
position.  But  this  is  not  borne  out  by  the  report 
of  Sozomen  (Hist,  ecd.,  iv.  15),  who  alone  reports 
on  the  subject.  The  sole  fact  apparent  is  that, 
after  somewhat  prolonged  negotiations,  in  the  spring 
of  358  Liberius  expressed  his  willingness  to  waive 
the  term  homoouaioB.  He  had  been  convinced  that 
the  formula  at  issue  was  liable  to  misimderstand- 
ing,  and  declared  himself  in  harmony  with  the  the- 
ory of  the  Homoiousians,  according  to  which  the 
Son  is  "  like  "  to  the  Father  (of  like  essence  and 
attributes).  That  he  rejected  the  term  homoousioSf 
or  that  he  consented  in  any  degree  to  the  thought 
of  designating  the  Son  as  unlike  the  Father  (an- 
omaioa),  Sozomen  pronounces  a  malicious  inven- 
tion. Yet  it  is  open  to  question  whether  the  tone 
of  Sozomen  adequately  accoimts  for  the  sharp  ut- 
terances of  Athanasius  (HiHoria  Arianorum,  xli.; 
NPNF,  2  ser.,  iv.  284)  and  Jerome  {Chronican, 
and  De  vir.  HI,,  xcvii.)  against  Liberius,  in  which 
Athanasius  states  that  Liberius  grew  languid  in 
exile,  and  subscribed  in  dread  of  threatened  death, 
while  Jerome  reproaches  Liberius  with  heresy. 
Athanasius  and  Jerome  are  supported  by  four  let- 
ters ascribed  to  Liberius,  preserved  in  the  so-called 
Fragmenia  ex  opere  historico  of  Hilary  of  Poitiers; 
if  these  letters  are  genuine,  their  contents  put  the 
result  in  a  light  unfavorable  to  the  pope,  showing 
that  Liberius  acquiesced  in  the  condemnation  of 
Athanasius  and  accepted  a  homoian  statement, 
the  second  Sirmian  formula  of  357.  But  the  gen- 
uineness of  the  letters  is  doubtful,  since  it  is  almost 
universally  conceded  that  the  four  letters  are  not  to 
be  separated  one  from  the  others,  in  which  case  the 
weight  of  evidence  turns  against  the  genuineness 
of  all  the  letters  by  the  fact  that  certain  particu- 
lars in  one  of  the  letters  (the  one  which  begins: 
Siudena  pad)  totally  contradict  well-attested  his- 
tory. There  is  the  possibility  that  during  his  exile, 
under  the  stress  of  constant  pressure,  Liberius  may 
have  used  some  utterances  which  seemed  to  give 
occasion  to  the  charge  against  him.  But  that  he 
directly  belied  his  earlier  position  can  be  asserted 
only  on  the  ground  of  doubtful  documents. 


Ziiberlna 
Ziiberty 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOQ 


476 


LiberiuB  took  no  part  in  the  Synod  of  Arizninum, 
359.  Several  years  elapse  without  note  of  him  in 
public  life.  In  3d3,  however,  he  put  forth  a  brief 
(Epiit.  ad  caUudicoB  epiteopoB  Italia)  dispensing 
pardon  to  all  those  who  repented  of 
Later  Life;  their  action  at  Ariminum  and  re- 
Achieve-  nounoed  Arian  doctrine.  These  terms 
menti.  indeed  were  not  agreeable  to  a  more 
austere  school  of  ecclesiasttcs,  even  at 
Rome;  and  the  resultant  opposition  led  to  cleav- 
ages which  were  anything  but  salutary  (see  Hila- 
Rius;  and  Lucifer  op  Calaris).  In  366,  as  the 
representative  of  orthodoxy,  the  pope  accorded 
fraternal  reception  to  the  envoys  of  the  Macedo- 
nians (see  Macedoniub  and  the  Macedonian  Sect) 
of  Asia  Minor,  on  the  ground  of  subscription  to  the 
Nicene  Creed;  and  returned  greetings  of  peace  to 
those  who  had  authorised  their  errand  (Epist.  ad 
universoa  OrientiB  orthodoxos  episcopog).  After  the 
death  of  Felix  (Nov.  22,  365),  Liberius  readmitted 
the  clerics  of  his  party  to  their  former  stations. 
His  death  (Sept.  24,  366)  nevertheless  gave  the  sig- 
nal for  fierce  factional  conflicts,  accompanied  by 
horrible  bloodshed  (see  Ubsinus).  According  to 
the  Liber  pontifioaliSf  Liberius  was  laid  to  rest  in 
the  Cemetery  of  PrisciUa,  along  the  Via  Salaria. 
It  is  hardly  probable  that  the  poem  of  eulogy  dis- 
covered by  De  Rossi,  on  the  subject  of  an  unnamed 
bishop,  refers  to  Liberius  (De  Rossi,  in  BtUlelino  di 
Archeciogia  CriaHana^  4th  ser.,  vol.  ii.,  1883,  pp.  5- 
59);  but  rather  to  Martin  I.  (cf.  Funk,  Kirchenge- 
achichUiche  Abhandlungenf  i.  391-420,  Paderbom, 
1887).  Liberius  created  a  lasting  memorial  for 
himself  at  Rome  by  founding  the  Basilica  Liberiana 
(Santa  Maria  Maggiore),  which,  even  to-day,  is 
important  historically  in  the  office  for  Christ's  nar 
tivity  and  the  season  of  Advent  (cf .  H.  Usener,  Rdi- 
giorugeschichUiche  Untersuckungen,  i.  266-293,  Bonn, 
1889.)  It  was  probably  here  in  the  year  354  that 
the  birth  of  Christ  was  celebrated  for  the  first  time 
on  Dec.  25.  So  late  as  the  preceding  year  Liberius 
had  consecrated  Maroellina,  sister  of  ^dnbrose,  as  a 
mm  on  Jan.  6,  still  observed  as  the  day  of  the  nativ- 
ity. The  pope's  address  delivered  on  this  occasion 
was  preserved  by  Ambrose  in  a  free  transcript  (De 
virgine,  iii.  1  sqq.).  In  the  Martyrclogium  Hierany- 
mianum  Liberius  is  celebrated  on  September  23; 
but  his  name  does  not  appear  in  the  Martyrohgium 
Romanum,  Ever  since  the  sixth  century  his  repu- 
tation has  suffered  distortion  through  apocryphal 
tradition,  exhibiting  him  in  league  with  Constan- 
tius  as  a  bloody  persecutor  of  the  true  faith;  while 
Felix  is  portrayed  as  a  holy  martyr  (cf.  J.  J.  I. 
von  Ddllinger:  Die  Papstfabdn  dee  MiUdaUen,  ed. 
Friedrich,  pp.  126-145,  Munich,  1890;  Eng.  transl., 
of  first  ed.,  FabUe  Reepecting  the  Papee  of  the  Middle 
Agee,  New  York,  1872).  G.  KrCger. 

Biblioobapht:  Liber  pon^ficalis,  ed.  Duebeme,  t  pp.  oxx.- 
czxvii.,  cd.  207-210,  Paris,  1886,  ed.  Mommaen  in  MOH, 
Oett.  porU.  Rom.,  i  (1808).  77-79;  Jaff4.  Regetta,  i.  32-36; 
B.  Jungmann,  DiuertaHonee  mUcUb,  ii  31-33,  Regent- 
burg,  1881;  J.  Langen,  OtwhicMe  der  rffimtcAen  Kirche, 
I  460-404,  Bonn.  1881;  G.  KrOger.  Ludfir  von  CalarU, 
pp.  12  sqq.,  Leipric,  1886;  H.  M.  Qwatkin,  StudiM  of 
Arianum,  pp.  102  sqq.,  Cambridge.  1000;  C.  de  Feis, 
Storia  di  Liberio  pava  e  detto  9cUma  dei  Seminariani, 
Rome.  1804;  F.  Qregorovius,  Hiat.  of  the  City  of  Rome,  i. 
108-100,  London,  1804;    T.  Mommsen,  In  Deuteche  Zeit- 


echriftfar  OeeeMdUe  und  Wiemmatkaft,  i  (1807),  167-179; 
Hefele,  ConeUimoeeehiehie,  L  647  sqq..  681  sqq^  Eng. 
transl..  L  100  sqq.;  Bower.  Popes,  i.  60-82;  Mitanan. 
LaHn  Chriatiamty,  L  102-106.  Very  raoently  the  senmitfr- 
ness  of  the  four  letters  of  liberius  has  been  maintained  bv 
L.  Duchesne,  in  JdManoee  d^kieUrire  et  ^arehSoUgie,  zx\-iu 
(1008).  31-78.  and  opposed  by  A.  Wilmart,  in  Renu  Blni- 
dicUne,  xxiv  (1007).  203-317.  and  by  F.  Savio.  Nuori 
Slwh  euHa  ^ueetiane  di  Papa  Liberio,  Rome.  1000. 

LIBERMANN,  JACOB.     See  Holt  Ghost,  Obdebs 

AND  CONORBOATIONS  OP  THE,  XL,  6. 

LIBBRTHIBS:    A  word  ueed  in  various  aenaps. 

1.  The  members  of  a  Jewish  synagogue  at  Jeru< 
salem  mentioned  in  Acts  vi.  9.  They  probably  po^ 
sessed  a  synagogue  of  their  own,  though  some  have 
held  that  they  worshiped  with  the  Cyreniaii<, 
Alexandrians,  Cillcians,  and  Asiatics,  or  at  least 
with  the  two  first  named.  The  meaning  of  t\& 
name  is  not  entirely  certain.  As  there  is  no  cer- 
tain record  of  an  (African)  dty  or  district  from 
which  they  could  take  their  name,  it  seems  prob- 
able that  the  word  denotes  "  freedmen "  (Lat. 
libertint),  meaning  the  descendants  of  Jews  taken 
captive  to  Rome  by  Pompey,  and  there  later  re- 
leased because  their  stubborn  adherence  to  their 
national  customs  rendered  them  useless  as  slaves. 
While  the  majority  of  these  freedmen  remainpd  in 
Rome  and  settled  in  the  regio  TraruHberina  (Sue^ 
tonius,  TiberiuB,  xzxvi.;  Tacitus,  Annales,  ii.  85:, 
others  seemed  to  have  returned  to  Jerusalem  anci 
to  have  formed  a  synagogue  where  the  name  of 
Libertines,  or  Roman  freedmen,  lingered. 

(F.  SiBFTERT.) 

2.  A  political  party  led  by  Ami  Perrin,  hence 
known  eiao  as  Perrinists,  which  opposed  Cal\iD  in 
his  efforts  to  reform  the  morals  of  Geneva.  Before 
the  Reformation  they  had  striven  for  the  liberty 
of  the  city  against  the  Roman  Catholic  bishop  and 
the  duke  of  Savoy,  and  under  the  rule  of  Calvin 
they  especially  opposed  the  excommunication  by 
the  consistory  of  those  deemed  by  it  imworthy  to 
partake  of  the  Lord's  Supper.  They  also  con- 
tended against  the  admission  of  French  refugees  as 
buighers  of  the  city,  and  in  May,  1555,  endeavored 
in  vain  to  lead  a  violent  protest  against  the  influ- 
ence of  these  refugees  and  the  French  preachers. 
Some  of  the  leaders  fled,  others  were  sentenced  to 
death,  and  thus  the  party  was  completely  dis- 
rupted. Their  significance  is  in  their  attitude  as 
liberals  opposed  to  the  strict  Calvinistic  Puritans. 

E.  Choist. 
8.  A  pantheiBtic  antinomian  party  which  flour- 
ished about  the  time  of  the  Reformation.  It  ap- 
peared first  in  the  Netherlands  and  from  there  spread 
into  France.  Its  roots  may  perhaps  reach  into 
the  soil  of  the  Brethren  of  the  Free  Spirit  (see  Fbee 
Spirit,  Brethren  of  the),  a  sect  which  had  not 
entirely  died  out,  and  there  may  have  been  connec- 
tions tiao  with  the  Anabaptists  [i.e.,  with  such  pan- 
theistic antipedobaptists  as  David  Joris,  q.v. — a. 
H.  N.].  The  adherents  gave  themselves  the  name 
"  Spirituals  ";  ''Libertines  "  being  the  title  given  by 
the  opponents  of  the  party.  The  founder  appears 
to  have  been  named  Coppin,  who  preached  at  Lille 
about  1529,  whence  his  teaching  was  carried  into 
the  French-speaking  part  of  the  coimtry,  and  thence 
into  France  by  a  certain  Quintin,  by  Antoine  Poo- 


477 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


I«iberty 


quet,  onoe  a  Roman  Catholic  priest,  and  by  others. 
Their  teaching  was  to  the  effect  that  all  visible  ex- 
istence is  but  a  manifestation  of  the  one  Spirit; 
hence  nothing  can  be  essentially  bad;  the  regener- 
ate man  is  he  who  recognises  that  the  distinction 
between  good  and  bad  is  baseless,  and  consequently 
has  attained  the  innocence  which  Adam  had  before 
he  knew  good  and  evil.  In  France  those  who  held 
these  views  found  protection  under  Margaret, 
Queen  of  Navarre,  at  N^rac;  but  they  met  a  stem 
opponent  in  Calvin,  whose  influence  with  Margaret 
and  other  measures  probably  brought  about  the 
extinction  of  the  party.  In  1547  Calvin  warned 
the  Christians  of  Rouen  against  a  Franciscan  monk 
who  expounded  the  dogma  of  predestination  after 
the  method  of  the  Libertines.  The  latter  replied 
in  Baudier  de  d^ence,  which  Farel  answered  in 
Glaive  de  la  parole  virUable  (Geneva,  1560).  Calvin 
speaks  of  two  anonymous  French  writings'  which 
he  ascribes  neither  to  Quintin  nor  to  Pocquet,  which 
seem  to  be  of  a  mystical  Libertine  cast.  Some 
writings  of  this  character  were  collected  by  C. 
Schmidt,  Traitis  mystiquea  icrila  .  .  .  1S47-49 
(Geneva,  1876),  and  by  E.  Picot,  ThiAire  mystique 
de  Pierre  Du  Val  et  des  Libertine  epiriiueU  de  Rouen 
au  le.  sikde  (ib.  1882;  cf.  G.  Jaujard,  Eeeai  9ur  lea 
Libertine  spiritueU  de  Gentve  [?],  Paris,  1890).     See 

also  LOISTB.  E.  (^OIBT. 

Biblioorapht:  On  1:  Scharer,  OetdiicAte,  ii.  65,  431.  iii. 
84,  Eog.  trand.,  IL.  i.  49.  iL  56^7.  276;  EB,  iiL  2793- 
2794;  DB,  iii.  110;  and  the  oommentaries  on  the  paa- 
aage.  On  2:  A.  Roget,  HxMt.  du  peuple  de  Oenkve,  voIb. 
ii.-iv..  7  volfl.,  Geneva.  1871-«4:  E.  Choiay.  La  Thio- 
CTQiM  h  Qtnkoe  au  temp9  de  Calvin,  Geneva,  1897.  On  3: 
CR,  vii  145.  341;  Calvin,  InatUuiee,  III.,  iii.  14;  F. 
Trechflel,  Die  proteetantiMAen  ArUitrinitarier,  i.  177.  Hei- 
delberg, 1839;  Hundeshagen.  in  TSK,  zviii  (1845),  866 
sqq.;  A.  Jundt,  Hiet.  du  panthHeme  populaire,  Straeburg, 
1875.  For  further  information  on  2-3  oonmilt  also  the 
works  on  the  life  of  Calvin  given  under  Calvin,  John, 
e.g.,  W.  Walker,  pp.  293-295.  New  York.  1906. 

LIBERTY,  REUGIOUS. 


I.  General  Development. 

Historical  Survey  (S  1). 

The  Evangelical  Spirit. 
Especially  in  England 
(5  2). 

In  America  (S3). 

Humanistic  Tnfluenowi 
(5  4). 
II.  In  Germany. 

The  Theory  of  Non-Tolera- 
tion (SI). 


The  Situation  at  and  During 
the  Reformation  (f  2). 

Toleration  of  Roman  Cath- 
olics,  Lutherans,  and  Re- 
formed (f  3). 

Change  in  the  Political  The- 
ory of  the  Church  ($4). 

Present  Legal  Status  of 
Churches  (S  5). 

Roman  Catholic  Attitude 
(§6). 


I.  General  Davelopmeiit:  Religious  liberty  is, 
in  the  fullest  sense  of  the  term;  unrestricted  freedom 
to  believe,  practise,  and  propagate  any  religion 
whatever  or  none. 

The  Edict  of  Milan  (see  Constantini!  the  Grbat 
AND  HIS  Sons,  I.,  §  4)  issued  by  Constantine  and 
Licinius  in  313  seems  to  be  the  only  ancient  proc- 
lamation by  a  civil  government  of  absolute  relig- 
ious liberty.    The  edict  grants  "  both  to  the  Chris- 
tians and  to  all  men  freedom  to  follow 
X.  Hlfl-     the  religion  which  they  choose,"  "  each 
torical      one  should  have  the  liberty  of  wor- 
Survey.     shiping  whatever  deity  he  pleases." 
"  This  has  been  done  by  us  in  order 
that  we  might  not  seem  in  any  way  to  discriminate 
against  any  rank  or  religion."   This  action  was  taken 


in  the  interest  of  Christianity  and  the  edict  contains 
instructions  for  the  restitution  of  all  church  property 
taken  from  Christians  in  the  Diocletian  persecution. 
Constantine's  later  policy  in  relation  to  non-Catho- 
lic Christian  parties  and  paganism  was  inconsistent 
with  the  declarations  of  the  edict.  From  this  time 
onward  nothing  more  liberal  than  toleration  ap- 
pears in  civil  legislation  until  modem  times.  Pleas 
for  religious  liberty  were  frequently  made  by  per- 
secuted minorities;  but  neither  civil  governments 
nor  dominant  ecclesiastical  parties  paid  heed  to 
them.  Luther  pleaded  for  liberty  in  the  most  thor- 
oughgoing way  (1519-20);  yet  when  confronted 
with  religious  radicalism  (1521  onward)  he  became 
convinced  that  only  drastic  measures  of  repression 
could  save  the  situation  and  urged  the  rulers  to 
spare  not.  Humanists  and  Socinians  argued  for  a 
broad  toleration,  and  some  of  them  no  doubt  would 
have  rejoiced  to  see  absolute  liberty  of  conscience 
incorporated  in  the  civil  constitutions  and  in  the 
confessions  of  faith;  but  they  were  not  optimistic 
enough  even  to  hope  for  such  a  consummation. 
Balthasar  Huebmaier  (q.v.),  when  his  life  was  be- 
ing sought  by  the  Austrian  government  and  he  was 
in  imminent  danger,  wrote  in  1524  a  tract  "  Con- 
cerning Heretics  and  their  Burners "  (cf.  H.  C. 
Vedder,  BaUhaear  HObmaier,  pp.  84-88,  New  York, 
1905)  in  which  he  sought  to  show  the  heresy,  anti- 
christian  character,  and  futility  of  persecution  for 
conscience's  sake.  Calvin  was  from  the  beginning 
an  avowed  antitolerationist.  Regarding  the  Old- 
Testament  theocracy  as  in  an  important  sense  a 
model  for  the  Christian  state,  he  thought  it  the 
duty  of  the  church  authorities  to  detect,  convict, 
and  denounce  heretics  and  open  sinners  of  every 
type,  and  of  Christian  magistrates  to  execute 
Church  censures  even  to  the  extent  of  inflicting  cap- 
ital punishment  in  extreme  cases.  For  the  Chris- 
tian minister  or  magistrate  to  allow  a  heretic  to  dis- 
seminate his  errors  was  as  little  allowable  as  it 
would  be  to  permit  a  miscreant  to  go  about  spread- 
ing the  pestilence.  Calvin  had  the  full  sympathy  of 
Melanchthon,  Butzer,  Bullinger,  Knox,  and  other 
leading  reformers  in  his  antagonism  to  religious 
liberty.  In  this  he  was  followed  for  more  than  a 
century  by  English  and  American  Puritans,  Scot- 
tish Presbyterians,  and  by  Reformed  and  Lutheran 
Churches  in  general.  The  progress  of  religious  lib- 
erty has  been  greatly  impeded  also  by  the  general 
conviction  that  the  divergent  religious  opinions  of 
minorities  are  malignant  and  inspired  by  the  devil 
and  that  no  treatment  is  too  severe  for  the  dissem- 
inators of  diabolical  error;  that  two  forms  of  re- 
ligion can  not  exist  in  the  same  state  without  disas- 
trous consequences;  that  civil  rulers  have  a  right 
to  determine  the  religion  of  their  subjects  (see  Teh- 
ritoriaubm);  that  the  established  order  is  of 
divine  right  and  that  innovation  is  ipso  /ado  evil. 
The  Peace  of  Augsbiu^  (1555;  see  Auosburo, 
Religious  Peace  of)  and  the  Peace  of  Westphalia 
(1648;  see  Westphalia,  Peace  of)  each  in  turn 
confinned  the  states  of  Europe  in  territorialism. 

The  two  lines  of  influence  already  mentioned 
wrought  mightily  for  the  breaking  down  of  the  in- 
tolerance of  conservatism,  for  a  long  time  sepa- 
rately and  at  last  cooperatively,  namely  the  old 


LilMTty,  Belicloiis 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


478 


Evangelical  and  the  Humanistic.  The  old  Evan- 
gelical spirit  (represented  by  the  Waldenses  [q.v.], 
Peter  of  Chelcic,  and  the  Bohemian  Brethren  [q.v.], 
in  the  Middle  Ages,  and  by  the  Anabaptists  and 
the  Society  of  Friends  in  more  recent  times)  made 
a  sharp  distinction  between  the  Old 
a.  The     Testament  and  the  New  Testament, 

EvBXigelical  making  the  latter  alone  an  authorita- 

Spirit,      tive  guide  in  doctrine  and  polity  and 

Especially  laying  chief  stress  on  the  very  words 

in  England,  and  acts  of  Christ.  Most  of  them  as- 
sumed an  attitude  of  passive  resist- 
ance toward  civil  governments,  denying  the  possi- 
bility of  a  Christian  state  (if  all  were  Christians 
there  would  be  no  need  of  civil  government),  and  re- 
jecting magistracy,  oaths,  warfare,  and  capital  pun- 
ishment as  inconsistent  with  the  spirit  of  Christian- 
ity and  with  the  precepts  and  example  of  Christ 
and  the  apostles.  To  use  coercion  in  connection 
with  religion  seemed  to  them  monstrous.  Inter- 
preting the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  literally  they 
thought  it  wrong  to  resist  evil  or  to  defend  them- 
selves. Only  when  fired  by  chiliastic  enthusiasm 
and  convinced  that  it  was  the  divine  will  that  they 
should  smite  the  imgodly  and  become  instruments 
for  the  establishment  of  the  kingdom  of  Christ  on 
earth  (see  Taborites;  Mxtbnzbr,  Thomab;  Fifth 
Monarchy  Men)  did  they  trust  in  the  arm  of  flesh. 
This  quietistic  form  of  Christianity,  while  it  pro- 
duced the  noblest  examples  of  self-sacrificing  devo- 
tion and  of  evangelistic  zeal,  was  too  much  out  of 
accord  with  the  life  and  thought  of  the  times  to 
exert  a  strong  influence  in  favor  of  religious  liberty; 
though  the  Mennonites  in  the  Netherlands  became 
ntmierous  and  wealthy  enough  to  gain  the  coop- 
eration of  the  government  in  efforts  to  secure  tolera- 
tion for  the  persecuted  in  other  lands.  It  was  only 
when  the  old  Evangelical  type  of  New-Testament 
Christianity  became  blended  with  Calvinistic  Puri- 
tanism that  it  was  able  powerfully  to  influence  the 
Christian  world  in  favor  of  liberty  of  conscience. 
Robert  Browne  (q.v.)  reached  the  conviction,  prob- 
ably imder  Mennonite  influence  (1580-84),  that 
civil  magistrates  ought  not  to  punish  religious  de- 
linquencies or  in  any  way  to  interfere  with  the 
rights  of  conscience.  His  immediate  Sep)aratist  fol- 
lowers failed  to  grasp  the  principle  and  he  himself 
soon  abandoned  it.  About  1609  a  party  of  English 
Separatists  led  by  John  Smyth,  exiled  in  Holland, 
reached  antipedobaptist  convictions  and  at  the 
same  time  adopted  the  old  Evangelical  principle 
of  separation  of  Church  and  State  and  liberty  of 
conscience  in  the  most  absolute  sense  (see  Baptists, 
I.,  §{  1-4).  A  portion  of  the  company  under  the 
leadership  of  Helwys  and  Murton  returned  to  Eng- 
land (1611  or  1612)  and  members  of  this  Arminian 
antipedobaptist  party  addressed  to  the  govern- 
ment and  published  a  series  of  pleas  for  absolute 
liberty  of  conscience  (1614,  1615,  1620)  that  influ- 
enced wide  circles  of  readers  (see  Baftibtb,  {  9; 
cf .  Tracts  on  Liberty  of  Conscience,  Hanserd  Knollys 
Society,  London,  1846).  The  triumph  of  the  Inde- 
pendents (Baptist  and  Congregational)  first  over 
established  episcopacy  and  then  over  Presbyterian- 
ism,  which  sought  to  become  the  established  Church 
and  purposed  the  suppression  of  all  forms  of  dis- 


sent, led  to  a  measure  of  religious  equality  under 
CromweU  (1649,  sqq.)  for  such  Congregationalists, 
Baptists,  and  Presbyterians  as  were  friendly  to  the 
government  and  of  suitable  education  and  char- 
acter, all  alike  being  admitted  to  endowed  pastor- 
ates when  invited  by  the  parishioners;  but  there 
was  no  thought  of  tolerating  Roman  Catholics, 
High-church  Episcopalians,  or  Unitarians.  Tolersr 
tion  of  Evangelical  dissent  has  prevailed  in  Eng- 
land from  1689  and  dissenters'  disabilities  have 
been  gradually  diminished;  but  even  now  the  free 
Churches  of  England  are  struggling  valiantly  for 
religious  equality  which  means  the  disestablishment 
and  the  disendowment  of  the  established  Church. 

In  America  the  early  British  colonies  were 
formed  on  an  antitolerationist  basis,  the  Calvinistic 
theocratic  idea  prevailing  in  Massachusettfi  and 
Connecticut  and  the  Anglican  establishment  taking 
contrgl  in  Virginia  and  other  Southern  colonies  and 
in  New  York  after  it  was  taken  from 
3.  In       the  Dutch   (see  United    States   of 

America.  America,  Rbuoious  History  of). 
Roger  Williams  (q.v.;  also  BAPrisi^i;, 
II.,  §{  1-2),  having  been  banished  from  Massachu- 
setts, estabhshed  a  small  colony  at  Providence  on  the 
basis  of  liberty  of  conscience  (1636)  and,  in  coopera- 
tion with  John  Clarke  (q.v.;  also  Baftibtb,  II.,  §  3), 
the  laiger  colony  subsequently  known  as  Rhode  In- 
land ( 1647) .  The  publication  of  the  pleas  for  liberty 
of  conscience  by  Williams  and  Clarke,  and  their  as- 
sociation in  England  with  the  leading  statesmen  of 
the  Cromwellian  time  no  doubt  greatly  influenced 
opinion  there.  In  Maryland  Lord  Baltimore,  the 
proprietor,  tolerated  and  encouraged  a  body  of 
Puritans  who  had  been  driven  from  Virginia  on 
account  of  their  non-conformity  (1643).  In  Vir- 
ginia the  Baptists,  supported  to  some  extent  by 
Presbyterians  and  freethinkers  (Jefi^erson,  Madi- 
son, and  others),  waged  an  uncompromising  war- 
fare against  the  established  Church  (1776-99)  and 
succeeded  in  securing  its  disestablishment  and  dis- 
endowment, and  absolute  religious  equality  (see 
Baptists,  II.,  {  6).  They  were  also  influential  in 
securing  the  insertion  of  the  clause  in  the  Constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States  that  guarantees  religious 
liberty.  The  triumph  of  religious  liberty  in  Vir- 
ginia and  the  provision  for  it  in  the  national  Oon- 
stitution  led  to  the  removal  of  all  restrictions  to  the 
free  exercise  of  religion  in  Connecticut  (1820)  and 
in  Massachusetts  (1833).  The  successful  experi- 
ment of  religious  liberty  on  so  large  a  scale  soon 
made  its  influence  felt  throughout  the  Christian 
world.  American  influence  was  a  factor  in  the 
French  Revolution.  After  the  abolition  of  Christian- 
ity by  the  Terrorists,  Napoleon  put  Roman  Catholi- 
cism, Lutheranism,  Calvinism,  and  other  recognised 
forms  of  religion  upon  the  same  basis  of  state  support 
and  state  control  in  France,  the  Netherlands,  and 
other  parts  of  his  empire.  Complete  religious  liberty 
has  recently  come  about  in  France  through  the 
separation  of  Church  and  State  (see  France). 

Side  by  side  with  the  influence  of  the  old  Evan- 
gelical New-Testament  Christianity,  the  advance  c^ 
liberal  thought  imder  the  influence  of  Humanism 
has  wrought  for  freedom  of  thought  and  liberty  of  eon- 
science.    Skeptical  minds  not  only  demand  toleration 


470 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Ziib«rty,  Selitfious 


for  themselves;  but  are  not  so  absolutely  sure  that 
their  own  views  of  religion  are  exclusively  valid  as 

to  consider  it  necessary  to  force  them 

4.  Hu-      upon  others.     The  growth  of  scientific 

manistic     study  and  the  application  of  the  his- 

Influences.  torical  method  tc  the  study  of  religion 

have  tended  to  break  down  dogma- 
tism and  intolerance.  The  French  freethinking 
of  the  eighteenth  century  not  only  prepared  the 
way  for  the  French  Revolution,  but  covered  Europe 
and  America  with  its  influence.  French  freethink- 
ing cooperated  with  Baptist  insistence  on  separation 
of  Church  and  State  and  equality  of  rights  for  all 
religious  parties  in  the  American  struggle.  See 
Conventicle  Act  ;  Corporation  Act  ;  Five  Mile 
Act;  Test  Act;  Toleration  Act  op  1689;  Uni- 
pormity,  actb  op.  a.  h.  nswman. 

XL  In  Germany:  There  is  now  no  German  State 
which  does  not  grant  freedom  of  conscience,  both 
to  individuals  and  to  communities  which  are  united 
by  common  religious  interests.  In  itself  toleration 
may  be  observed  toward  non-Christian  as  well  as 
toward  Christian  bodies,  as  in  Germany  toward  the 
Jews;  yet  in  Germany  the  legislation  concerning 
the  Jews  has  not  arisen  from  motives  of  toleration 
but  of  alien  laws,  and  as  it  still  retains  this  charac- 
ter it  falls  outside  the  limits  of  the  present  discussion. 
A  Church,  as  such,  while  loving  and  patient  in  pas- 
toral care,  can  not  be  tolerant  either  in  dogmatics 
or  ethics.  For  since  an  individual  Chureh  exists 
simply  because  it  recognizes  a  certain  concept  of 
Christian  revelation  as  the  only  correct  one,  it  can 

not  permit  divergent  concepts  within 
X.  The      its  fold.    This  was  the  actual  attitude 
Theory     assumed  before  the  Reformation,  espe- 
of  Non-    dally  as  the  Chiurchthen  not  only  con- 
Toleration,  trolled  both  her  own  members,  so  that 

she  could  exclude  irreclaimable  heretics 
from  her  communion,  but  also  had  such  power  over 
the  State  that  the  latter  would  pimish  such  here- 
tics, if  necessary,  with  death.  The  constitution  Ad 
decu8  of  Frederick  II.  (1220),  requiring  the  death 
penalty,  repeats  almost  literally  the  third  chapter 
of  the  fourth  Lateran  Coimdl  (1215),  and  is  ren- 
dered still  more  strict  by  the  same  emperor's  con- 
stitutions Catharos  (1232)  and  Paiarenoa  (1238). 
The  enforcement  of  the  death  penalty  by  burning, 
prescribed  also  by  the  Sachsenapiegd  {Landrechiy 
II.,  xiv.  17)  and  the  Bamberg  criminal  code  of  1507 
(art.  30),  is  illustrated  by  the  proceedings  against 
Hubs  at  Constance  and  by  the  action  of  the  Ger- 
man princes  against  the  Hussites.  This  use  of 
power  of  the  pre-Reformation  Chureh  is  fully  ex- 
plicable from  her  point  of  view.  If,  as  she  believ^, 
she  was  the  one  visible  Church  founded  by  Christ, 
if  every  one  baptized  belonged  to  her,  if  she  was 
responsible  for  their  salvation,  and  if  this  salvation 
depended  on  the  obedience  of  each  individual  to 
her  authority,  there  was  no  reason  for  her  to  hesi- 
tate to  use  her  influence  with  the  State  to  gain  her 
such  obedience.  The  Chureh  had  developed  into  a 
dogmatic  system  her  claim  to  control  the  executive 
means  of  the  State  in  given  cases  to  her  advantage; 
and  as  long  as  this  prindple  was  acknowledged  by  the 
authorities  of  the  State,  its  powers  were  in  a  sense 
her  own,  to  be  employed  when  oonsdence  dictated. 


When  Luther,  at  the  Leipsic  disputation,  rejected 

the  doctrine  that  the  interpretation  of  the  Bible  was 

to  be  conditioned  by  the  authority  of  the  Church, 

the  latter  appealed  to  the  laws  against 

2.  The     heretics.    But  these  were  ignor^  by 

Situation  those  princes  who  held  that  the  Church 
at  and      must  be  reformed  and  who  were  in  sym- 

During  the  pathy  with  Luther's  views.    On  the 

Raf  orma-  other  hand,  the  ban  against  Luther  and 
tion.  the  bull  Decel  Romanum  pofUificem 
(Jan.  3, 1521)  led  to  the  Edict  of  Worms 
(Jan.  26,  1521;  antedated  Jan.  8),  which  followed 
the  laws  against  heretics,  declared  Luther  an  out- 
law, and  required  the  lo(»kl  authorities  to  imprison 
him  and  his  adherents.  Other  princes,  however, 
refused  to  execute  the  edict,  declaring  that  they 
could  not  reconcile  it  with  their  duty  to  their  sul>- 
jects  and  their  land;  and  in  view  of  the  wide-felt 
need  of  a  religious  reformation,  and  in  considera- 
tion of  the  imsettled  religious  conditions,  the  Diet 
of  Speyer  (Aug.  27,  1526)  declared  that,  until  a 
council  should  have  been  held,  no  prince  should  be 
obliged  to  obey  the  edict.  This  enactment  at 
Speyer  was  the  first  German  law  of  toleration,  al- 
though primarily  it  was  merely  a  provisional  sus- 
pension of  a  law  which  was  by  no  means  abro- 
gated. The  next  step  in  advance  was  the  religious 
peace  of  Augsburg  in  1555  (see  Auosburo,  Re- 
LiGions  Peace  op).  The  most  promising,  though 
unsuccessful,  attempt  to  force  the  German  princes  to 
obey  the  Edict  of  Worms  was  made  in  the  Schmal- 
kald  War,  and  the  proviso  of  1526  now  became 
definite.  Although  the  old  laws  against  heretics 
were  still  in  force,  it  was  no  longer  possible,  by  the 
laws  of  the  empire,  to  secure  their  obedience  from 
such  princes  as  would  not  maintain  them  in  their 
dominions.  A  second  fruitless  attempt  to  have  the 
laws  against  heretics  enforced  was  made  by  the 
Roman  Catholics  in  the  Thirty  Years'  War  (q.v.), 
but  with  the  Peace  of  Westphalia  (Oct.  24,  1648; 
see  Westphalia,  Peace  op;  and  below)  the  re- 
ligious peivce  of  Augsburg  was  confirmed  by  im- 
perial law.  Nevertheless,  this  merely  gave  the 
(jerman  princes  a  right  which  they  had  not  legally 
possessed  before,  permitting  them,  in  so  far  as  they 
were  unfettered  by  agreements  with  their  estates, 
to  enforce  or  ignore  the  old  laws  against  heretics. 
The  empire  was  accordingly  divided,  in  the  eyes  of 
the  (Xiria,  into  States  "  in  which  the  Holy  Office  is 
exercised,"  and  those  "  in  which  heretics  rage  un- 
punished." But  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that 
anything  like  the  modem  concept  of  toleration  was 
equally  unknown  to  the  Protestants  as  well.  The 
theory  of  the  Reformers  was  that  the  State  had  re- 
ceived authority  not  only  to  maint>ain  the  law  in 
general,  but  the  law  of  God,  especially  as  set  forth 
in  the  Decalogue,  in  particular.  In  virtue  of  the 
First  Table,  therefore,  the  State  was  divinely  re- 
quired to  permit  only  the  right  worship  of  God. 
The  pre-Reformation  relation  of  Church  and  State 
thus  received  a  theological  foimdation.  Tolera- 
tion of  any  worship  which  was  "  not  right "  was 
accordingly  exduded,  and  its  prevention  was  a  duty 
for  which  the  State  was  responsible  to  God — the 
only  change  was  the  abolition  of  the  criminal  pro- 
ceedings against  heretics,  and  the  substitution  of 


XaoStcni 


ridarlo 


THE  NEW  6CHAFF-HERZ0G 


480 


polioe  regulation.  Sinoe,  however,  neither  Ronum 
Catholic  nor  Protestant  would  admit  that  his  op- 
ponent also  taught  true  doctrine,  it  became  prac- 
tically necessary  merely  to  recognise  the  power  of 
the  authority  of  each  country  as  purely  personal, 
a  concept  later  expressed  in  the  phrase  "  whose  is 
the  land,  his  is  the  religion."  Nevertheless,  the 
Protestants  gained  the  one  point  that  those  who 
adhered  to  the  Augsbuig  Confession  could  only  be 
banished  by  Roman  Qitholic  princes,  and  not 
brought  before  a  criminal  court. 

A  further  step  was  made  in  the  Peace  of  West- 
phalia, which,  taught  by  the  bitter  lesson  of  the 
Thirty  Years'  War,  proceeded  to  real  tolerance, 
and  first  officially  employed  the  term. 

3.  Toleia-  It  enacted  that  Roman  Catholics  in 
tion  of  Protestant  lands,  and  Lutherans  and 
Roman     Reformed  in  Roman  Catholic  lands. 

Catholics,   should  be  **  tolerated  patiently  "  (pa~ 

LothenmSy  UerUer  tolerentur)  if  they  rendered  due 
and        obedience    to    the    dvil    authorities 

Refonned.  and  caused  no  disturbance.  They 
were  likewise  granted  the  right  of 
simple  private  worship.  No  other  religions  than 
those  just  mentioned,  however,  were  to  be 
"  received  or  tolerated  "  in  the  Holy  Roman  Em- 
pire. Thus  arose  the  distinction  long  maintained 
between  ''  received  "  and  "  tolerated  **  religion. 
The  Roman  Catholic  Church  declared  these  en- 
actments of  toleration  in  the  Peace  of  West- 
phalia null  and  void  by  the  bull  Zdo  domus 
Dei  (Nov.  20,  1648),  and  in  consequence  of  the 
strict  Lutheran  insistence  on  the  **  guardianship  of 
the  First  Table  "  likewise  had  cause  to  refuse  obe- 
dience, especially  as  the  Protestants  came  to  hold 
that  Roman  Catholicism  could  be  tolerated  only 
when  civil  authority  was  insufficient  to  repress  it, 
or  when  the  State  was  in  such  condition  that  the 
repression  could  not  be  effected  without  civil  war 
and  effusion  of  blood,  or  when  its  repression  would 
lead  to  greater  harm  than  its  toleration.  This 
rigid  adherence  to  the  "  guardianship  of  the  First 
Table,"  however,  could  be  carried  out  only  in  the 
narrow  domains  of  the  old  empire;  in  lands  of  more 
diverse  interests  a  larger  spirit  was  needful.  This 
was  first  shown  in  Holland,  whence  the  new  move- 
ment spread  to  Germany,  especially  the  rising  State 
of  Prussia.  When  the  Lutheran  princes  of  the 
Palatine  Electorate  (1560),  Bremen  (1568),  Nassau 
(1677),  Wittgenstein,  Solms,  and  Wied  (1577-86), 
Tecklenburg  and  Steinfurt  (1588),  Anhalt  (1596), 
Hesse-Cassel  (1604),  and  Lippe  (1605)  entered  the 
Reformed  Church,  they  obliged  their  subjects  to 
follow  them;  but  when,  in  1614,  the  Elector  John 
Sigismund  of  Brandenbuig  did  likewise,  he  merely 
permitted  the  coexistence  of  the  Lutheran  and  Re- 
formed Churches  in  his  territories.  This  precedent 
of  two  "  received  "  Churches  side  by  side  was  taken 
by  the  seventh  article  of  the  OsnabrOck  treaty  of 
1648  as  the  model  of  general  regulations  on  the 
mutual  relations  of  Lutheran  and  Reformed 
Churches  in  one  and  the  same  territory.  This 
marks  a  change  from  a  principle  of  intolerance  to 
one  of  tolerance,  and  of  the  substitution  of  a 
purely  political  concept  of  the  State  for  a  theo- 
logictd  theory. 


Since  the  weakness  of  the  empire  and  the  variety 

of  conditions  in  the  individual  States  were  fatal  to 

any  national  basis  for  the  State  in  Gennany,  the 

social  theory,  largely  represented  at  the  time  by 

Dutch  views,  and  aided  since  the  Ren- 

4.  Change  aissance  by  the  trend  of  juristic  and 

in  the      political  tenets,  formed  the  necessary 

Political  substitute.  The  State  being  regaided 
Theoqr  as  a  congeries  of  interests  imited  by  so- 
ot the      dal  contracts,  and  its  authority  being 

Church,  derived  from  a  contract  to  obeidience, 
two  theories  of  the  Church  became 
possible.  Either  it  might  be  assumed,  with  Hugo 
Grotius,  that  the  maintenance  of  the  Church  as 
an  institution  was  a  function  of  the  State,  and  that 
the  administration  of  the  Church  was  essentially  ad- 
ministration of  the  State,  this  being  Territorialism 
(q.v.).  Or  it  could  be  supposed  that  the  conditions 
of  religious  freedom  which  had  preceded  the  rise 
of  the  State  had  not  been  abrogated  by  the  con- 
tract of  the  State.  By  the  latter  hypothesis, 
termed  Collegialism  (q.v.) ,  first  developed  by  Samuel 
Pufendorf  (q.v.),  religion  remained  a  matter  of  indi- 
vidual freedom,  even  under  the  State,  and  entitled 
to  the  protection  of  the  State.  Territorialism  had 
been  in  use  for  ages,  with  the  substitution  of  polit- 
ical for  theological  premises.  Collegialism  was  the 
way  in  which  the  State  began  the  restoration  of 
the  social  independence  inherent  in  both  the  Ro- 
man Catholic  and  the  Protestant  Church.  View- 
ing both  Churches  as  unions  of  religious  interests, 
the  State  could  without  prejudice  determine  under 
what  conditions,  based  on  its  general  interests,  it 
could  and  would  permit  a  plursdity  of  such  unions 
of  religious  interests  to  coexist.  Thus  the  State 
reached  the  standpoint  of  modem  tolerance,  as  it 
now  prevails  in  Germany.  Yet  this  point  of  view 
was  reached  only  gradually.  The  Elector  John 
Sigismimd  of  Brandenburg,  mentioned  above,  per- 
mitted the  Arminians  to  hold  private  worship  in 
1683,  and  three  years  later  allowed  the  Refonned 
refugees  from  France  to  have  public  religious  serv- 
ices. But  what  was  allowed  by  the  empire  to 
Prussia  was  forbidden  in  the  smaller  States.  Thus 
when  Coimt  Ernest  Casimir  of  Runkel  and  Isen- 
burg  promised  religious  freedom  to  all  who  should 
settle  at  Badingen  (Mar.  29,  1712),  even  though 
they  might  not  be  either  Roman  Catholics,  Lu- 
therans, or  Reformed,  he  was  fined  and  obliged  to 
retract  his  offer.  Prussia,  however,  continued  in 
her  course,  and  Frederick  the  Great  granted  relig- 
ious freedom  to  Mennonites,  Socinians,  Arians, 
Schwenckfelders,  and  other  sects.  On  the  oth^ 
hand,  he  never  issued  any  law  of  toleration,  nor  did 
even  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  gain  full  equality 
with  the  two  Protestant  bodies  during  his  reign. 
The  example  of  Frederick,  who  was  more  influenced 
by  Voltaire  and  the  Encyclopedists  than  by  Pufen- 
dorf and  Thomasius,  was  followed  in  the  edict  of 
toleration  promulgated  by  Joseph  II.  of  Austria 
(Oct.  18,  1781)  and  by  the  Elector  Clement 
Wenzel  of  Treves  in  1783.  Finally,  by  the  re- 
ligious edict  of  1788  and  the  general  Prussian 
statute  of  1794  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 
received  equal  privileges  with  the  Lutherans  and 
the  Reformed. 


481 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Liberty.  Relifficms^ 
Liohtenberffer,  Vr^erlo 


In  France  Protestantism  was  again  recognized 
by  Louis  XVI.  in  Nov.,  1787,  and  two  years  later 
the  French  Revolution  declared  for  entire  liberty 
of  worship,  a  position  retained  under  Napoleon. 
As  a  result  of  the  extension  of  this  legislation  to  the 
German  territories  west  of  the  Rhine  which  had 
come  into  the  possession  of  France  in  exchange  for 
districts  east  of  the  same  river,  religious  toleration 
was  granted  to  the  Protestants  in  the  archdiocese 
of  Cologne  and  the  dioceses  of  Munster  and  Pader- 
bom.  A  like  course  was  followed  by  Bavaria  (Aug. 
21,  1801),  and  by  Qeve-Berg,  the  grand  duchy  of 
Frankfort,  and  the  kingdom  of  Westphalia.  But 
while  the  German  Act  of  Confederation  (Jan.  8, 
1815)  granted  toleration  to  Roman  Catholics,  Lu- 
therans, and  Reformed,  it  referred  everything  re- 
garding the  development,  administration,  and  or- 
ganic life  of  the  Churches  to  special  legislation. 
Accordingly,  in  the  legislation  of  both  Bavaria 
(May  26,  1818)  and  Baden  (Aug.  22,  1818)  the  right 
of  private  worship  was  extended  to  others  than 
members  of  the  three  great  ecclesiastical  bodies. 
The  only  further  step  now  possible  was  the  exten- 
sion of  this  privilege  to  public  worship;  and  this 
was  granted  by  laws  of  Baden  (Feb.  17,  1849)  and 
Prussia  (Jan.  31,  1850),  these  and  similar  laws  fol- 
lowing the  Frankfort  statutes  of  1848.  The  last 
vestige  of  religious  discrimination  was  removed  by 
the  law  of  the  German  Confederation  of  July  3, 
1869,  which  granted  complete  civil  equality  to  the 
various  confessions. 

Since  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  the 

German  theory  of  the  legal  status  of  the  Church 

passed  through  the  entire  revolution  possible  from 

the  stage  after  bare  existence.    Begin- 

5.  Present  ning  with  the  exclusion  of  adherents 

Legal       of  imfavored  religious  bodies  from  full 

Status  of    civil  rights,  it  advanced  to  the  per- 

Churches,  mission  of  private  worship,  either  with- 
out clergy  ("  simple  ")  or  with  them 
(''qualified  ")•  The  next  step  was  the  right  to  hold 
public  worship,  which  was  "private"  when  the  re- 
ligious conmiimity  in  question  was  not  essentially 
privileged,  and  "public"  when  it  was  so  privil^ed 
by  the  State.  This  lat^r  came  to  be  construed  as  the 
granting  of  corporation-rights  to  a  Church,  which, 
in  such  States  as  Oldenburg,  Waldeck,  and  Prussia, 
can  be  done  only  by  the  passage  of  a  law,  as  was 
done  in  Prussia  in  1874  and  1875,  for  example,  for 
the  Baptists  and  Mennonites.  Religious  communi- 
ties can  secure  the  rights  of  a  corporation,  unless 
objected  to  by  the  State,  by  being  entered  in  the 
register  kept  by  the  local  authorities;  though  where 
a  special  law  is  necessary  for  the  acquisition  of  such 
rights,  the  need  of  such  laws  is  not  thereby  abro- 
gated. The  Imperial  Criminal  Code  (§  166)  grants 
any  religious  body  with  corporation-rights  within 
the  empire  special  protection  against  public  insults 
to  its  institutions  and  usages;  and  special  privi- 
leges are  also  accorded  the  clergy  of  such  bodies. 
Since  the  Peace  of  Westphalia,  therefore,  toleran 
tion  has  been  extended  from  the  Roman  Catholics, 
Lutherans,  and  Reformed  to  all  religions,  so  that 
the  minimum  accorded  to  any  religious  body  is 
now  "  private  "  public  worship. 

The  Roman  Catholic  Church  maintains  her  pre- 
VI.— 31 


Reformation  attitude  toward  toleration  by  the 
State,  as  protested  against  both  by  the  papal 
nuncio  Chigi  (Oct.  26,  1648)  and  the 
6.  Roman  bull  Zdo  domus  Dei  (Nov.  20,  1648), 
Catholic  on  the  ground  that  the  State  has  no 
Attitude,  authority  to  issue  such  regulations. 
Similar  protests  have  repeatedly  been 
made  by  the  Curia,  as  by  the  briefs  of  Pius  VII. 
against  the  toleration  of  Protestants  in  Bavaria 
(Feb.  13  and  Nov.  19,  1803),  the  encyclicals 
Mirari  voa  of  Gregory  XVI.  (Aug.  15,  1832), 
Pius  IX.  (Dec.  8,  1864),  and  Leo  XIII.  (Nov.  1, 
1885).  Nevertheless,  this  church  does  not  con- 
demn those  who,  for  the  promotion  of  great  good 
or  the  avoidance  of  grave  scandal,  tolerate  the  ex- 
istence of  various  cults  in  the  State.  At  the  same 
time  she  insists  that  no  one  may  be  forced  to  accept 
the  faith  against  his  will,  although  this  is  construed 
as  applying  to  non-Christians,  and  not  to  baptized 
Protestants,  the  latter  being  regarded  as  heretics, 
and  hence  subject  to  compulsory  conversion  by 
the  secular  arm.  Leo  XII?.,  while  maintaining  this 
position,  declared  that  a  State  tolerating  heretics 
should  not  be  incontinently  condemned,  but  should 
be  temporized  with  as  circumstances  should  de- 
mand. The  official  Roman  Catholic  rejection  of 
the  principle  of  toleration  accordingly  remains  un- 
changed in  essence,  and  it  is,  therefore,  her  endeavor 
and  hope  that  the  State  may  some  time  be  con- 
vinced of  the  justness  of  her  attitude,  and  again 
adopt  the  policy  of  non-toleration. 

(E.  Friedbero.) 
Biblxoorapht:  A  large  number  of  documents  dealing  with 
the  progress  of  the  idea  in  England  are  contained  in  Gee 
and  Hardy,  Document.  Consult:  J.  Locke,  Three  Let- 
ters on  Toleration^  reprint,  London,  1876  (on  the  act  of 
1689):  J.  Milton,  Eeaay  on  Toleration,  in  his  Worke,  8 
vols.,  London,  1867,  etc.;  J.  L.  Balmes,  European  CivU- 
uaUon;  ProteatanHem  and  Catholiciem,  chaps,  xxxiv.- 
xxxvii.,  London,  1856  (Roman  Catholic);  A.  Hess,  r/e&er 
religidee  und  aittlicke  Tolerang,  St.  Gall.  1884;  P.  Brooks, 
Tolerance,  New  York,  1887;  E.  Leffevre,  La  Liberti  re- 
lUfietAae,  Verviers,  1888;  P.  Schaff,  Progreat  of  Relioioua 
Freedom  aa  Shown  in  the  Hiat.  of  Toleration  Acta,  New 
York,  1889;  F.  Hement,  Entreiiena  aur  la  liberU  de  con- 
acienee,  Paris,  1890;  L.  Marillier,  La  LiberU  de  conacience, 
ib.  1890;  F.  Pollock,  Relioioua  Equality,  in  Ozford  Leo- 
turea,  London,  1890;  G.  Canet,  La  Liberti  de  conacience, 
aa  nature,  aon  hiatoire,  Lyon,  1891;  H.  FQrstenau,  Daa 
Orundrecht  der  Reliaionafreiheit,  Leipaic,  1891;  J.  J.  1. 
von  Ddllinger,  in  his  Eaaaya  on  Hiatarical  and  Literary 
Subjecta,  London,  1894;  M.  Creighton.  PeraeaUion  and 
Tolerance,  ib.  1896;  A.  D.  White,  Hiat.  of  the  Warfare  of 
Science  and  Theology,  2  vols..  New  York,  1896;  F.  M. 
Holland,  Liberty  in  the  19th  Century,  ib.  1899;  G.  Bonet- 
Maury,  HiaL  de  la  liberty  de  conacience  en  France  depuia 
VAiit  di  Nantea  juagu'au  1870,  Paris,  1900;  H.  Hello.  Lea 
Jjibertia  modernea  d'aprh  lea  encycliguea,  ib.  1900;  F. 
Ruffini.  La  liberth  religioaa,  Turin,  1900;  R.  Oertel.  Ent- 
wickelung  dea  Qrundaattea  OUkubigerbefriedigung,  Leipsic, 
1901;  S.  H.  Cobb,  Riae  of  Relioioua  Liberty  in  America, 
New  York,  1902;  H.  M.  King,  ReligUma  Liberty,  Provi- 
dence, 1903;  E.  S.  P.  Haynes,  Relioioua  Peraecution, 
London,  1904;  A.  Matagrin,  Hiat  de  la  toUrance  relir 
oieuae,  Paris,  1905;  J.  Mackinnon,  A  Hiat.  of  Modem 
Liberty,  vols.  i.-iii..  New  York,  1906  sqq.  (to  be  in  8  vols.); 
E.  Rousse,  La  Liberti  relioieuae  en  France  1880-1894, 
Paris,  1904;  Cambridoe  Modem  Hiatory,  v.  324  sqq.,  New 
York,  1908;  and  the  literature  under  the  articles  referred 
to  in  the  text. 

LICHTENBER6ER,  UH'ten-b&rg"er,  FREDERIC 
AUGUSTE:  French  Protestant  theologian;  b.  at 
Strasburg  Mar.  21,  1832;  d.  at  Paris  Jan.  7,  1899. 


Xjloht«nb«r««r 
liiebner 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


482 


He  was  the  deaoendant  of  an  old  Alsatian  family; 
attended  the  Protestant  gymnasium  of  Strasbuig; 
studied  theology  there  and  at  several  German  imi- 
versities;  spent  considerable  time  at  Paris;  re- 
turned to  Strasburg  where  he  became  bachelor  of 
theology  (1864),  Hcentiate  (1857),  and  doctor  (1860). 
In  1864  he  was  appointed  professor  of  systematic 
and  practical  theology  in  the  theological  faculty  of 
Strasburg,  but  his  activity  was  interrupted  by  the 
war  of  1870.  His  sympathies  were  on  the  side  of 
the  French,  and  he  nursed  the  sick  during  the  siege 
of  his  native  town.  After  the  war,  the  German  ad- 
ministration offered  him  as  weU  as  his  colleagues  a 
place  in  the  newly  organised  university,  but  while 
most  of  his  colleagues  accepted  the  offer,  he  to- 
gether with  Golani  and  Sabatier  declined.  Lich- 
tenberger  went  to  Paris  where  he  was  at  first  em- 
ployed by  the  Lutheran  consistory  as  assistant 
preacher  of  the  Church  of  Redemption,  then  he 
worked  six  years  with  great  devotion  in  the  service 
of  the  £glise  libre  in  the  Chapelle  Taitbout.  Chiefly 
owing  to  the  efforts  of  Lichtenberger  and  Auguste 
Sabatier,  Gambetta  finally  (1877)  fulfilled  the 
promise  to  renew  the  Strasburg  theological  faculty 
in  Paris,  and  for  seventeen  years  Lichtenberger  was 
the  efficient  dean.  During  the  time  between  1871 
and  1877  Lichtenberger  found  ample  time  to  de- 
vote himself  to  his  literary  works.  His  was  not  an 
original  mind,  but  he  could  clearly  and  forcibly  re- 
pr^luce  the  thoughts  of  others.  His  principal 
works  are:  Histaire  dea  idiea  rdigieuaea  en  AUe- 
magne  depuia  le  milieu  du  dix-huUihne  tihde  jutqu'h 
no8  joura  (3  vols.,  Paris,  1873;  Eng.  transl.,  Hia- 
tary  of  Oerman  Theology  in  the  19th  Century,  Edin- 
buigh,  1890),  and  the  French  Protestant  coimter- 
part  to  Herzog,  Encydopidie  dea  aciencea  religieuaea 
(Paris,  1877-82,  13  vols.).  It  was  also  owing  to 
his  efforts  as  Omseil  gdn^ral  des  facult^s  and  as 
member  of  the  Conseil  sup6rieur  de  Tinstruction 
publique  that  the  bond  between  the  Protestant 
faculty  and  the  other  faculties  of  the  imiversity 
became  so  dose  that  all  attempts  to  sever  it  failed. 
Lichtenberger's  personal  views  on  theology  and 
the  Church  were  influenced  by  Alexander  Vinet. 
As  a  thorough  individualist  he  inclined  toward  the 
ideas  of  a  free  Church  combating  conventionalism 
in  church  and  theology.  In  1895  a  chronic  disease 
permanently  laid  him  aside.  His  valedictory  aer- 
monUAlaaceendeuil  (1871, 10th  ed.,  1873)  preached 
at  Strasbiu^  after  the  war  of  1870,  achieved  an  un- 
precedented popularity. 

(EuoEN  Lachenhann.) 
Bzbuoorapht:   The  funeral  address  by  Sabatier  is  in  Revue 

ehriUenne,    1899,    pp.    122-127.     Consult   Lichtenberger, 

ESR,  xiii  120-121. 

LIDDON,  HENRY  PARRY:  Church  of  England ; 
b.  at  North  Stoneham  (7  m.  s.w.  of  Winchester) 
Aug.  20,  1829;  d.  at  Weston-^uper-Mare  (20  m. 
s.w.  of  Bristol)  Sept.  9,  1890.  He  was  educated  in 
the  school  at  Lyme  Regis,  continuing  at  King's  Col- 
lege, London,  and  Christ  Church,  Oxford.  He 
graduated  B.A.  in  1850,  and  the  next  year  won  the 
Johnson  theological  scholarship,  and  was  made  a 
student  of  Christ  Church.  In  1852  he  was  ordained 
deacon,  in  1853  priest.  For  the  first  two  months 
of  1852  he  was  curate  at  Wantage  (21  m.  n.n.w. 


of  Reading),  then  for  a  little  while  did  duty  at 
Finedon  (12  m.  n.e.  of  Northampton).  In  1854  he 
became  first  vice-principal  of  the  theological  college 
at  Cuddesdon  (6  m.  s.s.e.  of  Oxford),  which  had 
just  been  established  by  Samuel  Wilberforoe,  bishop 
of  Oxford,  but  his  Higk-church  views  excited  so 
much  opposition  and  exposed  his  bishop  to  so  much 
criticism  that  he  was  compelled  to  resign  on  Dec 
29,  1858,  and  he  left  the  following  Easter.  Almost 
immediately  he  became  vice-principal  of  St.  Ed- 
mund's Hail,  Oxford.  There  his  position  was  more 
congenial  by  far,  and  he  quickly  became  a  power 
in  the  university  by  the  Sunday-evening  lectures 
on  the  New  Testament,  which  he  carried  on  with 
great  success  until  1869  and  again  from  1883  till 
the  close  of  his  life.  But  in  1862  illness  forced  his 
resignation  of  the  vice-principalship.  In  1864  he 
became  examining  chaplain  to  Walter  Kerr  Hamil- 
ton, bishop  of  Salisbury,  with  whose  Anglo-Catholic 
views  he  was  in  full  accord.  In  1865  he  was  choeen 
Bampton  lecturer,  and  produced  the  volume  by 
which  he  is  best  known,  The  Divinity  </  our  Lord 
and  Saviour  Jesua  Chriat  (London,  1866,  14th  ed. 
1890).  In  1870  he  became  Ireland  professor  of 
exegesis  of  Holy  Scripture  at  Oxford,  and  so  re- 
mained till  1882,  when  he  resigned  because,  as  be 
said,  he  could  not  do  justice  to  the  office  and  at  the 
same  time  meet  his  other  engagements.  In  1870 
he  became  a  canon  of  St.  Paul's,  London.  He  was 
now  a  preacher  of  established  repute,  and  held  the 
attention  of  vast  crowds,  although  his  sermons  were 
inordinately  long.  He  was  always  tremendously  in 
earnest,  full  of  spiritual  fervor,  simple  in  his  lan- 
guage, and  dear  in  his  aigumentation.  He  read 
his  sermons  closely  because  the  strain  of  addressing 
such  large  audiences  was  felt  by  him  and  he  did 
not  wish  to  be  under  the  additional  strain  which 
extempore  speech  would  have  entailed. 

He  maintained  some  extreme  positions.  Thus 
he  defended  John  Purchas,  who  had  been  con- 
demned for  ritualism,  and  likewise  the  Reverend 
Thomas  Pelham  Dale  and  the  Reverend  Richard 
William  Enraght,  the  ritualists  who  had  refused 
to  obey  the  judgment  of  the  court  of  arches, 
going  so  far  as  to  question  its  authority.  His 
conservatism  came  out  in  his  defense  of  the 
continued  use  of  the  Athanasian  Creed;  in  his  as- 
sertion that  the  higher  criticism  of  the  Old  Test^a- 
ment  impugned  the  infallibility  of  Jesus  Christ  and 
was,  therefore,  to  be  rejected;  and  in  his  contention 
against  the  archbishop  of  Canterbury,  that  the 
presence  even  of  a  bishop  of  the  Church  of  Kngland 
in  Jerusalem  was  an  intrusion  on  the  diocese  of  the 
patriarch  of  Jerusalem. 

Christ  College,  Oxford,  was  his  home  when  not 
in  residence  in  St.  Paul's,  and  to  that  university  he 
gave  much  of  himself.  In  1866-70  he  was  active 
in  the  founding  of  Keble  College,  and  in  1883-84 
of  Pusey  House,  both  at  Oxford,  and  both  estab- 
lished by  the  friends  of  the  High-church  party. 

His  preaching  was  practically  limited  to  the  uni- 
versities of  Oxford  and  Cambridge  and  as  canon  of  St. 
Paul's,  London,  and  his  publications  were  almost  ex- 
clusively sermons  and  a  large  part  of  the  life  of  Pusey. 
He  was  asked  on  several  occasions  to  accept  an  epis- 
copal appointment,  but  he  would  not  consider  it .     In 


483 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Liohtentierflrer 
liiebner 


1886  he  did  accept  the  chancellorship  of  St.  Paul's  car 
thedral.    He  was,  as  might  be  expected,  deeply  inter- 
ested in  the  Old  Catholic  movement,  and  attended 
the  Bonn  conference  of  1875,  took  a  leading  part 
in  it,  and  translated  the  record  of  its  proceedings. 
Bibuoobapht:    The  principal  biography  is  by  J.  O.  John- 
ston, Li/e  and  LeUen  of  Henry  Parry  lAddon,  London,  1904. 
Others  are  by  A.  B.  Donaldson,  ib.  1905;  G.  W.  £.  Russell, 
ib.  1909.  and  in  DNB,  xxxui.  223-228. 

LIDWIHA  (LIDWIGIS,  LIDIA),  SAINT:  Dutch 
virgin;  b.  at  Schiedam  (4  m.  w.  of  Rotteidam) 
Mar.  18,  1380;  d.  there  April  14,  1433.  Bom  of 
prosperous  parents  she  was  of  so  great  beauty  that 
she  was  besieged  with  suitors  from  her  thirteenth 
year.  She  had  no  desire  for  marriage,  however, 
and  prayed  to  God  that  he  would  make  her  so 
loathsome  that  no  man  could  look  upon  her  with 
pleasure.  Coming  from  church  on  Candlemas  day, 
1394,  she  slipped  on  the  ice  and  broke  her  hip,  and 
for  the  rest  of  her  life  underwent  terrible  sufiferings, 
which  she  endured  with  such  incredible  patience 
that  she  has  been  said  to  hold  the  same  place  in 
the  dispensation  of  the  New  Testament  that  Job 
does  in  that  of  the  Old.  She  had  an  altar  erected 
in  her  chamber  and  during  the  last  years  of  her  life 
partook  of  holy  communion  every  few  days.  She 
bad  many  ecstatic  visions,  beholding  hell,  heaven, 
and  purgatory.  Pilgrims  flocked  to  her  bedside 
and  many  wonderful  cures  were  said  to  have  been 
performed.  Her  day  in  the  Roman  Catholic  calen- 
dar is  Apr.  14. 

Bibliographt:  The  early  Vita  are  collected  in  A8B,  Apr., 
ii.  270-365.  One  of  them  is  in  Fr.  transl.  by  J.  Bruch- 
man,  Besancon,  1840,  and  in  Dutch  by  G.  A.  Meyer, 
Nimeguen.  1890.  Consult:  W.  Moll,  J.  Brugmann  en  het 
ffodedienaHo  leven  ,  .  ,  in  de  16.  eeuiw,  Amsterdam,  1854; 
KL,  viL  1974^79  (where  other  literature  is  given). 

LIE:  Any  false  statement  made  with  intent  to 
deceive,  also  any  reservation,  equivocation,  or  con- 
cealment of  the  truth  for  the  purpose  of  misleading 
our  neighbor.  It  is  in  this  comprehensive  sense 
that  the  divine  command,  ''  Thou  shalt  not  bear 
false  witness  against  thy  neighbor,"  is  to  be  inter- 
preted. Christ  designates  the  devil  as  the  source 
of  the  lie  and  as  the  father  of  liars  (John  viii.  44); 
and  after  he  had  established  the  kingdom  of  truth 
upon  earth  (John  xviii.  37)  his  disciples  combatted 
falsehood  with  might  and  main  (cf.  Eph.  iv.  25; 
Tit.  i.  12-14).  John  expressly  states  that  liars  are 
excluded  from  the  city  of  God  (Rev.  zxi.  8,  xxii. 
15).  Attempts  have  been  made  to  adduce  Bib- 
lical examples  of  the  "  white  lie,"  or  "  necessary 
lie  "  (NotlUge),  but  the  prevarications  of  Abraham 
about  Sarah  (Gen.  xii.  11-13,  xx.  2),  and  the  de- 
ceptions of  David  (I  Sam.  xxi.  2,  13,  xxvii.  10)  do 
not  come  under  this  category,  not  to  speak  of  the 
lies  of  Sarah  (Gen.  xviii.  15)  and  Jacob  (xxvii.  19). 
However,  the  Old  Testament  seems  to  endorse  to 
a  certain  extent  the  kind  of  necessary  deception 
employed  by  Rahab  to  save  the  spies  in  Jericho 
(Josh,  ii.),  and  in  a  similar  case  by  Michael  (I  Sam. 
xix.  13-17).  Perhaps  such  deception  is  justifiable 
where  a  human  life  is  at  stake,  or  where  a  lie  seems 
necessary  to  the  accomplishment  of  some  higher 
good;  but  even  then  it  should  be  possible  to  sur- 
mount the  difficulty  without  lying. 

(KaBL  BURGEBf.) 


LIEBNER,  ItVner,  KARL  THEODOR  ALBERT: 

German  Lutheran  theologian,  of  importance  in  the 
history  of  the  newer  constructive  theology;  b.  at 
Schkdlen,  near  Naumburg,  Mar.  3,  1806;  d.  in 
Switzerland  June  24,  1871.  Along  with  the  con- 
sciousness that  in  the  modem  critical  period  a  spe- 
cial task  was  laid  upon  theological  science,  he  found 
his  life-work  in  the  conviction  that  in  order  success- 
fully to  meet  the  ever-growing  opposition  there  was 
requisite  a  wider  development  of  the  Christian 
ethical  content;  and  that  the  first  requisite  was  to 
give  full  play  to  the  radically  decisive  ethical  fac- 
tor in  Christianity  and  give  it  in  contemporary 
ecclesiastical  and  scientific  consciousness  the  place 
which  it  holds  by  intrinsic  right  in  the  Christian 
scheme. 

After  the  completion  of  his  education  at  Leipsic 
(marked  by  special  attention  to  Kant)  he  was  in- 
fluenced by  his  further  studies  in  Berlin  (under 
Schleiermacher,  Hegel,  Neander,  Marheineke),  and 
by  his  reception  into  the  Wittenberg  Theological 
Seminary  (under  Heubner  and  Richard  Rothe). 
It  was  here  that  he  wrote  his  first  book:  Hugo  von 
St.  Victor  und  die  theologiachen  Richtungen  seiner 
Zeit  (Leipsic,  1832),  which  is  valuable  for  its  ex- 
position of  the  imion  of  mysticism  and  gnosis  be- 
fore the  Reformation  in  the  school  of  St.  Victor, 
and  for  its  bearing  on  the  struggles  and  aims  of 
our  time.  This  theme  is  continued  in  the  treatise 
(in  the  TSK)  U^ber  Gersons  mystische  Theologie, 
which  he  composed  in  his  first  pastoral  charge 
(Kreisfeld,  near  Eisleben),  1832,  as  well  as  in  the 
academic  treatise  Richardi  a  S,  Victore  de  contem- 
plaiione  doctrinal  which,  along  with  some  treatises 
on  practical  theology  (184^-44),  and  some  sermons, 
he  published  at  Gdttingen,  whither  he  had  been 
called  in  1835  as  professor  of  theology  and  univer- 
sity preacher. 

Called  in  1844  to  Kiel,  to  succeed  Domer  as  pi-:>- 
fessor  of  systematic  theology,  be  wrote  there  nis 
principal  work,  Die  christliche  Dogmatik  aus  dem 
christologischen  Princip  dargeeteUi  (G6ttingen,  1849). 
In  Christ  the  God-man,  Liebner  finds  the  solution 
of  the  spiritual  struggle  of  our  time.  Here,  where 
the  divine  dwells  in  the  human  in  bodily  substance, 
he  discerns  the  truth  and  fulness  of  religion,  pei^ 
sonally  absolute  religion;  the  ethical  appears  to 
him  as  the  inmost  and  profoundest  essence  of  Chris- 
tianity, as  its  absolutely  deepest  and  richest  con- 
tent, in  fact  the  center-point  of  all  things  divine 
and  human,  the  principle  governing  all  manner  of 
being  and  thought,  in  the  inmianent  and  permanent 
vital  process  in  God  and  in  the  world.  By  the  aid 
of  this  thought  he  sees  how  the  conceptions  men 
have  of  God  and  religion  correspond;  how  subor- 
dinate and  one-sided  ideas  of  God  can  beget  none 
but  subordinate  and  partial  ideas  of  religion:  the 
physical  conception  of  God  as  being,  causality,  and 
the  like,  begetting  a  mere  physical  conception  of  re- 
ligion (feeling  of  dependency,  of  the  infiidte  in  the 
finite);  the  logical  conception,  a  merely  logical  re- 
ligion (perception,  knowledge  of  the  divine,  etc.); 
the  exclusively  ethical  conception  of  God,  an  ex- 
clusively ethical  conception  of  religion  (external 
positivism  and  moralism,  formal  orthodoxy  and 
rationalism).    In  view  of  these  partial  ideas  which 


laabner 
Zil^htfoot 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


484 


dilute,  if  not  disintegrate  and  dissolve,  the  eeaenoe 
of  Christianity,  Liebner  brings  to  bear  the  entire 
force  of  contemplative  and  speculative  reasoning 
in  order  to  conceive  as  a  whole  the  organic  coopera- 
tion of  the  physical,  logical,  and  ethi^,  and  there- 
by to  mp.infRin  the  fuB,  unmaimcd,  and  imdiluted 
effect  of  Christianity. 

Starting  from  the  principle  of  the  Incarnation, 
Liebner  now  more  lucidly  exhibits  the  relation  of 
faith  and  knowledge,  showing  how  the  one  postu- 
lates and  presupposes  the  other;  how  faith  can  as 
little  be  void  of  thought  as  can  God;  and  how 
Christianity  is  a  redemption  both  for  mind  and 
heart.  Participation  in  the  life  of  salvation  is  also 
participation  in  the  ideas  of  salvation  which  are 
inseparably  connected  with  it,  every  divine  gift  and 
grace  is  at  the  same  time  a  task  to  be  worked  out 
by  human  effort;  so  we  are  to  work  out,  as  the 
proper  content  of  thought,  the  salutary  ideas  im- 
manent in  the  facts  of  salvation,  under  constant 
and  formative  guidance  of  God's  word  and  of  the 
Spirit  who  leads  into  all  truth.  As  faith  without 
works  is  dead,  so  is  it  also  dead  without  knowledge. 
On  the  ground  of  such  faith  rests,  for  Liebner's  the- 
ology, the  certainty  that  theology  itself,  as  the 
scientific  self-consciousness  of  Christianity,  must 
also  find  its  scientific  principles  in  its  own  peculiar 
content,  the  Gospel,  with  full  confidence  that  the 
vital  Christian  fund  of  faith  is  susceptible  of  scien- 
tific elaboration.  In  this  consciousness,  his  theol- 
ogy disarmed  prejudices  against  faith  on  the  one 
hand  and  knowledge  on  the  other,  by  showing  in 
the  relation  between  God  and  the  universe,  Creator 
and  creature,  God  and  man,  spirit  and  nature,  free- 
dom and  necessity,  etc.,  how  the  atomistic  con- 
ception of  diversity  is  unable  to  discern  or  compre- 
hend the  idea  of  miity;  how  it  severs  and  dismem- 
bers unity,  and  is  in  the  last  analysis  a  conception 
of  death  and  decay.  He  shows  equally  how  the 
monistic  conception  of  unity  loses  sight  of  and  con- 
founds diversity:  whereas  faith,  when  compre- 
hended in  its  vital  truth  and  depth,  manifests  itself 
as  the  deepest  ground  and  motive  for  a  truly  or- 
ganic philosophy,  which  does  justice  to  both  diver- 
sity and  unity.  These  fimdamental  ideas  are  espe* 
ciidly  expanded  in  his  Introductio  in  dogmatioam 
ehritUanam  (Leipsic,  1854-55),  which  he  wrote  at 
Leipsic,  whither  he  had  been  persuaded  to  go  after 
declining  calls  to  Marburg  and  Heidelberg. 

In  1855  he  was  appointed  court  preacher  and 
vice-president  of  the  Superior  Consistory  of  Saxony. 
The  manner  in  which  he  embraced  this  position  as 
an  opportunity  to  increase  his  already  richly 
blessed  labors  appears  from  his  writings:  Ueber 
das  Wesen  der  Kirchenvisitationt  a  memorial  to  the 
official  visitors  (1857);  Ueber  den  Stand  der  christr 
lichen  Erkenntnis  in  der  deuUchen  evangelischen 
KirchCf  an  address  before  the  Conference  at  Eisen- 
ach in  1859,  incidentally  describing  the  construc- 
tive work  of  the  new  era  (Dresden,  1860);  his 
Reformation  sermon  in  1864;  a  second  volume  of 
sermons,  Predigt^BeiJbr&ge  zur  Fdrderung  der  Er- 
kenntnie  Christi  in  der  Gemeinde  (1861),  and  the 
Jahrbucher  fur  deuiache  Theologie  which  he  f oimded 
in  conjunction  with  Domer,  Ehrenfeuchter,  and 
others,  for  the  support  of  his  constructive  theology. 


Bibuoobapht:  M.  M.  ROlins,  Zur  Brinnerung  an  ...  T. 
A.  Liebner,  Dresden,  1871;  C.  Schwan,  Ztir  GtadndUe 
der  neueeten  Theotoffie,  pp.  371  eqq.,  Leipsic.  1864;  A. 
MQeke,  Die  Doffmatik  dee  19.  Jahrhunderte,  pp.  280  kiq.. 
Gotha,  1867. 

LIETZMAIIN,  Uts'mOn,  HANS:  (German  Prot- 
estant; b.  at  DQssekiorf  Mar.  2,  1875.  He  was  ed- 
ucated at  the  universities  of  Jena  (1893)  and  Bonn 
(1894-07;  lie.  theoL,  1896),  and  after  teaching  in 
a  gymnasium  at  Bonn  in  1898-99,  became  privat- 
docent  at  the  university  in  the  same  city  in  1900. 
Since  1905  he  has  been  professor  of  church  history 
at  Jena.  He  has  edited  Kleine  Texte  fur  theologische 
Vorleaungen  und  Udmngen  (Bonn,  1902  sqq.;  Eng. 
transl.,  Materials  for  the  Use  of  Theoloffioal  Lecturers 
and  Students,  Cambridge,  1902  sqq.)  and  Hand- 
buch  zum  Neuen  Testament  (in  collaboration  with 
H.  Gressmann,  E.  Klostermann,  F.  Niebergall,  and 
P.  Wendland;  Tabingen,  1906  sqq.),  and  has  writ- 
ten: Der  Menschensohn  (Tabingen,  1896);  Catenen, 
MiUtUungen  iiber  ihre  Gesehichte  und  handsehrtftliche 
Ud)erlieferung  (1897);  ApoUinaris  von  Laodicea  und 
seine  Sdiule,  i.  (1904) ;  and  Das  LAen  des  heUigen 
Simeon  Styliles  (Leipsic,  1908). 

LIFE  AND  ADVENT  UNION.   See  Adventists,  4. 

LIFTINJB,  SYNOD  OF:  The  second  Austrasian 
synod  held  during  the  reign  of  Carloman,  appar- 
ently in  743,  at  Liftins,  in  the  sixteenth  century 
called  Lestines,  the  modem  Estinnes  (7  m.  s.e.  of 
Mons),  Belgium.  Many  things  occur  in  its  acts 
which  do  not  really  belong  there,  and  others  have 
scant  independent  value,  being  mere  confirmations 
of  the  first  Austrasian  synod  of  the  previous  year. 
It  marked  an  important  step  in  advance,  however, 
in  that  the  principles  of  church  government  already 
fixed  in  the  earlier  synod  were  now  more  accurately 
defined  as  an  adherence  to  primitive  usage.  Direct 
dependence  on  the  canons  of  the  earlier  Fathers 
(i.e.,  the  ecumenical  ooimcils)  was  expressly  postu- 
lated and  the  attitude  assumed  toward  unlawful 
marriages  prepared  the  way  for  the  entrance  of  the 
Roman  code  into  the  kingdom  of  the  Franks.  Still 
more  important  was  the  legal  aspect,  which  was 
equally  momentous  for  Church  and  State,  inasmuch 
as  it  involved  the  moot  question  of  the  enormous 
secularization  of  the  eighth  century.  They  seem  to 
have  begun  chiefly  with  Charles  Martel,  who  in- 
vested laymen  with  bishoprics.  After  the  death  of 
Charles  the  process  of  restitution  began  in  Austrasia, 
when  the  newly  consecrated  bishops  were  rein- 
stated in  the  possessions  of  the  Church,  although 
the  greater  portion  still  remained  in  the  hands  of 
laymen  as  precarias.  In  Neustria,  on  the  other 
hand,  those  who  held  ecclesiastical  estates  retained 
their  illegal  property  until  the  accession  of  Pepin, 
who  gradually  put  an  end  to  this  state  of  affairs, 
partly  by  actual  restitution  and  partly  by  the  sys- 
tem of  precarim  which  he  could  revoke  at  pleasure, 
even  though  secularization  was  still  practised  to 
some  extent  both  by  him  and  Carloman. 

The  provisions  of  742  and  743  are  important  as 
inaugurating  a  real,  though  limited,  restitution  &nd 
as  guaranteeing  a  regular  mode  of  procedure.  At 
the  synod  CJarloman  reached  an  agreement  with  the 
bishops.  Those  who  had  received  ecclesiastical 
fiefs  from  the  king  held  them  only  for  life,   the 


486 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Ziiebner 
Liffhtfoot 


bishoprics  reverting  to  the  Church  at  death,  while 
the  incumbents  were  required  to  pay  taxes  and  to 
keep  the  buildings  in  repair.  Even  in  case  of  re< 
version,  however,  the  king  could,  if  obliged  by 
necessity,  again  grant  a  bishopric  as  a  frecaria,  the 
clergy  being  ob%ed  in  the  great  majority  of  cases 
to  obey  the  royal  will.  Yet  the  synod  secured 
better  conditions  for  the  German  Chureh  than  pre- 
vailed  in  Neustria,  and  neither  the  bishops  nor  the 
pope  protested.  In  the  latter  years  of  his  life 
Pepin  promised  that  both  the  secular  and  regular 
clergy  should  retain  their  property,  although  this 
made  no  material  change,  the  fiefs  remaining  in  the 
same  hands  and  the  provisions  for  reversion  being 
disregarded.  Even  at  the  end  of  the  ninth  century 
a  great  part  of  the  property  of  the  Church  was  in 
the  hands  of  the  king  and  had  then  been  considered 
practically  his  own  for  a  hundred  years.  The  ap- 
plication of  secularized  ecdesiastioal  property,  as 
established  at  Liftins,  contributed  in  no  small 
measure  to  the  extension  of  the  system  of  benefices, 
and  this  synod  thus  became  important  in  its  bear- 
ing on  the  development  of  the  feudal  system  of  the 
Middle  Ages.  (A.  Hauck.) 

Bibuooraphy:    The  decisions  are  given  in  MOH.,   Leg., 

sectio  iL  1,  p.  26,  no.  11.     Consult:    G.  Waits,  DeuUdte 

Verfaanmoageackichie,  iii.  35  sqq.,  8  vols.,  Kiel.  1844-78; 

P.  Roth.  Oeachichie  dea  Benefinatioeaena,  Erlangen.  1850; 

idem,  FevdalitiU  und  Unterthanenverband,  Weimar,  1863; 

idem,  in  MUndirur  hiatariachea  Jakrbuch,  i  (1865),  275; 

Hefele,  ConcUienoeachichte,  iii  525;    Rettberg,  KD,  i.  306. 

LIGGINS,  JOHN:  Protestant  Episcopalian;  b. 
at  Nuneaton  (9  m.  n,e.  of  Coventry),  Warwickshire, 
England,  May  11,  1829.  He  was  educated  at  the 
Episcopal  Academy,  Philadelphia,  and  the  theo- 
logical seminary  at  Alexandria,  Va.  He  was  or- 
dered deacon  in  1855  and  ordained  priest  two  years 
later.  After  being  curate  at  the  Church  of  the  As- 
cension, New  York  City,  for  a  short  time  in  1855, 
he  went  to  China  as  a  missionary,  remaining  in  that 
country  imtil  1859.  He  then  spent  a  year  in  Japan, 
where  he  was  the  first  Protestant  missionary.  Be- 
cause of  impaired  health  he  returned  to  America  in 
1860,  and  has  since  devoted  his  enei^gies  to  literary 
work.  In  addition  to  contributing  to  The  Spirit 
of  Missiona  from  1862  to  1900  and  to  the  American 
Church  Sunday  School  Magazine  since  1885,  he  has 
written:  One  Thousand  Familiar  Phrases  in  Eng- 
lish and  Japanese  (Boston,  1860) ;  Missionary  Pic- 
ture Gallery  (1870);  OrierUal  Picture  Gallery  (1870); 
England's  Opium  Policy  (New  York,  1883);  Gems 
of  Illustration  from  the  Sermons  and  Writings  of  Rev. 
Dr.  Guthrie  (1885);  and  The  Great  Value  and  Suc- 
cess of  Foreign  Missions  (1889). 

LIGHTFOOT,  JOHN:  English  Biblical  critic 
and  Hebraist;  b.  at  Stoke-upon-Trent  (38  m.  n.  by 
w.  of  Birmingham),  StafToidshire,  Mar.  29,  1602; 
d.  at  Ely,  Cambridgeshire,  Dec.  6,  1676.  After 
completing  his  education  at  Christ's  Collie,  Cam- 
bridge, he  taught  at  Repton,  Derbyshire,  for  two 
years  and  then  took  orders.  Appointed  curate  of 
Norton-in-Hales,  Shropshire,  he  became  chaplain 
to  the  Hebraist  Sir  Rowland  Cotton,  who  urged 
him  to  study  Hebrew  and  other  Semitic  languages. 
He  accompanied  Cotton  when  he  removed  to  Lon- 
don, and  then  became  rector  of  Stone,  Staffordshire, 
for  about  two  years,  but  in  1628  changed  his  resi- 


dence to  Homsey,  Middlesex,  in  order  to  be  able 
to  consult  the  rabbinical  collections  at  Sion  Col- 
lege, London.  During  his  residence  at  Homsey 
he  wrote  his  first  work,  dedicated  to  Cotton  and 
entitled  Erubhin,  or  Miscellanies^  Christian  and 
Judaicalf  penned  for  Recreation  at  vacant  Hours  (Lon- 
don, 1629).  In  the  following  year  he  was  pre- 
sented to  the  rectory  of  Ashley,  Staffordshire,  which 
he  held  twelve  years,  after  which  he  settled  in  Lon- 
don and  became  rector  of  St.  Bartholomew's.  Pres- 
byterian in  his  sympathies,  he  took  the  parliament 
tary  side  in  the  Civil  War  and  was  a  member  of  the 
Westminster  Assembly.  After  a  year  at  St.  Bar- 
tholomew's, he  was  appointed  rector  of  Great  Mun- 
den,  Hertfordshire,  and  held  it  for  the  remainder 
of  his  life.  In  1650  he  was  chosen  master  of  St. 
CJatharine  Hall,  Cambridge,  and  four  years  later 
became  vice-chancellor.  He  again  sided  with  the 
Presbyterians  in  the  Savoy  Conference  of  1661,  but 
accepted  the  Act  of  Uniformity  in  the  following 
year.  In  1667  he  was  appointed  a  prebendary  at 
Ely.  His  Oriental  library  was  bequeathed  to  Har- 
vard College,  but  was  burned  in  1769. 

Lightfoot  was  a  prolific  writer  and  is  noteworthy 
as  the  first  Christian  scholar  to  call  attention  to  the 
importance  of  the  Talmud.  His  chief  works,  in  ad- 
dition to  the  one  already  mentioned,  are  as  follows: 
A  Few  and  New  Observations  on  the  Book  of  Genesis 
(London,  1642);  A  Handful  of  Gleanings  out  of  the 
Book  of  Exodus  (1643) ;  Harmony  of  the  Four  Evanr 
gelists  among  themselves  and  with  the  Old  Testament 
(3  vols.,  1644-50);  Harmony,  Chronicle,  and  Order 
of  the  Old  Testament  (1647);  The  Temple  Service  as 
it  stood  in  the  Days  of  our  Saviour  (1649) ;  The  Tem^ 
pUf  especially  as  it  stood  in  the  Days  of  our  Saviour 
(1650);  Harmony,  Chronicle,  and  Order  of  the  New 
Testament  (1655);  and  the  work  which  has  done 
most  to  preserve  his  fame,  Hora  Hdiraicas  et 
TalmudiccB  (6  vols.,  Cambridge  and  London,  1658- 
1678).  The  first  edition  of  his  collected  works, 
those  originally  in  Latin  translated  into  English, 
was  edited  by  G.  Bright  and  J.  Strype,  2  vols. 
London,  1684;  and  a  Latin  edition,  including  those 
at  first  written  in  English,  was  prepared  by  J. 
Texellius,  2  vols.,  Rotterdam,  1686.  A  complete 
edition  of  his  writings  was  made  by  J.  R.  Pitman, 
13  vols.,  London,  1822-25.  It  should  also  be  noted 
that  Lightfoot  revised  the  Samaritan  version  of  the 
Pentateuch  for  Walton's  Polyglot  Bible. 

Biblioorapht:  A  Life  ia  prefixed  to  the  Worka,  ed.  of  1684, 
and  one  may  be  fotind  in  vol.  i.  of  the  Pitman  edition; 
D.  M.  Welton,  John  Lightfoot,  the  Engliah  Hebraist,  Lon- 
don, 1878.  Consult  further:  W.  M.  Hetherington,  His- 
tory of  the  Weatminater  Aaaemhly  of  Divinee,  Bklinburgh, 
1878;  A.  F.  Mitchell,  The  Weatminater  AaaenMy;  Ua  His- 
tory and  Standards,  London,  1883;   DNB,  xxxiii  229-231. 

LIGHTFOOT,  JOSEPH  BARBER:  English  ec- 
clesiastic and  scholar;  b.  at  Liverpool  Apr.  13, 
1828;  d.  at  Bournemouth  (6  m.  s.w.  of  Christ- 
church),  Hampshire,  Dec.  21,  1889.  He  was  the 
son  of  an  accountant,  and  entered  Trinity  College, 
Cambridge,  in  1847.  In  1849  he  became  scholar 
of  Trinity;  1861,  B.A.,  senior  classic,  and  chan- 
cellor's medalist;  in  1852,  fellow  of  Trinity;  1854 
M.A.,  and  was  ordained  deacon;  1854,  was  one  of 
the  founders  of  the  Journal  of  Classical  and  Sacred 
Philology;    1857,  tutor  of  Trinity;    1858,  was  or- 


i^htfoot 


lAgnoxi 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


486 


dained  presbjrter,  and  became  select  preacher  in 
Cambridge;  in  1861,  Hubean  professor  of  divinity  at 
Cambridge,  and  chaplain  to  the  prince  consort;  1862, 
was  appointed  examining  chaplain  to  Bishop  Tait  of 
London,  and  honorary  chaplain  in  ordinary  to  the 
queen;  1866  and  1869-79,  «>-rfi.fnining  chaplain  to 
Tait,  who  had  now  become  archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury. From  July,  1870,  to  Nov.,  1880,  he  acted  as 
one  of  the  revisers  of  the  English  New  Testament; 
from  1871  to  1879  was  canon  of  St.  Paul's,  and  in 

1874  and   1875   select    preacher  at  Oxford.    In 

1875  he  gave  up  the  Hulsean  professorship  and 
became  Lady  MJaigaret  professor  of  divinity  at 
Cambridge,  with  which  was  combined  the  rectory 
of  Terrington  St.  Clement's,  Norfolk;  in  1875  he  was 
made  deputy  clerk  of  the  closet  to  the  queen.  On 
Apr.  25, 1879,  he  was  consecrated  bishop  of  Durham. 

Lightfoot  was  shy  and  reserved,  yet  was  very 
successful  as  a  professor.  The  students  flocked  to 
his  lectures  and  he  held  them  by  his  rich  thoughts, 
his  wide  knowledge,  and  his  sympathetic  and  in- 
spiring style  of  address.  As  a  preacher  in  St. 
Paul's  the  same  characteristics  secured  him  a  hear- 
ing. The  fact  is  moreover  not  to  be  overlooked, 
that  his  four  volumes  of  sermons  are  as  good  when 
read  as  when  heard.  In  1870  he  showed  his  liking 
for  church  history  by  foimding  three  scholarships,  on 
the  subject  "  in  itself  and  in  connection  with  general 
history."  As  bishop  he  gathered  six  or  eight  students 
at  a  time  around  him  in  his  palace  at  Bishop  Auck- 
land, where  the  chaplains  instructed  them.  He  made 
it  his  aim  to  preach  in  every  church  in  his  diocese. 

His  work  as  canon  of  St.  Paul's  and  his  conneo- 
tion  with  Tait  had  prepared  him  for  the  charge  of 
a  diocese,  and  Durham  was  a  very  important  one. 
He  did  all  he  could  to  prepare  for  the  long-needed 
division  of  the  diocese,  and  the  necessary  funds 
were  at  length  secured  for  the  foundation  of  the 
see  of  Newcastle;  J.  W.  Pease,  a  Quaker,  made  the 
munificent  gift  of  the  estate  of  Benwell  Tower  as  a 
residence  for  the  new  bishop.  Then  Lightfoot  set 
to  work  to  build  the  churches  still  needed  in  his 
diocese.  At  a  meeting  at  Durham  he  declared  that 
twenty-five  churches  and  mission-rooms  were 
needed  and  he  subscribed  a  large  sum  himself; 
nearly  £30,000  were  subscribed  in  that  meeting, 
and  in  five  years  twenty-five  chiurches  or  mission 
chapels  were  built  or  building.  As  a  thank-offer- 
ing after  the  first  seven  years  of  his  episcopate,  he 
himself  foimded  a  church  in  the  town  of  Simder- 
land.  He  furthered  strongly  the  creation  of  a 
diocesan  fund  to  unite  all  the  foundations  for 
church  purposes  in  the  diocese,  for  churches,  schools, 
insurance,  pensions  for  clergymen,  and  the  like;  his 
own  share  in  it  was  £500  a  year,  and  besides  he 
left  the  greater  part  of  his  property  to  it.  He  in- 
creased the  number  of  the  rural  deans,  and  ap- 
pointed a  second  archdeacon  in  1882.  When  at 
Terrington  he  had  in  1878  and'  1879  spent  £2,140 
to  renew  the  chancel  of  the  church,  and  at  Durham 
he  spent  much  money  in  beautifying  the  episcopal 
palace.  He  furthered  in  every  way  the  temperance 
and  White  Cross  movements. 

In  the  year  1865  his  commentary  on  Galatians 
came  out  (10th  ed.,  London,  1892).  Philippians 
came  out  in  1868  (10th  ed.,  1891),  and  Oolossians 


and  Philemon  1875  (dd  ed.,  1890).  These  volumes 
contained  the  Greek  text,  a  very  full  conmientary, 
and  important  special  essays.  His  Clement  of 
Rome  appeared  in  1869,  an  appendix  with  the  new 
matter  from  Bryennios  in  1877  (again  in  1890  in 
two  volumes).  The  AposUdie  FcUkers  came  out 
in  two  parts  (Part  I.,  vols,  i.,  ii.;  Part  II.,  vols,  i.- 
iii.,  1885-1890).  As  a  reviser  he  wrote  A  Fresh 
Revision  of  the  New  Testament,  1871  (2d  ed.,  1872, 
New  York,  1873,  3d  ed.,  with  new  appendix,  Lon- 
on,  1891).  He  was  against  a  half-heatrted  revision 
and  opposed  vigorously  the  use  of  the  yoimger 
Greek  text.  His  essays  against  Cassels'  Super- 
nattiral  Religion  (see  Scpsrnaturai.  Rsuoion)  ap- 
peared as  a  book  in  1889.  Five  volimies  of  ser- 
mons, essays  and  notes  have  been  published  since 
his  death.  Caspar  Ren£  Greoort. 

Bibuoorapbt:  BUkop  lAq^oai  (uionymouB),  London. 
1804:  Z>^B.  zxziu.  232-240;  J.  8.  Stone,  in  CKvr<^  tU- 
vvsw,  Ixiii.  173  iqq.;  F.  W.  Fturar.  in  Contemporary  Re- 
view, IviL  170  aqq.,  nprodueed  in  Magazine  of  Chri&tian 
Literature,  I  300;  W.  Sanday,  in  Bnglieh  Hietarieal  Re- 
view, T.  200  0qq. 

LIGHTS,  USE  OF,  IN  WORSHIP:  From  very 
early  times  during  service  the  altar  has  been  lighted, 
even  in  day-time,  at  first  generally  by  lamps,  later 
by  candles.  In  the  fourth  century  the  custom  of 
giving  distinction  to  religious  fimctions  by  means 
of  illiunination  appears  to  have  been  general.  The 
reading  of  the  Gospels,  baptism,  the  celebration  of 
the  Lord's  Supper,  festivals  such  as  Easter  and  Pen- 
tecost, the  consecration  of  churches,  the  installa- 
tion of  bishops,  etc.,  gave  regular  or  extraordinary 
occasion  therefor.  The  vigils  especially  offered  a 
favorable  opportunity.  Indeed,  even  at  an  early 
period,  the  institution  of  the  "  eternal  light "  ap- 
pears, indicating  a  still  earlier  date  for  the  origin 
of  the  custom.  The  practical  requirements  of  the 
early  morning  services,  the  primitive  custom  c^ 
celebrating  the  Eucharist  in  the  evening,  the  em- 
ployment of  lamps  in  the  ceremonies  at  the  aepul- 
chers  in  the  catacombs,  the  religious  significance 
given  to  light  in  the  Bible  and  the  example  of  the 
seven-branched  candlestick  rendered  Ught  a  con- 
stituent of  the  liturgy  as  early  as  the  third  century. 
At  first  the  altar  was  surrounded  by  candlesticks 
and  hanging  lamps;  not  until  the  twelfth  century 
were  the  candlestidcs  placed  upon  the  altar  itself. 
There  were  in  the  Roman  churches  at  an  early 
period  candlesticks  of  varied  forms  and  of  great 
material  and  artistic  value.  Paulus  Silentiarius 
(ed.  Becker,  Bonn,  1837)  describes  the  brilliant 
lighting  of  the  St.  Sophia  in  the  time  of  Justinian. 
At  the  services  for  the  dead  also  the  use  of  lighu 
was  introduced  at  an  early  period. 

In  the  medieval  church  this  custom  increased 
and  became  more  definite,  especially  in  the  placing 
of  candles  before  pictures  and  reliquaries,  a  custom 
which  had  its  beginnings  in  Christian  antiquity;  in 
the  Easter  candles,  in  the  so-called  Tenebne  lights 
diuring  Holy  Week,  and  in  the  death  lamps.  The 
festival  of  Candlemas  was  created  especially  for  the 
consecration  of  candles. 

The  lamps  found  in  so  great  numbers  in  the 
catacombs  were  for  private  use;  they  are  almost 
all  of  clay  and  were  given  an  elongated  form  from 


487 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Liffhtfoot 
lAguari 


the  fourth  century  on.  The  base  is  ornamented 
in  relief,  both  of  a  secular  and  religious  character 
(V.  Schultze,  ArchOologie  der  aUchrisUichen  Kunsi, 
pp.  292  sqq.,  Munich,  1895;  M.  Bauer,  Der  BH- 
denchmuck  JHihchrisUieher  Tkonlampen,  Greifs- 
wald,  1907).  On  the  other  hand  the  bronze  lamps, 
preserved  from  Christian  antiquity  and  distin- 
guished by  more  graceful  forms  and  a  more  artistic 
conception,  must,  in  part,  have  served  for  ecclesi- 
astical purposes.  A  complete  change  shows  itself 
in  the  Middle  Ages;  lamps  were  not  indeed  entirely 
abandoned,  but  candlesticks,  brackets,  and  can- 
delabra took  their  place.  The  forms  reflected  the 
influence  of  Roman  and  Gothic  art.  The  candle- 
sticks with  several,  sometimes  even  with  seven, 
branches  are  more  impressive.  For  a  brighter 
illumination  of  churches  chandeliers  were  used  at 
an  early  period.  Prominent  examples  of  this  style 
are  found  in  Hildesheim,  Combourg,  Aix-k^ha- 
pelle,  and  other  places.  In  the  Gothic  period  the 
candelabra  and  chandeliers  became  more  orna- 
mental and  more  subject  to  the  influence  of  archi- 
tectural form;  the  Renaissance  secularized  the 
traditional  forms.  At  the  present  day,  in  sympathy 
with  the  reaction  in  favor  of  medieval  architecture, 
there  is  a  return  to  the  older  designs.  The  Re- 
formed Churches,  from  the  beginning,  rejected  the 
use  of  altar-lights  as  papistical,  while  the  Lutheran 
Church  maintained  the  custom  as  it  was. 

Victor  Schultze. 
Bibuographt:  Bingham,  OriginsM,  VIIL,  vi.  21,  XI.,  iv. 
14;  XIL,  iv.  4:  XVI.,  iv.  17;  XX.,  viii  6;  XXIII.,  u.  6; 
F.  Bock,  Der  Kronlmehter  det  Kaiaert  Friedrich  Bar- 
baro99a^  Leipric,  1864;  W.  Mtlhlbauer,  Oeachichle  und 
Bedeutufiff  der  WaehaiidUer  hei  den  kirchliehen  FunkUonen^ 
Augsburg,  1874;  C.  Cahier.  Nouoeaux  mHangee  d'arehS- 
olooie,  pp.  188-228.  PariB.  1875;  V.  Schultse.  Die  KaUt- 
komhen^  pp.  488  aqq.,  Leipnc,  1882;  H.  Otte.  Handlnteh 
der  kirihUehen  KunatarchOoloffie,  i.  166  sqq.,  Leipsio,  1883; 
C.  Rohault  de  Fleury,  La  Mesee,  vi.  1-58,  8  vols.,  Paris, 
1883-89;  V.  Thalhofer,  Handhuch  der  katholiechen  LUta-' 
gik,  I  666  sqq.,  Freiburg.  1887;  8.  Beissel,  Kunat  und 
LUurgie  in  Italien,  pp.  247  sqq..  Freiburg,  1899;  H.  Theilar, 
The  Candle  ae  a  Svmbol  and  Sacramental  in  the  Cathdic 
Chwch,  New  York.  1909;  DC  A,  u.  993-998.  1564. 

LIGUORI,  ll"gQ-6'rl,  ALFONSO  MARIA  DI,  AliD 
THE  REDEMPTORIST  ORDER. 

I.  Alfonso  Mkria  di  Liguori. 
Early  Life  (S  1). 

Foundation  of  the  Redemptorist  Order  (S  2). 
Episcopate  and  Later  Life  (S3). 
Moral,  Pastoral,  and  Ascetic  Works  (S  4). 
Dogmatic,  Apologetic,  and  Homiletic  Works  (|  5). 
II.  The  Redemptorist  Order. 
Early  History  ($1). 
Spread  in  Northern  Europe  (S  2). 
Present  Status  (}  3). 
Redemptorists  in  America  (S  4). 

L    Alfonso  Maria  di  Liguori.    Alfonso  Maria  di 

Liguori,  commonly  known  as  St.  Alphonsus,  the 

most  influential  Roman  Catholic  moralist  of  the 

eighteenth   century,    was   bom   at   Marianella,   a 

suburb  of  Naples,  Sept.  27,  1,696,  and  died  near 

Nooera  (8  m.  n.w.  of  Salerno)  Aug.  1,  1787.    The 

third  son  of  well-bom  and  pious  pa- 

X.  Eoriy     rents,  he  received  an  excellent  educa- 

Life.        tion  at  the  hands  of  the  Oratorians. 

His  progress  in  philosophical  and  legal 

studies  was  such  that  he  took  his  doctor's  degree 

at  the  age  of  seventeen,  and  began  to  practise  law 


with  every  prospect  of  a  brilliant  career;  but  he 
deserted  it  in  1723  to  prepare  for  the  priesthood, 
which  he  received  on  Dec.  21,  1726,  after  a  year 
spent  in  the  Neapolitan  house  of  the  Propaganda. 
In  1729  he  entered  the  Chinese  College  under  the 
same  direction,  and  devoted  himself  to  the  life  of  a 
missioner  in  southern  Italy,  founding  pious  associ- 
ations to  be  directed  by  catechists  appointed 
by  himself.  This  part  of  his  life  was  marked 
by  visions  and  revelations,  one  of  which,  through 
a  mm  at  Scala  near  Amalfi,  directed  him  not 
to  retum  to  Naples,  but  to  remain  where  he  was 
for  the  purpose  of  founding  a  new  order  of  mis- 
sion-priests in  aid  of  neglected  souls.  In  pursuance 
of  this  admonition  he  proceeded  (Nov.  9,  1732) 
to  found  the  Congregation  of  the  Most  Holy 
Redeemer. 

The  new  order  was  confined  to  the  small  town 
of  Scala  for  two  years,  and  its  very  existence  was 
threatened  by  attacks  from  various  quarters.  The 
Propaganda  expelled  Liguori  as  a  rest- 
2.  Founda-  less  innovator,  and  the  archbishop  of 
tion  of  the  Naples  spoke  imfavorably  of  the  new 
Redempto-  undertaking.  Only  two  of  Liguori's 
rist  Order,  original  companions  remained  stead- 
fast; but  he  went  forward  undiscour- 
aged,  and  soon  was  able  to  establish  a  second  house 
at  Villa  Schiavi  in  the  diocese  of  Cajazzo,  and  a 
third  (1735)  at  Ciorani  in  that  of  Salemo.  The 
vows  were  first  solenmly  taken  on  July  21,  1742, 
when  Liguori  was  unanimously  elected  superior* 
general  for  life.  Papal  confirmation  was  given  by 
Benedict  XIV.  (Feb.  25,  1749),  though  the  Nea- 
politan government  refused  to  accept  the  brief. 
The  order  made  rapid  progress,  especially  in  the 
kingdom  of  the  Two  Sicilies,  where  the  founder 
was  unwearied  in  missionary  labors,  his  influence 
being  seen  not  only  in  the  foundation  of  new  houses, 
but  also  in  the  winning  of  various  classes  of  the 
community — ^the  clergy,  secular  and  regular,  the 
nobility,  the  laboring  classes,  and  even  the  prison- 
ers in  the  jails — ^to  participation  in  his  spiritual 
exercises.  He  won  his  power  over  them  partly  by 
his  ardent  devotion  and  by  the  skilful  tactics  em- 
ployed in  his  missions,  and  partly  by  mild  treat- 
ment of  penitents  in  the  confessional,  together  with 
the  habit  of  encouraging  them  to  frequent  recep- 
tion of  the  Sacrament,  both  of  which  points  were 
contrary  to  the  rigorist  practise  of  that  part  of  the 
Italian  clergy  which  was  inclined  to  Jansenistic 
views. 

In  1762,  much  against  his  will,  Liguori  was  named 
by  Pope  Clement  XIII.  to  the  bishopric  of  Sant' 
Agata  de'  Goti.    He  turned  over  the  direction  of 
his  congregation  to  a  vicar-general,  Andrea  Villani, 
and  applied  his  zeal  to  the  care  of  his 
3-  Episco-  diocese,  using  every  means  to  promote 
pate  and    piety  and  education  within  it  for  thir- 
Later  Life,  teen  years,  until,  on  the  ground  of  fail- 
ing health,  Pius  VI.  relieved  him  of 
the  burden  of  the  episcopate  in  1775,  after  which  he 
lived  in  ascetic  retirement  and  poverty,  refusing  his 
episcopal  pension,  in  the  house  of  his  order  at  San 
Michele  de'  Pagani  near  Nocera.    His  later  years 
were  troubled  by  a  division  in  his  order  arising  from 
the  discord  between  the  liberal  Neapolitan  govern- 


lint] 


ith 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


MB 


ment  and  Piiu  VI.,  and  he  did  not  live  to  see  the  re- 
union of  the  two  branches  into  which  it  spht.  Nine 
years  after  his  death  the  title  of  '*  Venerable  "  was 
conferred  upon  him  by  Pius  VI.;  he  was  beatified 
by  Pius  VII.  in  1816,  and  canonized  in  1839  by 
Gregory  XVI.;  while  Pius  IX.  added  his  name  to 
those  of  the  doctors  of  the  Church  in  1871,  and  his 
works  were  specially  oonmiended  by  Leo  XIII.  in 
a  brief  of  Aug.  28,  1879.  It  is  easy  to  see  why 
Liguori's  teaching  has  been  so  acceptable  to  mod- 
em ultramontanism:  the  "  baming  and  piety  " 
commended  in  these  papal  utterances  are  closely 
allied  to  the  Jesuit  type  of  devotional  literature 
and  probabilist  ethics,  and  he  takes  a  strong  stand 
in  favor  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Immaculate  Con- 
ception and  papal  infallibility.  His  works  are 
nevertheless  characterized,  as  might  be  expected 
from  the  rapidity  of  their  production,  by  gross 
carelessness  and  inaccuracy  in  citations,  as  well  as 
by  unthinking  acceptance  of  traditional  errors  and 
superstitions,  as  has  been  admitted  by  strict  Ro- 
man Catholic  critics  in  both  the  eighteenth  and  the 
nineteenth  centuries. 

The  theological  works  of  Liguori  may  be  divided 
into  four  principal  groups:    moral;    pastoral  and 
ascetic;   dogmatic  and  apologetic;   and  homiletic. 
The  principal  work  of  the  first  class  appeared  first 
as  a  new  edition  of  H.  Busenbaum's  Medulla  theo- 
logia  moralia,  with  notes  by  Liguori 
4.  Moral,    (Naples,  1748);  the  second  edition,  re- 
Pastoral,    vised  and  greatly  enlarged   (2  vols., 
and  Ascetic  1753-55),  bears  his  name  as  author — 
Works.      Theologia  moralis,  cancinnata  a  R.  P. 
Alphanao  de  Ligorio  .  .  .  per  appetir- 
dices  in  Medullam  R,  P,  H.  Busenbaum.     Nine  edi- 
tions in  all  appeared  during  Liguori 's  life,  and  the 
nineteenth  century  saw  a  large  number  of  reprints, 
condensations,   translations,  etc.,  so  that  in  one 
form  or  another  the  work  is  used  as  the  basis  of 
moral  instruction  in  many  Roman  Catholic  insti- 
tutions.    Other  works  in  moral  theology  were  the 
practical  instructions  for  confessors,  published  first 
in  Italian,   Istnmone  e  pratica  per  un  confessore 
(3  vols.,  Naples,  1757),  and  then  in  Latin,  Homo 
apostolicua,    instrucitia    ad    audiendas    confessionea 
(Bassano,    1759);    and  certain  controversial  trea- 
tises in  defense  of  his  system,  which  until  1762  was 
simple  probabilism,  later  developing  into  equiprob- 
abilism  (see  Probabiusm). 

To  the  class  of  pastoral  and  ascetic  theology  be- 
long, besides  the  Homo  apoatolicus,  which  may  be 
classed  under  this  head,  the  Insiractio  ordinan- 
dorum  (Naples,  1758);  Inslitutto  caiechistica  (Bas- 
sano, 1768) ;  La  vera  «/xwo  di  Gesu  Crista ,  for  nuns 
(Venice,  1781);  and  a  number  of  small  vernacular 
tractates  on  devotion  to  the  Sacred  Hearts  of 
Jesus  and  Mary,  visits  to  the  Blessed  Sacrament, 
the  Way  of  the  Cross,  etc.  The  best-known  work 
of  this  class,  much  admired  by  Liguori's  adherents 
and  sharply  attacked  from  the  other  side,  is  Le 
Glorie  di  Maria  (2  vols.,  Naples,  1750),  in  which  he 
follows  the  Jesuit  Pepe  in  teaching  what  amoimts 
to  the  thesis  that  the  help  of  Mary  is  necessary  to 
salvation,  and  supports  it  by  a  vast  mass  of  un- 
critically accepted  stories. 
The  earliest  of  the  dogmatic  and  apologetic  wri- 


tings of  Liguori  was  the  Breve  dissertazione  contro 
gli  errori  dei  modenn  incredulif  written  in  1756  and 
directed  against  the  pantheism  of  Spinoza  and  the 
philosophy  of  Berkeley,  Leibnitz,  Wolf, 
5.  Dogmat-  etc.    A  more  extensive  work  along  the 
ic,  Apolo-   same  lines  appeared  a  year  later  imder 
getic,  and   the  title  Eviderua  della  fede,  ossia  ver- 
Homiletic    HA  della  fede.    In  1767  he  published  a 
Worki.      new  edition  of  this  in  three  books,  in 
which  besides  materialism  and  English 
deism  the  French  philosophers  Helvetius  and  Vol- 
taire were  attacked,  and  in  1772  a  fourth  book  was 
added  against  the  deists.    At  short  intervals  ap- 
peared another  series  of  polemical  works:  a  Latin 
treatise  (under  the  pseudonym  Honorius  de  Honorio) 
against  N.  von  Hontheim,  VindicicB  pro  suprema 
Romani  pontifieis  potestate  contra  Justinum  Fdjron^ 
ium  (Naples,   1768),  defending  not  only  the  pri- 
macy but  the  infallibility  of  the  pope;  Opera  dtmh- 
maiica  contra  gli  eretici  prdesi  riformatori  (1769),  a 
defense  of  the  dogmatic  decrees  of  the  Council  of 
Trent;    the  Trionfo  della  chiesa  (3  vob.,  1772),  a 
history  and  refutation  of  heresies;  and  a  work  com- 
mending unity  of  religious  belief  in  nations,  en- 
forced if  necessary  by  their  rulers,  with  special 
praise  of  the  example  of  Louis  XIV.,  La  Fedelta 
de*  vassalli  verso  Dio  li  rende  fedeli  anche  al  loro 
principe  (1777). 

As  a  homilist  Liguori  began  the  publication  of 
sermons  for  every  Sunday  and  greater  festival,  in 
Italian,  in  1769,  and  extended  the  series  to  four 
volumes,  besides  other  smaller  collections.  As  a 
religious  poet  and  composer  Liguori  enjoyed  some 
reputation.  His  "  Recitative  and  Duet  between 
the  Soul  and  Jesus  Christ "  and  '^  Passion  Can- 
tata "  have  recently  been  published,  the  former  in 
Stimmen  aus  MariorLaach,  xlix.  441,  and  the  latter 
at  Paris  in  1900. 

IL  The  Redemptorist  Order.  The  ascetic  prac- 
tises originally  prescribed  by  Liguori  for  his  fol- 
lowers were  partially  mitigated  in  the  constitutions 
drawn  up  by  him  after  1742,  but  not  a  little  of  the 
primitive  rigor  remained  in  force.  In  common  with 
the  Jesuit  order,  from  whom  he  borrowed  a  num- 
ber of  points,  he  prescribed  a  fourth  vow  in  addition 
to  the  usual  ones  of  poverty,  chastity,  and  obedi- 
ence— ^not  to  accept  any  dignity  or  ben- 
I.  Early  efice  outside  of  the  congregation  ex- 
History,  cept  by  the  express  command  of  the 
pope  or  the  superior-general,  and  to 
remain  in  the  congregation  until  death  unless  dis- 
pensed by  the  pope  himself.  The  unconditional 
obedience  to  the  infallible  pope  here  expressed  and 
taught  in  Liguori 's  writings  led  to  difficulty  in  the 
later  years  of  his  life  and  brought  about  the  division 
already  alluded  to.  The  Neapolitan  branch  was 
required  by  the  government  to  submit  to  certain 
changes  in  the  rule.  No  overt  resistance  was  made, 
except  by  a  few  fathers  who  left  their  house  at 
Illicetto  and  migrated  to  the  Papal  States.  Pope 
Pius  VI.,  however,  required  strict  adherence  to  the 
statutes,  and  went  so  far  as  to  declare  the  Neapoli- 
tan branch  excluded  from  the  congregation  and  de- 
prived of  its  privileges,  while  Liguori  himself  was 
sentenced  to  deposition  from  his  office  as  superior 
and  to  expulsion  from  the  order.    This  harsh  decision 


489 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


th 


was  obeyed  in  the  Papal  States  and  Sicily,  while  most 
of  the  Neapolitan  members  proved  recalcitrant. 
Liguori  himself  yielded  meekly  and  counseled  obe- 
dience; but  the  breach  was  not  healed  until  an 
accommodation  was  reached  between  Rome  and 
Naples  three  years  after  the  founder's  death.  In 
the  autimm  of  1790  the  Neapolitan  government  for 
the  first  time  recognized  the  bull  of  Benedict  XIV. 
confirming  the  statutes,  and  in  the  next  year  PiuB 
VI.  sanctioned  the  reunion  of  the  order. 

Before  Liguori's  death,  the  extension  of  the  con- 
gregation beyond  the  limits  of  central  and  south- 
em  Italy  was  planned  out,  and  carried  into  effect 

under  the  auspices  of  Clemens  Maria 

a.  Spread    Hoffbauer,    who  is  justly  considered 

in  IVortfaem  as  the  second  founder  of  the  order. 

Eoxope.     He  was  bom  at  Tasswitz  in  Moravia 

Dec.  26, 1751,  and  was  at  first  a  baker, 
but  got  a  taste  for  theology  and  the  beginning  of  his 
education  at  the  Premonstratensian  house  of  Bruck 
where  he  was  employed,  and  after  two  years  among 
the  hermits  of  MUhlfrauen  and  a  period  of  com- 
bined work  at  his  trade  and  study  in  Vienna  went 
to  Rome,  where,  with  two  companions,  he  joined 
the  Redemptorists  in  1782.  In  1785,  having  been 
ordained  priest,  he  was  sent  to  Vienna  to  found  a 
house  there,  but  on  account  of  the  Emperor  Jo- 
seph's hostility  went  to  Warsaw,  where  the  congre- 
gation soon  had  two  churches  and  before  the  end 
of  the  century  twenty-five  members.  The  work 
spread,  and  Hoffbauer  was  named  vicar-general  for 
Germany  and  Poland  in  1792;  but  the  Napoleonic 
wars  destroyed  what  had  been  done,  and  Hoff- 
bauer was  obliged  to  go  to  Vienna,  where  at  the 
time  of  the  Congress  he  was  the  rallying-point  of 
the  reviving  Catholicism,  and  contributed  largely 
to  keeping  it  Roman  in  opposition  to  the  attempt 
to  found  an  independent  German  Church.  He 
died  Mar.  15,  1820,  and  in  the  same  year  the  order 
established  a  college  and  obtained  possession  of  a 
church  in  Vienna  under  the  guidance  of  Joseph 
Constantin  Passerat,  a  Frenchman,  Hoffbauer's 
most  gifted  disciple.  The  order  continued  to  grow 
in  Austria,  and  besides  numerous  houses  for  men 
began  to  establish  some  for  women.  The  female 
branch  is  traced  back  to  the  early  years  of  Liguori's 
ministry  at  Scala  (see  above),  where  the  commu- 
nity imder  his  guidance  obtained  papal  confirma- 
tion in  1750;  and  he  had  foimded  a  second  house 
in  1766  in  his  see  city  of  Sant'  Agata.  The  Re- 
dcmptorist  nuns  increased  in  number  under  Pas- 
serat's  care  and  spread  to  Belgium,  Holland,  and 
France.  The  male  order  gained  a  rapid  extension 
in  the  German  states,  especially  in  Bavaria,  where 
it  took  the  place  of  the  Jesuits  who  had  been  ex- 
pelled. It  spread  also  to  Switzerland,  Holland, 
Belgiiun,  France,  England,  and  the  United  States. 
Their  resemblance  to  the  Jesuits,  which  in  spite  of 
some  fundamental  distinctions  is  an  obvious  one  as 
to  purpose  and  methods,  brought  about  the  ex- 
clusion of  the  Redemptorists  from  Germany  dur- 
ing the  Culturkampf  from  1873  to  1894,  when,  on 
the  motion  of  the  Bavarian  government,  made 
after  consulting  the  aged  Ddllinger,  who  declared 
that  there  was  no  essential  connection  between 
the  two,  and  that  the  reasons  which  made  the 


Jesuits  dangerous  to  the  State  did  not  exist  in 
the  case  of  the  younger  order,  the  prohibition  was 
removed.  No  other  important  obstacle  to  their 
growth  came  up  in  the  latter  half  of  the  nineteenth 
century. 

«  The  congregation  now  numbers  about  150  houses, 
divided  into  twelve  provinces — ^three  in  Italy  (Ro- 
man, Neapolitan,  Sicilian);   two  Ger- 

3.  Present  man  (northern  or  Rhenish- Westphalian 
Status,  and  southem  or  Bavarian,  the  former 
with  colonies  in  South  America) ;  one 
Austrian;  one  Belgian  (with  colonies  in  Canada  and 
the  West  Indies);  one  Dutch  (with  a  colony  in 
Surinam);  one  French,  including  Spain  and  the 
western  states  of  South  America;  one  English,  in- 
cluding Scotland,  Ireland,  and  Australia;  and  two 
North  American  (Baltimore  and  St.  Louis).  The 
Paulist  Fathers  (see  Paul  the  Apostle,  Congre- 
QATiON  of)  may  be  considered  an  offshoot  of  the 
Redemptorists,  the  separate  organization  (estab- 
lished in  1858)  having  been  intended  to  meet  more 
closely  special  American  conditions. 

(O.  ZOCKLBRf.) 

The  first  Redemptorist  convent  in  the  United 
States  was  established  in  Detroit  in  1832,  and  such 
has  been  the  development  of  the  order  that  at 
present  (1909)  it  comprises  two  independent  prov- 
inces, viz.,  that  of  Baltimore  and  that  of  St.  Louis. 
There  are  38  convents  and  2  colleges  besides  2 
novitiates  and  2  houses  of  study.    The 
4.  Redemp-  total  number  of  the  fathers  is  338,  of 
torists  in    the  professed  students  and  novices  111, 
America,    lay  brothers  124,  lay  novices  and  pos- 
tulants 51.    The  Redemptorists  have 
convents  in  most  of  the  large  cities,  and,  although 
parishes  are  generally  conducted  in  connection  with 
these  houses,  the  fathers  make  a  specialty  of  preach- 
ing-missions or  retreats  in  parbhes  throughout  the 
country.    There    are    two    vice-provinces    of   the 
order  in  the  Dominion  of  Canada,  viz.,  one  at- 
tached to  the  Belgian  province,  the  other  to  that 
of  Baltimore;    convents  9,  fathers  68,  novices  21, 
lay  brothers  52. 

Bibliography:  Collections  of  the  Works  in  Italian  have 
been  published:  Monia.  1819;  Venice,  1830;  Naples, 
1840;  and  3  vols,  at  Turin,  1887  sqq.;  in  French  at  Tour- 
nai.  1895  sqq.;  in  Genxian  in  42  vols..  Regensburg,  1842- 
1847;  and  in  English  in  22  vols.,  at  New  York.  1887-^ 
(vols.  zxiii.-xxiv.  contain  the  Lt/s).  A  very  complete 
collection  of  the  "  Letters  "  was  nuule  at  Rome,  1887 
sqq.  On  the  life  of  Liguori  consult  the  works  by  K. 
Dilgstrom,  2  vols..  Regensburg.  1887  (the  best);  A.  M. 
Tannoja,  3  vols.,  Naples,  1798-1802  (by  a  scholar  of 
Liguori);  Villecourt.  4  vols.,  Toumai,  1813;  P.  V.  A. 
Gratini,  Rome,  1815;  Jeancard,  Louvain,  1829;  Ris- 
poli,  Naples,  1839;  M.  A.  Hugues,  MOnster.  1857;  Sain- 
tram,  Toumai,  1879;  O.  Gisler,  Einsiedeln,  1887;  G. 
Schepers,  Meuns,  1887;  A.  (^pecelatro,  2  vols..  Rome, 
1893;  A.  de  Meffert,  Mains,  1901;  A.  des  Retours.  Paris, 
1903;  A.  C.  Berthe,  St.  Louis,  1906;  KL,  viL  2023-52; 
and  Encydopadia  BrUannica,  xiv.  634-639. 

On  the  order  consult:  K.  Mader,  Die  KonoreocUion  de» 
heUigaten  ErlQtert  in  OtaUmich,  Vienna,  1887;  F.  Ratte. 
Der  Keilioe  Alphormu  und  der  RedemptorivUn-Orden, 
Luxemburg.  1887;  A.  Zapf,  Die  Redempioriaign^  Erlan- 
gen.  1894;  F.  Dumortier,  Le«  Premih-et  RSdemptoriaHnu, 
Lille,  1884;  M.  A.  Hugues.  Die  Kloaterfrauen  Maria  Vio- 
toria  und  Marianna,  Freiburg,  1883;  Heimbucher.  Orden 
und  KonffregcUionen,  ii.  313  sqq.,  331  sqq.,  498;  Currier, 
Religiou*  Order;  pp.  466  sqq.,  673  sqq. 

LILITH.    See  Demon,  I.,  §$  3^-4. 


I^lUle 
IiindMiy 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


400 


ULLIB,  JOHN:  American  Piesbyterian;  b.  at 
Kelso  (38  m.  8.e.  of  Edinbuiigh),  Roxburghshire, 
Scotland,  Dec.  16,  1812;  d.  at  Kingston,  N.  Y., 
Feb.  23,  1867.  He  was  graduated  at  the  Univer- 
sity of  Edinbuigh  (1831;  D.D.,  1855);  studied  the- 
ology, and  taught  until  1834,  when  he  emigrated 
to  America.  He  then  finished  his  theological  studies 
at  New  Brunswick,  N.  J.,  and  was  ordained  minis- 
ter of  the  Reformed  (Dutch)  Church  at  Kingston, 
where  he  labored  until  he  accepted  the  presidency 
of  the  grammar^chool  of  the  University  of  the  City 
of  New  York  (Aug.,  1841).  He  had  charge  of  the 
Broadway,  afterward  Stanton  Street,  Reformed 
(Dutch)  Church  (1843-i8),  and,  in  addition,  edited 
the  Jewish  CkromcU  (1844-48).  He  labored  upon 
the  revised  version  of  the  American  Bible  Union 
(1851--57);  and  in  1857  he  reentered  the  pastor- 
ate, taking  charge  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  of 
Kingston.  Lillie,  who  was  acknowledged  to  be 
one  of  the  best  Biblical  scholars  in  the  United 
States,  prepared  for  the  American  Bible  Union  val- 
uable new  versions  and  philological  commentaries 
upon  I-II  Thessalonians,  I-III  John,  II  Peter, 
Jude,  and  Revelation  (also  on  I  Peter  and  James; 
but  these  were  never  printed).  He  wrote  Lectures 
on  the  EpisUes  to  the  Tfiessalonians  (New  York, 
1860);  and  translated,  with  additions,  C.  A.  Au- 
berlin  and  C.  J.  Riggenbach  upon  Thessalonians  (in 
the  Lange  Commentary,  1868).  His  Lectures  on 
the  First  and  Second  Epistles  of  Peter,  with  a  Bio- 
graphical Sketch  by  Dr.  Schaff  and  James  Inglis 
(1869)  were  published  posthumously. 

LIMBORCH,  lim'bdrH'',  PHXLXPPUS  VAN: 
Dutch  Remonstrant  theologian;  b.  at  Amsterdam 
June  19,  1633;  d.  there  Apr.  30,  1712.  He  was  the 
son  of  a  lawyer,  Frans  van  Limborch,  and  Geer- 
truida  Bischop,  a  niece  of  Episcopius,  and  was  ed- 
ucated at  Leyden  and  Utrecht  for  the  law,  after- 
ward, when  he  had  made  up  his  mind  to  become  a 
Remonstrant  minister  (see  Remonstrantb),  study- 
ing under  Voesius  and  Barlieus  in  Amsterdam.  In 
1657  he  accepted  a  call  to  Gouda,  and  ten  years 
later  he  returned  to  Amsterdam;  but  after  a  few 
months  of  pastoral  ministry  be  became  a  professor 
in  the  Remonstrant  seminary  (Apr.  19, 1668).  Here 
he  held  a  position  of  influence  for  forty-five  years, 
and  his  deep  theological  learning  attracted  many 
students.  He  was  the  leading  Remonstrant  theo- 
logian of  the  seventeenth  century.  His  fame  rests 
chiefly  on  his  Theologia  Christiana  ad  praxin  pieta- 
tis  ac  promotionem  pads  christiancs  unice  directa 
(Amsterdam,  1686;  Eng.  transl.,  A  Compleai  Sys- 
tem, or  Body  of  Divinity,  2  vols.,  London,  1713, 
republished,  Macclesfield,  1807).  He  had  a  remark- 
able conversation  with  Isaac  Orobio,  a  Spanish  Jew 
who  had  been  obliged  to  flee  from  the  Inqubition 
and  had  established  himself  in  Amsterdam  as  a  phy- 
sician, and  published  a  report  of  it  under  the  title 
De  veritate  religionis  Christiana,  amica  coUatio  cum 
erudito  JtidoBO  (Gouda,  1687).  Against  the  Roman 
Catholics  lie  maintained  the  right  of  freedom  in  relig- 
ious investigation,  and  himself  showed  a  moderate 
and  tolerant  spirit  toward  those  who  differed  from 
him.  He  shows  little  sympathy  with  the  philosophy 
of  his  age — at  least  with  Descartes  and  Spinoza 
— though  he  was  much  attracted  by  Locke's  works 


and  exchanged  interesting  letters  with  him.  He 
wrote  an  ezoelleht  biography  of  Episcopius,  and  a 
short  history  of  the  Synod  of  Dort,  as  an  introduc- 
tion to  the  letters  of  the  English  delegates  Hales 
and  Balcanqual,  besides  editing  the  second  part  of 
the  theological  writings  of  Episcopius,  the  whole 
Opera  theUogica  of  Curcellsus,  and  the  ProBetar^ 
Hum  ac  eruditorum  virorum  episUda  theologicce  et 
ecdesiastica.  H.  C.  RoGGEt- 

Bibuoobapht:  Besides  the  works  mentioned  in  the  text, 
Limboroh  wrote  Hialaria  InquiMiiionM,  2  parts,  Amster- 
dsm,  1602,  Eng.  transl.  by  8.  Chandler,  London,  1731. 
The  funeral  oration  by  J.  Le  Gere  was  published  Amster- 
dam, 1712,  and  is  found  in  the  transl.  of  the  Theolaoia 
Chrittiana,  ut  sup.  Consult:  A.  des  Amorie  van  der 
HoeTsn.  DiuertaHo  de  Phil,  a  Limborch,  ib.  1843;  Nioeron, 
Af^moirss,  xi  80  sqq.;  C.  F.  St&udlin,  OeBchiehie  der  theo- 
looiechen  Wieeenaehaflen,  i.  207  sqq.,  ii.  87  sqq.,  Gdttinicen, 
1810-11,  Enc.  transl.,  Hiei.  <^ .Theoloffieal  Kntndedge  and 
Literattare,  Edinburgh,  1836. 

LIMBUS:  A  name  applied  in  Roman  Catholic 
theology  to  a  place  of  detention  for  such  souls  as 
are  incapable,  through  no  fault  of  their  own,  of  en- 
trance into  heaven.  Outside  of  hell  (see  Future 
Punishment),  the  prison  of  those  who  have  died 
in  stubborn  enmity  against  God,  it  is  taught  that 
there  are  three  places  of  detention:  Purgatory  (q. v.) 
for  those  who  are  in  process  of  purification  to  ren- 
der them  fit  for  heaven;  the  Limbus  patrum,  or 
place  where  those  who  died  before  the  Atonement 
were  detained;  and  the  Limbus  in/antium  (or 
puerorum),  where  the  souls  of  infanta  dying  with- 
out baptism  are.  It  is  taught  that  there  is  no 
actual  suffering  in  the  two  latter  places,  and  thus, 
although  the  souls  therein  are  excluded  from  the 
Beatific  Vision,  they  are  at  the  opposite  extreme 
of  the  "  under-world  "  from  hell— on  its  border 
(limbus).  The  Limbus  patrum  is  held  to  have 
ceased  to  exist  when  Christ  ''  went  and  preached 
unto  the  spirits  in  prison  "  (I  Pet.  iii.  19;  see  De- 
scent OF  Christ  into  Hell).  The  state  of  in- 
fants in  the  Limbus  ir^antium  is  regarded  as  one  of 
complete  natural  happiness;  of  the  supernatural 
bliss  of  heaven  they  have  not  been  made  capable 
by  baptism.  See  Infant  Salvation. 
Bxblioorapht:    The  subject  is  treated  in  the  literature 

tmder  the  articles  to  which  reference  is  made  in  the  text 

— FuTUBE  PuNisaicBNT;  PumoATORT,  etc 

LmCK  (LINK,  LmCK  VON  COLDITZ),  WEN- 
CESLAIJS  (WENZEL,  VINCILAUS):  Lutheran 
preacher  and  theologian;  b.  at  Colditz  (25  m.  s.e. 
of  Leipsic)  Jan.  8,  1483;  d.  at  Nuremberg  Mar.  12, 
1547.  In  1498  he  entered  the  University  of  Leip- 
siCy  then  joined  the  Augustinian  friars,  and  in  1503 
went  to  Wittenberg  to  continue  his  studies,  where, 
six  years  later,  he  lectured  on  the  "  Sentences  "  of 
Peter  Lombard,  and  was  dean  of  the  faculty  when 
Luther  took  his  doctor's  degree  in  1512.  In  the 
following  years  he  was  temporary  prior  of  the  Au- 
gustinian monastery  in  Wittenberg  while  Luther 
was  its  subprior;  and  the  sermons  which  he  preached 
at  that  time  were  praised  by  Luther  for  their  pop- 
ularity and  fertility  of  imagination.  When  his 
activity  at  Wittenberg  terminated  in  1516,  Linck 
accompanied  his  patron  Staupitz  on  several  tours 
of  visitation,  and  in  1517  was  called  as  preacher  to 
Nuremberg.  The  sermons  which  he  delivered 
there,  especially  on  Palm  Sunday  and  in  Advent, 


491 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


UUie 
Iiindsay 


1518,  show  the  consciousness  of  the  Reformation 
struggling  to  gain  expression.  All  Linck's  work 
was  done  in  Luther's  spirit,  and  the  monastery  of 
the  Augustinians  at  Nuremberg  became  one  of  the 
earliest  strongholds  of  the  new  creed,  while  he  him- 
self took  an  active  part  in  the  negotiations  between 
Cardinal  Cajetan  and  Luther.  When  Staupitz  re- 
signed as  vicar-general  of  the  German  Augustin- 
ians in  1520,  Linck  was  chosen  to  fill  his  place,  and 
in  this  capacity  made  visitations  in  Thuringia  and 
Saxony.  In  spite  of  his  rather  delicate  position,, 
he  remained  faithful  to  Luther  and  his  cause.  In 
1521  he  started  from  Mimich  on  an  extensive  visi- 
tation, in  the  course  of  which  he  became  acquainted 
with  Albrecht  Diirer  in  Antwerp.  On  his  return 
he  found  the  public  mind  agitated  over  the  ques- 
tion of  monasticism  which  the  fanatics  wished  to 
reject  altogether.  In  his  perplexity  Linck  asked 
the  advice  of  Luther,  and  the  latter  sought  to  de- 
fend his  point  of  view  by  appealing  to  the  Gospels, 
although  he  did  not  approve  of  the  lawless  meth- 
ods of  the  innovators.  In  1522  Linck  convoked  a 
chapter  at  Wittenberg  in  which  Luther's  stand- 
point was  generally  adopted,  since  it  was  main- 
tained that  the  Bible  transcended  human  authority 
and  tradition,  and  that  each  one  might  leave  the 
monastery  at  his  own  will,  while  other  anti-Catho- 
lic teachings  were  also  adopted.  A  second  chap- 
ter was  convoked  by  Duke  George  a  few  months 
later  at  Grimma  to  restrict  the  measures  adopted 
at  Wittenberg,  but  it  was  too  late.  Whole  con- 
vents were  in  a  state  of  dissolution,  and  Linck  was 
powerless  to  stay  the  tendency  of  the  time,  while 
he  was  forced  to  bear  the  responsibility  for  the 
Wittenberg  resolutions,  thus  rendering  his  position 
as  provincial  more  and  more  untenable.  At  this 
time  Elector  Frederick  offered  Linck  the  position 
of  Evangelical  preacher  at  Altenbui^,  and  after 
long  hesitation  he  resigned  his  position  as  provin- 
cial and  entered  upon  his  new  calling  in  1523.  The 
Roman  Catholics  still  predominated  in  Altenburg 
and  the  churches  were  in  their  hands,  so  that  Linck 
could  not  execute  the  regular  functions  of  the  minis- 
try, but  was  obliged  to  content  himself  with  preach- 
ing. Within  a  short  time,  however,  the  Evangelicals 
bad  acquired  the  right  to  share  in  the  use  of  the 
Church  of  St.  Bartholomew,  while  in  1523  com- 
munion was  celebrated  in  both  kinds  and  the  first 
Lutheran  baptism  in  the  German  language  took 
place.  Linck,  who  in  the  mean  time  had  married,  did 
all  in  his  power,  by  sermons  as  weU  as  by  treatises, 
to  further  the  Lutheran  cause,  so  that  other  churches 
were  soon  ceded  to  the  Lutherans  and  he  began  to 
organize  a  regular  system.  He  paid  special  atten- 
tion to  the  reform  of  education,  the  relief  of  the  poor, 
and  the  suppression  of  begging.  In  1525  he  was 
called  as  preacher  to  Nuremberg,  his  second  period 
of  activity  here  lasting  almost  twenty-two  years. 
In  the  beginning  he  was  involved  in  the  question 
of  the  remarriage  of  clergymen  who  were  widowers, 
then  agitating  Luther  and  other  Evangelical  theo- 
logians. Provost  Dominicus  Schleupner  of  St. 
Sebald  in  Nuremberg  had  married  again  after  the 
death  of  his  first  wife,  and  his  action  had  caused 
some  sensation.  In  Nuremberg  twenty-eight  anony- 
mous theses  attacked  him,  and  Luther  was  asked 


to  reply,  his  own  treatise  on  the  subject,  as  well 
as  one  by  Osiander  and  Linck,  being  circulated 
widely  throughout  the  city.  Linck's  arguments 
were  noteworthy  for  their  dear  and  moderate  tone 
and  laid  stress  upon  the  theory  that  ministers  have 
no  requirements  of  morality  and  sanctity  other 
than  those  binding  on  the  Christian  laity. 

In  1524  Nuremberg  had  broken  definitely  with 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  and  in  Mar.,  1525, 
the  Lutherans  held  a  conference  which  closed  the 
monasteries  and  issued  calls  to  Evangelical  preach- 
ers. At  first  Linck  preached  at  the  monastery  of 
St.  Catharine,  but  was  called  within  the  same  year 
(1525)  to  the  position  of  first  preacher  in  the  Church 
of  the  Holy  Ghost.  There  again,  as  in  Altenburg, 
he  manifested  much  zeal  in  strengthening  the 
Evangelical  cause.  Sermons  for  children  were  in- 
troduced in  his  church,  and  the  rooms  of  the  Au- 
gustinian  monastery  were  changed  into  a  high 
school.  At  the  same  time  Linck  took  an  active 
part  in  polemical  writings  against  the  Anabaptists 
and  against  non-Lutheran  interpretations  of  the 
Lord's  Supper.  He  was  also  involved  in  repeated 
disputes  with  Osiander,  but  his  friendship  with 
Luther  alwa3rs  retained  its  old  intimacy.  In  1539 
Linck  received  a  call  to  Leipsic,  but  declined  it,  on 
the  advice  of  Luther.  In  the  following  year,  after 
his  reconciliation  with  Osiander,  the  pair  took  part 
in  the  colloquies  of  Hagenau  and  Worms,  but  Osian- 
der again  went  too  far  in  his  vehemence  and  invec- 
tives, so  that  he  was  inunediately  recalled,  and  both 
were  reprimanded  at  their  return. 

Among  the  numerous  writings  of  Linck,  special 
mention  may  be  made  of  the  following:  Artikel  und 
Positianen  (Grimma,  1523),  a  pamphlet  dating 
from  the  time  of  his  activity  at  Altenburg  and  con- 
taining a  concise  siunmary  of  his  teachings;  Voin 
Reiche  GoUes  (1524);  UrUerrichtung  der  Kinder, 
so  zu  GoUes  Tische  gehen  woUen  (1528),  Dcu  Ave 
Maria,  wie  mans  chriatlich  gdrravjcken  und  die  Kin- 
der lehren  soil  (1531);  Bapetegeepreng;  aue  dem 
CeremonievrBuch  (Strasburg,  1539);  and  Aualegung 
dee  Alien  TeetamerUs  (1543-45).    (R.  BENDiXENf.) 

Biblzogbapht:  Dr.  W.  Reindell  began  the  collection  of 
Linck's  Werke,  vol.  i.,  Marbuii;,  1804,  and  has  also  written 
Doktor  Wenaealaua  Linek  von  ColditM,  part  i..  ib.  1802. 
The  life  by  H.  W. Oaeelmann  iain  M.  Meurer,  LebenderAU- 
voter  der  htOkeriadken  Kirehe,  Leipeic,  1883.  A  very  rich 
list  of  literature  is  given  in  Hauok-Hercog.  BE,  xi.  505-606. 

LIUDSAT,  THOMAS  MARTIN:  United  Free 
Church  of  Scotland;  b.  the  son  of  Rev.  A.  Lindsay, 
1843.  He  received  his  education  at  the  University 
of  Edinburgh;  became  examiner  to  the  same  insti- 
tution, where  he  was  later  assistant  to  the  professor 
of  logic  and  metaphysics;  became  professor  of 
church  history  in  the  Free  Church  College,  Glasgow, 
1872;  and  principal  of  the  United  Free  Church  Col- 
lege, Glasgow,  1902.  He  was  also  for  fifteen  years 
convener  of  the  Foreign  Mission  Conmiittee  of  the 
Free  Church  of  Sootlimd.  Among  his  publications 
are  handbooks  on  Acts  (Edinburgh,  1884-85),  Mark 
(1884),  Luke  (1887),  and  on  the  Reformation  (1882); 
Luther  and  the  German  Reformation  (1900);  The 
Church  and  ihe  Ministry  in  the  Early  Centuries  (Cun- 
ningham lectures,  London,  1902);  and  History  of 
the  Reformation  (2  vols.,  Edinburgh,  1906-07). 


Lindsey 
Ijipaius 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


492 


LINDSE7,  THEOPHILUS:  English  Unitarian; 
b.  at  Middlewich  (21  m.  e.  of  Chester)  June  20, 
1723;  d.  in  London  Nov.  3,  1808.  He  was  edu- 
cated at  Leeds  and  at  St.  John's  (College,  Cam- 
bridge, where  he  was  elected  fellow  in  1747.  He 
became  curate  of  a  chapel  in  Spital  Square,  Lon- 
don, and  shortly  afterward  was  made  chaplain  to 
the  duke  of  Somerset,  to  whose  son,  the  future  sec- 
ond duke  of  Northumberland,  he  was  tutor  from 
1750  to  1753.  He  was  then  presented  to  the  rec- 
tory of  Kirkby  Wiske,  Yorkshire,  but  resigned 
three  years  later  to  become  rector  of  Piddletown, 
Dorset.  In  1762  he  declined  the  proffered  chap- 
laincy to  the  duke  of  Northumberland,  and  in  the 
following  year  accepted  the  rectory  of  Catterick, 
Yorkshire.  Meanwhile  the  latitudinarianism  which 
had  hitherto  characterized  him  had  become  Uni- 
tarianism,  largely  through  the  influence  of  his  wife's 
stepfather,  Archdeacon  Francis  Blackbume.  On 
Nov.  28,  1773,  he  preached  his  farewell  sermon  at 
Catterick  and  went  to  London,  where  he  began  to 
preach  Unitarianism,  a  permanent  chapel  being 
opened  for  him  in  1778;  he  remained  there  until 
his  resignation  in  1793.  His  chief  works  are:  The 
Book  of  Common  Prayer  Reformed  (London,  1774); 
Apology  on  Reeigning  the  Vicarage  of  CaUerick, 
Yorkshire  (1774);  A  Sequel  to  the  Apology  (1776); 
The  Calechietf  or  an  Inquiry  into  the  Doctrine  of  the 
Scriptures  concerning  the  Only  True  God  (1781); 
Historical  View  of  the  State  of  the  Unitarian  Doc- 
trine and  Worship  (1783);  Vindicia  Priestleyana 
(2  parts,  1784-90);  Conversations  on  Christian 
Idolatry  (1792);  and  Conversations  on  the  Divine 
Government  (1802). 

Bibliogbapht:  T.   BeUham,  Memoin  of  Revd.  T.  Lindaey, 
Centenary  Volume,  London,  1873;    DNB,  xxziU.  317.  318. 

LINES,  EDWIN  STEVENS:  Protestant  Epis- 
copal bishop  of  Newark,  N.  J.;  b.  at  Naugatuck, 
Conn.,  Nov.  23,  1845.  He  was  educated  at  Yale 
(A.B.,  1872)  and  at  Berkeley  Divinity  School,  Mid- 
dietown,  Conn.,  from  which  he  was  graduated  in 
1874.  He  was  ordered  deacon  and  priested  in  the 
latter  year,  and  was  then  rector  successively  of 
Christ  Church,  West  Haven,  Conn.  (1874-79),  and 
of  St.  Paul's,  New  Haven,  Conn.  (1879-1903).  In 
1903  he  was  consecrated  bishop  of  Newark. 

LINGARD,  JOHN:  Roman-Catholic  historian; 
b.  at  Winchester  Feb.  6,  1771;  d.  at  Hornby  (9  m. 
e.n.e.  of  Lancaster),  Lancashire,  July  13,  1851. 
He  studied  at  the  English  College  at  Douai  from 
1782  to  1793,  but  fled  from  France  on  account  of 
the  Revolution  and  returned  to  England  as  tutor 
in  the  family  of  Lord  Stourton.  There  he  remained 
until,  in  1794,  he  went  to  Crookhall,  near  Durham, 
where  some  of  those  driven  from  Douai  had  gath- 
ered, and  completed  his  theological  studies.  He 
was  ordained  priest  in  1795,  and,  having  declined 
a  flattering  call  to  London,  taught  natural  and 
moral  philosophy  in  Crookhall,  where  he  was  also 
vice-president  and  prefect  of  studies.  In  1808  the 
college  was  removed  to  Ushaw,  Durham,  and  he 
accompanied  it.  In  1810  he  was  chosen  president, 
but  in  the  following  year  retired  to  Hornby,  where 
he  spent  the  remainder  of  his  life,  devoting  himself 
to  historical  studies  and  declining  both  the  profes- 


sorship of  Sacred  Scripture  and  Hebrew  at  the 
Royal  College  of  St.  Patrick  at  Maynooth  and  the 
presidency  of  the  seminary  at  Old  Hall  Green.  Id 
1817  and  1825  he  visited  Rome  and  was  received 
with  great  distinction,  some  believing  that  his  ap> 
pointment  as  a  cardinal  was  reserved  in  petto. 

The  chief  works  of  Lingard  were  as  follows: 
Antiquities  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  Church  (2  vob^.. 
Newcastle,  1806;  3d  ed.,  practically  a  new  work, 
imder  the  title  The  History  and  Antiquities  of  the 
Anglo-Saxon  Church,  2  vols.,  London,  1845);  Col- 
lection of  Tracts  on  several  Subjects  connected  vnth 
the  Civil  and  Religious  Principles  of  the  Catholic 
(London,  1813);  History  of  England,  from,  the  first 
Invasion  by  the  Romans  to  the  Accession  of  William 
and  Mary  in  1688  (8  vols.,  1819-30;  6th  ed..  10 
vols.,  1854-55);  Supplementum  ad  Breviarium  Ro- 
manum  adjectis  officiis  Sanctorum  Anglice  (1823); 
A  new  Version  of  the  Four  Gospds  (1838);  and 
Catechetical  Instructions  on  the  Doctrine  and  Wor- 
ship of  the  Catholic  Church  (1836).  His  History  is 
characterized  by  accuracy,  care,  and  impartiality, 
although  he  was  charged  by  extreme  Protestants 
with  perversion  of  the  truth  and  by  extreme  Ro- 
man Catholics  with  undue  concessions  to  the 
Protestants. 
Bibuoorapht:   J.  GUlow,  BibUographieal  Dietumary  of  Em. 

CatKolicB,  iv.  254-278,  London,  n.  d.;   DSB,  xxsdiL  32l^ 

323  (with  citation  of  softttered  referenoee). 

LINUS:  The  iomiediate  successor  of  St.  Peter 
according  to  all  lists  of  Roman  bishops,  although 
the  duration  of  his  office  is  very  uncertain.  In  his 
church  history,  Eusebius  counts  twelve  years,  but 
fourteen  in  his  chronicle;  the  Catalogue  Liberianm 
assigns  him  twelve  years,  four  months  and  twelve 
days,  and  Jerome  eleven  years.  The  date  of  the 
beginning  of  his  pontificate  is  also  differently  fixed 
according  to  the  varying  calculations  of  the  death 
of  St.  Peter.  As  the  Roman  Church  knew  nothinjc 
about  an  episcopal  constitution  in  the  beginning  ka 
the  second  century,  Linus,  if  he  actually  existed 
was  simply  a  presbyter  of  the  Church,  but  when. 
to  combat  heresies,  a  continuous  succession  of 
bishops  was  assumed  from  the  Apostle  Peter,  be 
was  made  a  bishop  in  the  later  sense,  and  identi- 
fied with  the  Linus  of  II  Tim.  iv.  21.  His  allege>J 
epitaph  is  generally  recognized  as  possessing  no 
historic  value.  (A.  Hauck.) 

Bzbliograprt:  R.  A.  Lipnus,  Dm  PaptCtvrzeicAnissr  dn 
J?tMe6iiM  uni  der  von  ikm  abhAngioen  Chronisien,  Kk 
1869;  idem,  Chronoloffie  der  rdmi9ehen  Bieckofe^  ib.  1S<*. 
J.  B.  Lightfoot,  ApoetoUe  Fathen,  part  L.  S.  Clemmt  ./ 
Rome,  i.  201  sqq.,  London,  1890;  Hamaek.  in  Sitsu^ii>$*- 
beriehte  der  Berliner  Akademie,  1892;  idem,  Litt^raty,^ 
ii.  1,  pp.  70  »qq.;  Bower,  Popea,  i.  4-6;  DCB,  iii.  72i>^ LV 

LWZ,  lints,  PEACE  OF:  A  treaty  concluJ-l 
Dec.  16, 1645,  at  Linz  (98  m,  w.  of  Vienna)  beiw»^-i 
the  Emperor  Ferdinand  III.,  as  king  of  Hungary 
and  George  Rakoczy,  prince  of  Transylvanin.  I' 
is  important  as  forming  one  of  the  legal  base^  <■: 
the  Evangelical  Church  in  Hungary.  The  Prote- 
tant  Rakoczy,  who  aimed  to  secure  the  Hun^arir 
throne,  formed  an  offensive  and  defensive  alliai*c-' 
with  Sweden  and  France  in  Apr.,  1643,  again;>i 
Ferdinand,  and  was  aided  by  the  Sublime  Porte,  c«f 
which  he  was  a  vassal.  Alleging  the  grievances  of 
his  countrymen  and  especially  the  oppression  of  the 


493 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Z«inds«y 


Protestants,  he  levied  a  large  army,  which  he  placed 
under  the  leadership  of  Johannes  Kemenyi,  while 
Sweden  sent  him  troops  led  by  Dugloss  and  France 
supplied  him  with  fimds.  Despite  success  at  first, 
Rakoczy  found  it  advisable  to  open  negotiations 
with  his  opponents  in  Oct.,  1644.  In  December 
Ferdinand  won  the  Turkish  government  over  to  his 
side,  and  Rakoczy  succeeded  in  inducing  Ferdinand 
to  accept  his  terms,  which  dealt  chiefly  with  the 
unrestricted  liberty  of  the  Hungarian  Church,  the 
treaty  being  confirmed  by  Rakoczy  at  Weissenburg 
Oct.  20,  1646.  By  its  terms  he  boimd  himself  to 
withdraw  from  the  Franco-Swedish  alliance,  to  re- 
move his  forces  from  the  imperial  domains,  and  to 
restore  the  districts  and  cities  which  he  had  taken. 
In  return,  he  and  his  sons  received  two  heritable 
counties  and  five  for  life.  The  most  important  por- 
tion of  the  treaty,  however,  was  the  granting  of 
religious  freedom  to  the  Evangelical  Church  in  Hun- 
gary. The  unrestricted  use  of  their  churches,  bells, 
and  burial-places  was  granted  to  the  Protestants; 
those  who  had  been  compelled  to  accept  Roman 
Catholicism  were  to  be  permitted  to  retiun  to  their 
former  beliefs;  pastors  and  preachers  could  no  longer 
be  expelled  from  their  charges,  and  those  who  had 
been  driven  out  might  either  be  reinstated  or  re- 
placed by  others  of  their  own  persuasion.  Churches 
which  had  been  confiscated  from  the  Protestants 
were  to  be  restored,  but  this  clause,  affecting  400 
buildings,  roused  such  opposition  on  the  part  of  the 
Jesuits  that  the  Protestants  were  obliged  to  content 
themselves  with  ninety.  Supplementary  articles  in 
the  treaty  enacted  a  fiie  of  600  florins  for  violations 
of  its  provisions  concerning  the  Protestants.  The 
diet  which  considered  the  final  details  of  this  treaty, 
so  important  for  the  Protestants  of  Hungary,  did  not 
adjourn  until  July  17,  1647.  (K.  KLCPFBLf.) 

Bibliography:  I.  Katona,  HxHaria  critica  regum  Hun- 
oaritB,  xzii.  232  sqq.,  42  vols.,  Budapest,  1779-1817;  J. 
Duinont,  Corp§  univerBol  diplomaHque  du  droit  <2m  gen$, 
vi.  1.  pp.  331  sqq.,  8  vols..  The  Hague,  1720-31;  J.Mai- 
lath,  Die  Reliffionnrirren  in  Unoam,  1.  30  sqq..  Regenv- 
buig,  1845;  Oeachichte  der  evangelitchen  Kirdne  in  Un- 
oom,  pp.  199  sqq.,  Berlin,  1854;  Ssilagyi,  Aetet  el  docu- 
ment pour  servir  h  Vhiatovn  de  VcUliance  de  Q.  RacocMi  avec 
let  Francaie  el  lea  SuSdoie,  Budapest,  1874;  8.  Linberger, 
GeachuJUe  dee  EvangeUuma  in  Ungam,  pp.  57  sqq..  ib.  1880. 

LIPPE,  lip'pe  (LIPPE-DETHOLD):  A  princi- 
pality of  northwestern  Germany;  capital  Detmold; 
area  469  square  miles;  population  (1905)  145,577, 
of  whom  139,127  were  Reformed  or  Lutherans, 
5,477  Roman  Catholics,  and  735  Jews.  Lippe  be- 
came Christian  in  the  time  of  Charlemagne,  and,  like 
other  German  states,  it  was  dominated  throughout 
the  Middle  Ages  by  the  papacy.  Some  of  the  cities 
of  the  principality  early  accepted  the  Reformation, 
particularly  Lemgo,  which  adopted  the  Brunswick 
church  order  in  1533;  and  in  1538  a  church  order 
that  had  been  worked  out  by  two  Lutheran  clergy- 
men at  the  instance  of  the  regents  of  Lippe  was 
accepted  by  the  nobility  and  the  cities.  Through 
the  Interim  (q.v.)  the  reform  movement  suffered  a 
reverse;  but  in  1571  Count  Simon  VI.  introduced 
a  new  church  order  which  recognized  as  binding  the 
Augsburg  Confession  and  its  Apology,  the  Schmal- 
kald  Articles,  and  Luther's  catechism.  Later 
Count  Simon  went  over  to  the  Reformed  faith. 


Throughout  the  country  and  in  the  cities,  with  the 
exception  of  Lemgo,  the  Heidelberg  catechism 
now  replaced  that  of  Luther;  and  in  1584  a  Re- 
formed church  order  was  introduced.  The  Re- 
formed Church,  which  numbers  forty-one  parishes, 
now  has  a  modem  synodal  constitution.  The  Lu- 
theran Church,  with  five  parishes,  is  tmder  the 
state  consistory  at  Detmold,  forming  a  synodal  dis- 
trict of  its  own.  The  Roman  Catholic  Church  num- 
bers ten  congregations,  which  are  under  the  bishop 
of  Paderbom.  There  are  all  together  some  fifty 
beneficent  institutions  in  the  principality,  includ- 
ing the  Sophienhaus  at  Sabniflen,  the  Rettungs- 
haus  at  Griinau,  and  the  state  Diakonissenanstalt 
at  Detmold.  There  are  gynmasia  at  Detmold  and 
Lemgo,  a  Realschule  at  Salzuflen,  and  a  seminary 
for  teachers  at  Detmold,  as  well  as  several  city 
high  schools  for  girls.  There  are  126  Evangelical 
elementary  schools,  eleven  Roman  Catholic  schools, 
and  ten  Jewish  schools  (F.  H.  Brandbs.) 

Bidlioobapht:  O.  Preuss  and  A.  Falkmann,  lAppiethe  Re- 
geeien,  5  vols.,  Detmold,  1860  sqq.;  H.  Clemen,  Beiir&ge 
gur  Kirchengeechichte  in  Lippe,  Ijeiagio,  1860;  A.  Dreves, 
GeseAidUe  der  Kirchen  .  .  .  dee  lippioehen  Landee,  ib. 
1881;  A.  Falman,  BeitrOge  zwr  GeeehidUe  dee  FOretentume 
Lippe,  Detmold.  1902;  J.  Freisen,  SUuU  und  kattioliache 
Kirthe  in  Lippe,  Stuttgart,  1906. 

LIPSCOMB,  Ups'cum,  ANDREW  AD6ATE: 
American  Methodist  Protestant  divine  and  edu- 
cator; b.  at  Georgetown,  D.  C,  Sept.  6,  1816;  d. 
at  Athens,  Ga.,  Nov.  24,  1890.  He  was  licensed  to 
preach  in  1834,  and  remained  in  the  ministry  till 
1849  when  failing  health  compelled  him  to  resign. 
He  then  opened  an  academy  for  young  ladies  at 
Montgomery,  Ala.  He  was  president  of  the  Female 
College  at  Tuskegee,  Ala.  (1856-59),  chancellor  of 
the  University  of  Geoi^  (1860-74),  and  professor 
of  art  and  criticism  in  Vanderbilt  University,  Nash- 
ville, Tenn.  (1874-85).  Among  his  works  are:  The 
Social  SpirU  of  Chriatianiiy  (Philadelphia,  1846); 
Studies  in  the  Forty  Days  between  Christ's  Resurrec- 
tion and  Ascension  (Nashville,  1884);  and  Studies 
Supplemenlary  to  the  Studies  in  the  Forty  Days  between 
Christ's  Resurrection  and  Ascension  (Nashville,  1885). 

LIPSnXS,  lip'si-as,  FRIEDRICH  REINHOLD: 
German  Protestant;  b.  at  Jena  Oct.  3,  1873.  He 
was  educated  at  the  universities  of  Leipsic  and 
Jena  from  1893  to  1897  (lie.  theoL,  Jena,  1898); 
was  assistant  pastor  at  Weimar  (1897-98) ;  privat- 
docent  for  systematic  theology  at  the  university  of 
Jena  (1898-1906);  became  in  1906  pastor  of  St. 
Martini-Kirche,  Bremen.  He  has  edited  R.  A.  Lip- 
sius'  Glavben  und  Wissen  (Berlin,  1897),  and  has 
written  Vorfragen  der  systematischen  Theologie  (Frei- 
burg, 1899);  Kriiik  der  iheologischen  Erkenntnis 
(1904);  &Qd  Die  ReligumdesMonismus{BeT\m,1907). 

LIPSnXS,  RICHARD  ADELBERT:  German 
Protestant  theologian;  b.  at  Gera  (34  m.  s.s.w.  of 
Leipsic)  Feb.  14,  1830;  d.  at  Jena  Aug.  19,  1892. 
He  descended  from  a  family  of  Saxon  theologians, 
and  received  his  early  education  from  his  grand- 
father, A.  G.  W.  Lipsius,  preacher  in  Bemstadt,  and 
in  the  '^  Thomana  "  of  Leipsic  where  his  father  was 
teacher  of  religion.  In  1848  he  entered  the  Uni- 
versity of  Leipsic.  Though  he  came  successively 
under  the  influence  of  Fichte,  Hegel,  and  Kant,  the 
teachings  of  Schleiermacher  and  Rothe  and  the 


JAprntam 
JAUny 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0Q 


494 


tenets  of  the  CJoDgresation  of  Brethren  kept  him 
from  a  one-sided  moralism  and  induced  him  "  to 
preserve  a  place  for  religious  mysticism  in  the 
sanctuary  of  his  heart."  While  Lipsius  during  the 
time  of  his  studies  stood  for  the  views  of  the  **  me- 
diating theology/'  he  later  followed  the  tenden- 
cies of  historical  criticism.  The  spirit  of  free  in- 
vestigation which  he  inherited  from  his  father  and 
his  study  of  the  writings  of  Baur  exercised  an  irre- 
sistible influence  upon  him,  although  he  was  not  a 
slavish  follower  of  the  latter.  In  1855  he  estab- 
Ushed  himself  as  privat-docent  at  the  University 
of  Leipsic,  and  four  years  later  was  appointed  ad- 
junct professor  there;  in  1861  he  was  called  to 
Vienna  as  professor  of  systematic  theology,  and  in 
1863  became  a  member  of  the  Austrian  Council  of 
Education;  in  1864  he  was  chosen  deputy  of  the 
faculty  to  the  first  general  synod  and  cooperated 
in  the  establishment  of  a  liberal  church  constitu- 
tion. The  obdurate  refusal  of  the  government  to 
incorporate  the  theological  faculty  in  the  univer- 
sity induced  Lipsius  in  1865  to*acoept  a  call  to  Kiel. 
At  the  Kiel  assembly  of  1867  he  showed  himself  a 
champion  of  the  Prussian  Union.  A  polemical  en- 
counter with  Bishop  Koopmann,  the  head  of  the 
Holstein  Lutherans,  induced  him  to  give  up  his 
position  in  Kiel,  and  to  accept  in  1871  a  call  to 
Jena,  where  he  remained  imtil  his  death.  Besides 
his  studies,  he  took  a  prominent  part  in  the  prac- 
tical questions  of  the  day,  and  was  one  of  the 
founders  of  the  Evangelical  Alliance. 

He  devoted  himself  to  the  study  of  the  docu- 
ments of  primitive  Christianity  and  published  nu- 
merous works  on  them.  It  was  not  as  a  historian, 
however,  that  he  became  the  acknowledged  leader 
of  Jena  theology,  but  as  a  systematic  theologian. 
In  his  theological  system  he  starts  from  the  stand- 
point of  the  critical  (though  not  unreservedly 
Kantian)  theory  of  perception.  He  admits  that 
perception  of  objects  is  subjectively  conditioned, 
but  rejects  Kant's  dualism  of  phenomena  and 
"  things-in-themselves  ";  he  rather  holds  that  by 
thought  an  objective  order  of  law  is  grasped,  and, 
applying  the  same  contrast  in  the  sphere  of  the  phi- 
losophy of  religion,  he  distinguishes  between  final 
and  absolute  being.  The  latter  receives  a  positive 
content  only  through  religious  experience.  The 
truth  of  religious  concepts  can  not  be  demonstrated 
philosophically,  but  the  unity  of  the  human  spirit 
demands  the  blending  of  the  scientific  and  religious 
perceptions  into  a  harmonious  whole.  In  this  con- 
nection metaphysics  as  a  theory  of  the  universe 
is  indispensable,  but  the  harmonious  blending  of 
those  two  perceptions  can  succeed  only  approxi- 
mately, as  may  be  seen  from  the  idea  of  God;  the 
scientific  definitions  remain  here  always  negative, 
and  the  religious  definitions  figurative.  No  super- 
natural interference  breaks  the  coherent  develop- 
ment of  the  world,  and  that  which  on  the  basis  of 
an  inner  need  becomes  for  the  religious  man  a  di- 
vine revelation,  represents  for  science  nothing  but 
a  psychic  phenomenon.  The  relation  between  God 
and  man  remains  a  holy  "  mystery."  Hence  it  is 
evident  that  dogmatics  is  not  a  science  without 
presuppositions,  but  can  represent  faith  only  from 
the  standpoint  of  faith,  although  in  a  purified  form. 


Amonc  the  wotkM  of  lipnoa  may  be  nsmed:  Die  pauUni- 
•ehe  RedUfertiffuno9ldiT€  (Ldpsio,  1853);  De  ClemteniU  Re 
mani  MpUioia  ad  Corinthio§  prion  dtBqumUo  (1855);  Uebtr 
da§  VerhAUniU  der  drti  tyriKhen  Briefe  det  IffmaHot  su  den 
abrufen  Reeenaiimen  d$r  IffnaUaniBehen  lAUeraiur  (1859); 
Der  0no9iici$mu9t  eein  Weeen,  Ureprung  und  SntwiekebuHf- 
ffang  (1860);  Zur  QuMenkrUik  dee  Bpiphamoe  (Vienna, 
1855);  Die  Papetvereeiehmeee  dee  Eueebioe  und  der  von  ikm 
abKAnoufen  Chronieten  kriUeeh  uniereudU  (Kiel.  1868); 
Chronologie  der  rOmieehen  Bieehitfe  bie  tur  Mitte  dee  vierlen 
JahrhunderU  (1860);  DU  PiUUue-Acten  kriiieeh  unier- 
endU  (1871);  GUiube  und  Ldire,  Theoloffiedu  Streiteekrift- 
en  (1871);  Die  Quellen  der  rinniedun  Petn»-eaoe  kritieA 
uniereudU  (1872);  Die  QxteUen  der  dUeeten  KeteergeeAidde 
(Leipno,  1875);  Lekrbudi  der  evangelieth-proteetantiadten 
Doomaak  (Brunswick,  1876);  DoffnuUiedte  BeitriUfe  rwr  Ver- 
thadigung  uni  ErlAtUerung  meinee  Ldurbudtee  (Leipoe, 
1878);  Die  edeeeeniedis  Abifor-'eaae  kriHedi  unSerauehi  (Bruns- 
wick, 1880);  Die  Apokryph^n,  Apoetdgeediidiien  und  Apoe- 
teUegenden  (1883-60);  Philoeophie  und  Bdigion  (Letpaic. 
1885).  In  oonneetion  with  Die  Apokryphen,  Apoetdoeeckickt' 
en,  Lipsius  edited  together  with  M.  Bonnet  the  Greek  and 
Latin  texts  (Acta  apoetclorum  apocrypha,  part  t..  Acta  Pelri^ 
PavU,  Petri  etPauli,  PauU  et  Thedae,  Thaddaei,  Lnpsdc,  1891. 
by  Lipsius  alone).  He  further  published  Hauptpunkie  der 
duieOidton  Oiaubenelehre  (2  ed.,  Brunswick,  1891)  and  Gbat- 
ben  und  Wieeen  (ed.  F.  R.  Lipsius.  Berlin,  1897).  He  founded 
in  1875  and  edited  the  Jahrbadurfar  proteetaniiedie  Theole- 
gie,  and  from  1885  was  editor  of  the  TKeologiadier  Jakree- 

**'"^-  (F.  R.  Lipsiirs.) 

Bibuoobapht:  Q.  Riehter  and  F.  Nippold,  Zicci  Ged&dU- 
niereden,  Jena,  1893;  A.  Neumann,  Orundlagen  und  Grand' 
edge  der  WdU^n»d^auung  von  .  ,  .  lApeiue,  Bninswick, 
1896;  E.  Pfennigsdorf,  Vergleidi  der  dognutUeehen  Sy^ 
feme  von  .  .  .  Lipeiue  und  .  .  .  RitedU.  Caotha.  1896; 
U.  Fleiseh,  Die  .  .  .  Orundlagen  der  dogmatiedken  Sys- 
tems von  A.  E.  Biedermann  und  .  .  .  Lipeiue,  Berlin, 
1901;  H.  LOdemann,  in  Addition  to  MULndioner  aU^- 
meine  Zoiiung,  kcuL,  no.  200;  Ecke,  in  KtrtkUdu  Monatt^ 
eduift,  xciy.  798-817.  Further  referenoes  are  airai  in 
Hauok-Hersoc.  RS,  xi.  520. 

LITAWY. 

Greek  Church  (|  1). 

Roman  (Catholic  (Siureh  (|  2). 

(Churches  of  the  Reformation  (|  3). 

The  Litany  is  a  prayer  of  supplication,  especially 
in  responsive  form.  With  the  Greeks  liianeia  de- 
notes a  processional  prayer,  an  act  of  prayer  con- 
nected with  the  profession,  or  the  procession  itself. 
The  term  is  used  in  the  first  sense  by  Chrysostom. 
Eustratius  (6th  cent.),  Simeon  of  Thessalonica  (d. 
1429),  and  Codinus,  while  it  denotes  the  procession 
in  the   Chronicon   Paschale,    Malalae, 

z.  Greek    Cxeorgius  Cedrenus,  and  Michael  Glycas. 

Church.  In  the  acts  of  the  fifth  Ck>uncil  of  Con- 
stantinople, as  well  as  in  Philotheus, 
Simeon  of  Thessalonica,  and  Theodorus  Lector,  it 
designates  the  prayer  connected  with  the  prooe^on, 
which  here  implies  not  only  the  procession  outside 
the  church  but  also  the  passing  of  light-bearers, 
priests,  deacons,  and  choristers  to  the  narihej. 
where  the  litany  was  recited,  a  usage  established  as 
early  as  the  Council  of  Constantinople  in  536.  This 
custom  still  continues,  and  in  this  minor  procession 
the  litany  is  recited  at  the  dose  of  the  great  ves- 
pers before  the  chief  feasts,  and  also  in  such  pro- 
cessions as  those  of  burial.  This  litany,  also  caHed 
edene^  or  ''  deacon's  litany,"  is  essentially  the 
prayer  for  the  whole  Church  foimd  in  the  ancient 
Oriental  liturgies  {AjiOBtoUc  ConstUuHoru,  viiL,  and 


496 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


X«ipaiu« 
Ziitany 


the  liturgies  of  Mark  and  James)  and  is  recited  as 
a  Bidding  Prayer  (q.v.)  by  the  deacon,  the  con- 
gregation responding  with  the  ejaculation  Kyrie 
deiion,  **  Lord  have  mercy "  (see  LiTtrBoics,  III., 
§  5).  The  processional  litany  is  distingiushed  from 
the  edene  of  the  mass  by  its  invocation  of  the  Virgin, 
St.  John  the  Baptist,  the  Apostles,  the  great  I^h 
priests,  and  all  saints,  as  well  as  by  the  very  fre- 
quent repetition  of  the  ejaculation  ''  Lord,  have 
mercy  I  "  The  litany  is  recited  by  the  deacon  and 
the  response  is  sung  by  the  choir. 

In  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  the  term  litany 
has  several  connotations.  The  invocation  Kyrie 
eleiaon,  Christe  deison  and  the  supplications  in  the 
ancient  liturgy  made  at  the  bidding  of  the  deacon, 
corresponding  to  the  Greek  ectene,  are  both  called 
litany,  although  the  latter  was  tech- 
2.  Roman  nically    known    as    the    deprecation. 

Catholic    The  term  litany  was  frequently  ap- 

ChttfciL  plied  to  the  processions  of  supplica- 
tion, and  a  distinction  was  accordingly 
drawn  between  the  "  greater  litany  "  on  St.  Mark's 
Day  (Apr.  25)  and  the  "  lesser  litanies  "  which  are 
recited  on  the  three  Rogation  Days  (q.v.).  The 
word  was  likewise  employed  with  extreme  fre- 
quency in  its  modem  connotation  of  the  responsive 
prayer  beginning  with  Kyrie  elei8on,  and  this  use 
finally  gained  supremacy,  the  term  litany  as  a 
designation  of  a  circuit  with  prayer  being  super- 
seded by  "  procession  "  about  the  twelfth  century. 
The  older  designation  of  the  processions  as  litanies 
was  retained,  however,  in  the  "  greater  litany " 
and  the  "  lesser  litanies,"  the  former  being  a  sub- 
stitute for  the  pagan  rohigalia  or  festival  of  Apr.  25, 
and  apparently  instituted  by  Pope  Liberius  (352- 
366)  rather  than  by  Gregory  the  Great,  and  the 
latter  the  survival  of  the  Roman  ambarvalia  or 
procession  around  the  fields.  The  custom  of  proces- 
sions, which  had  almost  fallen  into  desuetude,  was 
revived  by  Mamertus  about  470,  while  Leo  III. 
(795-816)  reoiganized  the  spring  rogations  accord- 
ing to  Gallic  usage  and  introduced  them  throughout 
the  Catholic  Church.  The  name  "  greater  "  and 
"  lesser,"  the  former  denoting  a  procession  of  one 
day  and  the  latter  of  three,  is  explained  by  the  rela- 
tive antiquity  of  the  two. 

The  origin  of  the  form  of  prayer  now  known  by 
the  name  of  litany  is  imcertain.  It  is  usually  as- 
simied  that  it  is  a  development  and  transformsr 
tion  of  the  Greek  edene,  although  the  hypothesis 
has  been  advanced  that  its  long  lists  of  saints  and 
its  response  "  pray  (or,  intercede)  for  us,"  are  sur- 
vivals of  the  formula  recited  by  the  Pontifex  Maxi- 
mus  according  to  the  indigitamenUif  or  old  books 
of  direction  for  worship,  so  that  they  can  not  be 
older  than  the  fourth  century;  but  no  correspond- 
ing formularies  can  be  cited  from  the  indigitamerUa. 
It  is  not  impossible  that  the  Western  procession  (in 
contradistinction  to  the  oriental)  was  not  a  devel- 
opment of  the  prayer  called  litany,  but  had  an  inde- 
pendent origin,  which  seems  to  have  been  derived 
from  pagan  models.  Later  the  processional  litany 
was  amplified  from  the  "deacon's  litany"  and  was 
separated  from  the  procession,  although  this  litany 
was  most  tenacious  in  places  where  a  procession 
once  actually  existed.    The  litany  usually  began 


with  the  invocation  Kyrie  eleiaon,  Christe  deieon,  or 
"  Christ,  hear  us,"  which  preceded  the  invocation  of 
the  saints,  the  people  responding  after  each  name 
''pray  for  us."  Certain  perils  and  dangers  were 
then  enumerated,  to  which  the  congregation  re- 
sponded with  the  deprecation  "  Lord,  deliver  us," 
and  these  were  followed  by  a  series  of  petitions  for 
blessings  with  the  response  ''hear  us,  we  beseech 
thee,"  the  whole  concluding  with  the  Agnus  Dei 
(q.v.)  and  the  Kyrie  eleison.  This  general  scheme 
was  modified  in  many  ways.  The  names  of  the 
saints  invoked  varied  according  to  place  and  cir- 
cmnstance,  and  the  litany,  according  to  the  number 
of  times  each  was  invoked,  was  termed  ternary, 
quinary,  and  septenary. 

The  litany  was  essentially  penitential,  and  it 
never  lost  this  character,  whence  it  was  frequently 
coxmected  with  the  seven  penitential  Psalms.  It 
was  extraordinarily  popular  and  was  used  on  the 
most  varied  occasions,  such  as  the  blessing  of  the 
baptismal  water  on  Holy  Saturday,  the  dedication 
of  a  church,  ordination,  coronation,  baptism,  con- 
fession, visitation  of  the  sick,  extreme  unction,  and 
the  ordinal.  It  originally  opened  the  mass,  as  is 
shown  by  the  Constitutions  of  Cluny  and  the  Stowe 
Missal,  the  same  usage  prevailing  at  Milan.  It  is 
clear,  in  the  light  of  all  evidence,  that  the  Kyrie 
which  now  follows  the  InJtrofU  in  the  ordinary  of  the 
mass  is  a  remnant  of  the  processional  litany.  The 
popularity  of  the  litany  resulted  in  the  composition 
of  many  new  ones,  some  of  them  in  metrical  form 
and  occasionally  deviating  widely  from  the  model 
and  spirit  of  the  Church.  The  public  use  of  new 
litanies  was  consequently  made  conditional  on  eccle- 
siastical approbation,  and  the  only  Utanies  now 
officially  sanctioned  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 
are  the  Litany  of  the  Saints  (approved  1601),  the 
Litany  of  Loreto  (approved  1587),  the  Litany  of 
the  Most  Holy  Name  of  Jesus  (approved  1862), 
and  the  Litany  of  the  Sacred  Heart  (approved  Apr. 
2,  1899).  The  Litany  of  the  Saints,  in  its  present 
form,  is  the  liturgical  litany  par  exceUence,  and  is 
used  on  such  occasions  as  the  conferring  of  major 
orders,  the  blessing  of  the  font  on  Holy  Saturday 
and  Whitsun  Eve,  as  well  as  on  the  Rogation  Days 
and  St.  Mark's  Day.  The  form  adopted  was  fixed 
in  1596,  with  a  few  additions  made  in  1683  and 
1847,  and  contains  sixty-three  invocations  of  saints 
with  the  response  "  pray  for  us."  The  Litany  of 
Loreto  is  devoted  to  the  Virgin  and  receives  its 
name  from  the  fact  that  for  centuries  it  has  been 
sung  on  Saturdays  in  the  Holy  House  of  Loreto. 
Each  penitential  recitation  of  it  gives  an  indul- 
gence of  300  days,  and  its  repetition  on  five  desig- 
nated feasts  of  the  Virgin  confers  a  plenary  indul- 
gence. The  Litany  of  the  Most  Holy  Name  of 
Jesus,  which,  according  to  the  Roman  Catholic 
view,  originated  in  the  fifteenth  century,  likewise 
gives  an  indulgence  of  300  days.  These  three  lit- 
anies are  also  used  in  litiugical  services  and  pro- 
cessions, but  are  simg  only  in  Latin.  There  are  in 
addition  a  number  of  litanies  with  episcopal  sanc- 
tion, such  as  those  for  brotherhoods,  which  are  re- 
cited in  the  vernacular  at  non-lituigical  public 
devotions. 

In  the  first  period  of  the  Wittenberg  Reforma- 


Iilteny 
Uttl^John 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


496 


tion  prooessionB  and  litanies  were  retained,  al- 
though they  were  discarded  by  1525.  Four  years 
later,  however,  a  revised  litany  wm  restored  in 
Evangelical  worship  by  Luther  himself,  the  imme- 
diate occasion  being  a  threatened  in- 
2.  Churches  vasion  of  the  Turks.  He  evidently 
of  the  Ref-  published  a  separate  German  version 

ormatioiL  of  this  litany,  although  no  copy  of  this 
edition  is  known  to  be  extant,  but 
there  is  no  ground  for  assuming  that  he  issued  the 
Latin  text  of  it  as  he  proposed  to  do.  The  German 
litany  was  also  appended  to  the  third  edition  of  his 
smaller  catechism,  but  was  later  omitted,  although  it 
then  found  its  way  into  the  hymnals,  doubtless  with 
its  author's  approval.  The  Latin  version,  in  like 
manner,  was  almost  certainly  contained  in  the 
hymnal  of  Klug  published  in  1529  and  no  longer  ex- 
tant. It  may  well  have  included  the  German  version 
as  well,  like  the  later  editions  of  the  work  and  a  num- 
ber of  other  hynmals  of  the  same  period.  The  ex- 
tension of  the  litany  through  middle  and  north 
Germany  by  means  of  the  hynm-books  was  rapid, 
but  it  was  comparatively  rarely  found,  on  the  other 
hand,  in  southern  or  southwestern  German  hym- 
nody.  There,  however,  it  was  spread  by  the  church 
orders,  the  more  important  ones  all  containing  it. 
The  original  Lutheran  litany  was  closely  similar  to 
the  Roman  Catholic  Litany  of  the  Saints,  except 
that  all  invocations  of  the  saints,  as  well  as  petitions 
for  the  pope  and  the  dead,  were  omitted.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  petitions  are  more  specialized  and 
more  concrete  than  in  the  older  litany,  which  is, 
nevertheless,  far  the  richer. 

In  the  northern  and  central  parts  of  Germany 
no  uniformity  whatever  prevailed  in  the  time  of  the 
recitation  of  the  litany.  Wednesday  and  Friday 
were,  on  the  whole,  the  favorite  days,  although  it 
might  also  be  recited  on  Tuesday,  Sunday  festivals, 
and  at  vespers  on  Saturday.  Local  usage  in  many 
cases  prescribed  it  for  special  days,  while  numerous 
church  orders  required  it  to  be  said  occasionally, 
although  no  special  day  was  designated.  The  place 
which  the  litany  occupied  in  the  North  and  Middle 
German  liturgy  likewise  varied.  It  might  be  re- 
cited alone,  either  in  the  morning  or  the  evening, 
after  the  lesson,  epistle,  or  sermon,  and  before  or 
during  the  communion.  An  equal  lack  of  uniform- 
ity prevailed  in  southern  and  southwestern  Ger- 
many, but  there  the  litany,  in  harmony  with  the 
intention  of  Luther,  retained  its  original  character 
oi  a  penitential  prayer  more  than  in  the  north,  so 
that  in  Strasburg  it  followed  the  confession  and 
absolution.  The  litany  was  subject,  furthermore, 
to  numerous  local  modifications,  petitions  being  in- 
serted or  omitted  practically  at  pleasure. 

In  Wittenberg  the  German  litany  was  chanted 
by  the  choir-boys,  while  the  congregation  sang  the 
responses,  although  ultimately  one  part  of  the  choir 
chanted  the  petitions  and  the  other  responded. 
The  Latin  litany  was  sung  only  in  the  latter  fashion. 
In  the  seventeenth  century  the  Latin  litany  was 
discarded  altogether,  and  in  case  there  was  a  trained 
choir,  the  pastor,  kneeling  or  standing  with  his  face 
toward  the  altar,  intoned  the  petition,  while  the 
congregation,  led  by  the  choir,  sang  the  responses. 
If  for  any  reason  the  litany  was  not  sung,  it  might 


be  recited  or  read.  These  modes  of  repeating  the 
litany  gradually  supplanted  the  singing  of  it,  but 
on  the  whole,  though  it  is  still  retained  in  almost 
all  modem  German  liturgies,  it  has  lost  its  hold  in 
great  measure  on  the  congregations  because  of  its 
monotony. 

The  Reformed  Church  had  Uttle  sympathy  with 
the  litany,  and  rejected  it  almost  without  exception, 
so  that  wherever  Calvinism  gained  supremacy  over 
Lutheranism,  the  litany  was  abolished. 

The  Moravians  have  two  litanies,  the  "  Church 
Litany  "  and  the  ''  Litany  of  the  Life,  Passion,  and 
Death  of  Jesus  Christ."  The  former  is  used  in  a 
double  form,  a  shorter  version  having  been  made 
in  1873,  while  the  latter  is  derived  from  the  "  Litany 
of  Woimds  "  composed  by  Zinzendorf  in  1744. 

(P.  Drews.) 
The  litany  of  the  English  Book  of  Common  Prayer 
was  originally  intended  to  be  a  distinct  office.  A 
rubric  in  the  first  prayei^book  (1549)  ordered  it  to 
be  said  on  Wednesdays  and  Fridays,  before  the 
communion-office.  It  was  then  placed  after  the 
communion-office,  and  in  1552  put  in  the  place  it 
now  occupies,  with  the  direction  that  it  was  to  be 
"  used  upon  Sundays,  Wednesdays,  and  Fridays, 
and  at  other  times  when  it  shall  be  commanded  by 
the  ordinary."  The  clause  in  Edward's  prayer- 
book,  "  From  the  tyranny  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome 
and  all  his  detestable  enormities,"  was  omitted  in 
1559. 

Bibuoorapht:  On  Utaium  in  general  consult:  Bingham, 
OrioenM,  XIII..  i.  10-12;  £.  Martina.  Z>0  anH^iM  eeeleauB 
rOtbtM.  Antwerp,  1763;  M.  Gerbert.  Viiua  Uturgia  Ale- 
manniea,  parts  ii.-iii.,  San  Bias,  1776;  idem,  Monumenta 
veterii  lUurgioB  Alemannica,  part  ii,  ib.  1770;  A.  J. 
Binterim,  DenkwItrdigkeUen,  iv.  1,  pp.  555  sqq..  Mains. 
1827;  C.  W.  Aususti,  DenkwOrdiokeiien,  x.  26  sqq.,  Leip- 
sio.  1820;  T.  F.  D.  Kliefoth,  LUurffUdta  Ahhandlun^fen, 
V.  301  sqq..  373  sqq..  308  sqq.,  vi  152  sqq.,  225  sqq.,  298 
sqq.,  viii  66  sqq.,  8  vols.,  Sehwerin,  1858-60;  J.  M. 
Neale,  Etmiy  on  lAtwrgioloov  and  Churdi  History,  Lon- 
don, 1863;  A.  P.  Stanley,  Christian  InatUuUonM,  chap, 
zii..  New  York.  1881;  Q.  Rietschel.  L^iHmch  der  LUur- 
gik,  i.  200-201  et  passim.  Berlin,  1000;  F.  Spitta,  in 
Monataehrift  /Or  Oottemiienat  und  kirehUehe  Kunst,  vi 
(1001),  375  sqq.;  L.  Duchesne,  Christian  Worahip,  pas- 
aim,  London,  1004. 

On  the  Lauretanian  Litany  consult:  J.  Sauren,  Die 
laureianUeke  LUaneij  Konpten,  1805;  A.  de  Santi,  Lc 
LUanoi  Laureiane,  Rome,  1807;  J.  Braun.  in  SUmmen  avs 
Maria  Laadi,  Iviu  (1000),  418-437.  On  the  Utany  of  the 
Brethren  of.  J.  T.  Mailer,  in  Monatadirift  far  OoUeadimai 
und  kirdUiehe  Kunat,  vii.  1002.  On  the  Anglican  Litany 
consult:  J.  H.  Blunt,  Annotated  Book  of  Common  Praver, 
London,  1003;  J.  N.  McOormick,  TKe  Litany  and  the  Life, 
Milwaukee.  1004;  F.  Procter  and  W.  H.  Frere,  Nev>  HiaL 
of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  London,  1005.  No  small 
part  of  the  literature  cited  under  LrruBOY  necessarily  deals 
with  the  litany. 

LITHUAIVIA.    See  Russia. 

LITTLE,  CHARLES  EUGENE:  Methodist  Epis- 
copalian; b.  at  Waterbury,  Vt.,  Apr.  7,  1838.  He 
was  graduated  in  1860  from  the  theological  depart- 
ment of  Boston  University  (then  at  Concord,  N.  H.), 
was  ordained  deacon  (1862)  and  eider  (1864),  and 
has  held  pastorates  at  Dannemora,  N.  Y.  (1860-61), 
ClintonviUe,  N.  Y.  (1862-63),  Fair  Haven,  Vt. 
(1865-67),  Newmarket,  N.  J.  (1867),  Eighth  Avenue 
Church,  Newark,  N.  J.  (1868-70),  Hackettstown, 
N.  J.  (1871,  1875-77),  Nyack,  N.  Y.  (1873-74), 


497 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Xdtany 
Iiittlijohn 


Park  Church,  Elizabeth,  N.  J.  (1878-80),  Cente- 
nary Church,  Newark,  N.  J.  (1881-83),  Calvary 
Church,  East  Orange,  N.  J.  (1884-86),  Grace  Church, 
Port  Richmond,  Staten  Island  (1887-91),  Lafayette 
Church,  Jersey  City,  N.  J.  (1892-96),  West  Side 
Avenue  Church,  Jersey  City  (1897-1901),  Arling- 
ton, N.  J.  (1902-05),  Hackensack.  N.  J.  (1905),  and 
Verona,  N.  J.,  since  1905.  He  has  written:  Biblical 
Lights  and  Side  LighU  (New  York,  1883);  HiHar- 
iced  LighU  (1886);  and  Cydapedia  of  Classified 
Dates  (1900). 

LITTLE   SISTERS   OF  THE   POOR,   THE:    A 

religious  order  of  women  which  had  its  origin  in 
Saint  Servan,  near  the  coast  town  of  St.  Malo  in 
Brittany.  In  1840  the  village  priest,  M.  le  Pailleur, 
first  interested  Jeanne  Jugan,  a  humble  servant 
girl,  and  a  few  other  pious  women  in  the  care  of 
some  of  the  aged  poor  people  of  the  locality,  and 
in  1842  a  house  was  bought  to  serve  as  a  refuge  for 
the  same.  The  work,  though  undertaken  without 
any  definite  or  far-reaching  plan,  and  utterly  with- 
out resources,  save  the  alms  contributed  by  a  far 
from  opulent  siurounding  population,  developed 
with  an  unlooked-for  rapidity.  The  spirit  of  pov- 
erty and  the  imselfish  devotedness  which  charac- 
terized the  founders  of  the  work  soon  made  them 
very  popular,  and  in  the  course  of  a  few  years  they 
were  organized  on  the  lines  of  a  religious  congrega- 
tion which  in  twenty  years  spread  to  most  of  the 
cities  of  France,  and  even  to  Belgium  and  England. 
The  object  of  the  organization  is  the  establishment 
and  maintenance  of  permanent  homes  for  the  des- 
titute aged  and  infirm  of  both  sexes  without  dis- 
tinction of  creed  or  nationality.  To  be  admitted 
to  these  homes  the  applicants  must  be  "  respecta- 
ble,'' i.e.,  of  good  moral  character,  and,  as  a  rule, 
they  must  be  over  sixty  years  of  age.  They  are 
supported  and  cared  for  personally  by  the  sisters 
who  depend  entirely  on  charity  for  their  mainte- 
nance. The  rule  of  the  community,  which  is  based 
on  that  of  St.  Augustine,  received  the  solemn  ap- 
probation of  the  Holy  See  July  9,  1854.  The  order 
was  legally  recognized  by  the  French  government 
in  1856,  and  it  finds  place  among  the  few  congrega- 
tions which  survived  the  legislation  enacted  against 
the  religious  commimities  in  France  in  1905  and 
1906. 

The  order  was  introduced  into  the  United  States 
in  186S  when  their  first  home  was  opened  in  Brook- 
lyn, and  in  1907  the  American  membership  num- 
bered 800  sisters  with  two  provincial  headquarters, 
one  in  Brooklyn  and  the  other  in  Chicago.  They 
conduct  fifty  homes  for  the  aged  in  the  various 
cities  of  the  Union,  chiefly  in  those  of  the  East 
and  Middle  West,  the  total  number  of  inmates  being 
over  9,000.  James  F.  Dribcoll. 

Bxblioorapht:  J.  P.  Migne,  EncydopMie  tfUoloffique,  vol. 
xxiii.;  Dietionnaire  <2m  ordre$  religieiAX,  vol.  iv  (under 
"  Petites  Soeun  des  Pauvres  ").  Paris,  1859;  L.  Aubi- 
neau,  Lebentbeadureiimngen,  Die  kleinen  SthwetUm  det 
Armen,  Regensburg,  1871;  Nouveau  dietionnaire  d'hiB- 
toire  et  de  geographie,  ib.  1874;  G.  Ratiinger,  Oeachiehte 
der  kirehlidien  Armenpfiege^  pp.  518  sqq.,  Freiburg,  1884; 
Qffleial  Calholie  Directory  for  the  United  Statea,  Milwaukee, 
1909;  Baunard,  E,  Ldxhore  et  lee  fondations  dee  Petitee 
Scnure  dee  pauvree,  Paris.  1904;  Heimbuoher,  Orden  und 
KongregaUonen,  ii.  388-389. 
VI.-n32 


LITTLEDALE,         RICHARD         FREDERICK: 

Church  of  England;  b.  in  Dublin  Sept.  14,  1833; 
d.  in  London  Jan.  11,  1890.  He  studied  at  Trinity 
College,  Dublin  (B.A.,  1854;  M.A.,  1858;  LL.D., 
1862;  D.C.L.,  Oxford,  1862).  He  was  curate  of 
Thorpe  Hamlet,  Norfolk  (1856-57),  then  of  St. 
Mary  the  Virgin,  Soho,  London  (1857-61);  but, 
being  compelled  by  iU-health  to  abandon  parochial 
work,  he  devoted  himself  to  religious  literature,  and 
became  a  voluminous  writer.  As  an  opponent  of 
the  Church  of  Rome,  he  attracted  much  attention. 
Among  his  works  may  be  mentioned:  Religi&us 
Communities  of  Women  in  the  Early  Church  (Lon- 
don, 1862);  Offices  of  the  Holy  Eastern  Church 
(1863);  The  Mixed  Chalice  {186Z);  The  North  Side 
of  the  Altar  (1864);  Catholic  Ritual  in  the  Church 
of  England  (1865);  The  Elevation  of  the  Host  (1865); 
Early  Christian  Ritual  (1867);  Commentary  on  the 
Psalms  (in  continuation  of  Dr.  Neale's,  vols,  ii.- 
iv.,  1868-74);  Commentary  on  the  Song  of  Songs 
(1869);  Religious  Education  of  Women  (1872); 
Papers  on  Sisterhoods  (1874-78);  Last  Attempt  to 
reform  the  Church  of  Rome  from  within  (1875);  Ul- 
tramontane Popular  Literature  (1876);  An  Inner 
View  of  the  Vatican  Council  (1877);  Plain  Reasons 
against  joining  the  Church  of  Rome  (1879);  A  Short 
History  of  the  Council  of  Trent  (1888);  The  Petrine 
Claims:  a  Critical  Inquiry  (1889).  He  contributed 
to  the  Encydopoedia  Britannica  (9th  ed.);  edited 
Anselm's  Cur  Deus  Homof  (1863);  and  shared  in 
editing  The  Priests'  Prayer-Book  (1864);  The  Peo- 
ple's Hymnal  (1867);  Liturgies  ofSS.  Mark,  James, 
Clement,  Chrysostom,and  Basil  (1868-69);  The  Chris- 
tian Passover  (1873);  and  The  Altar  Manual  (1877), 

Bxbuographt:  DNB,  xjodn.  384-365;  O.  C.  H.  Kins. 
7^  Character  of  Dr.  Littiedale  ae  a  ControvereialUt,  Lon- 
don. 1888.  Further  literature  is  indicated  in  Richvdoon, 
Encydopaedia,  p.  634. 

LITTLE  JOHN,  ABRAM  NEWKIRK:  Protes- 
tant Episcopal  bishop  of  Long  Island;  b.  at  Flor- 
ida, N.  Y.,  Dec.  13,  1824;  d.  at  Williamstown, 
Mass.,  Aug.  3,  1901.  He  was  educated  at  Union 
College  (B.A.,  1845)  and  at  Princeton  Theological 
Seminary.  He  was  ordained  deacon  in  1848  and 
priest  the  following  year.  While  deacon  he  offi- 
ciated at  Amsterdam,  N.  Y.,  and  at  Meriden,  Conn. 
He  was  rector  of  Christ  Church,  Springfield,  Mass. 
(1850-51);  St.  Paul's  Church,  New  Haven,  Conn. 
(1851-60);  and  Church  of  the  Holy  Trinity,  Brook- 
lyn, N.  Y.  (1860-69).  During  his  rectorate  in  New 
Haven  he  was  professor  of  pastoral  theology  in  the 
Berkeley  Divinity  School  at  Middletown,  Conn. 
He  was  consecrated  as  the  first  bishop  of  the  new 
diocese  of  Long  Island  (Jan.  27,  1869),  having  pre- 
viously been  elected  bishop  of  Central  New  York, 
but  declined  the  position.  He  had  oversight  of  the 
American  Protestant  Episcopal  churches  on  the 
Continent  (1874-86).  His  principal  works  are: 
Condones  ad  Clerum  (New  York,  1881);  Individ- 
ualism: its  Orowth  and  Tendencies  (1881;  lectures 
before  the  University  of  Cambridge)  and  The  Chris- 
tian Ministry  at  the  dose  of  the  19th  Century  (1884; 
lectures  on  the  Bishop  Paddock  foundation.  Gen- 
eral Theological  Seminary,  New  York). 

Bibliography:  W.  8.  Perry,  The  Epieeapaie  in  America, 
p.  196,  New  York,  1895, 


lilturglos 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


498 


I.  FondAmental  Principlefl. 

Importanoe    and    Delimitation  of 

Liturgy  (|  1). 
Theory  of  Liturgy  (|  2). 
Relation   of   Liturgy   to    Doctrine 

(13). 
Exemplification   by  the   Lutheran 

Liturgy  (|  4). 

1.  Fundamental  Principlet:  Proclamation  of  the 
Gospel,  prayer,  and  the  adminiBtration  of  the  Sao- 
ramenta  belong  to  the  essence  of  the  Church  and  of 
public  worship  as  well.  If  the  body  of  Christ  is  to 
be  truly  edified,  the  officiating  ministers  and  every 

member  of  the  congregation  must  be 
X.  Impor-  quickened  continually  by  the  Spirit  of 
tance  and  God.  The  precise  manner,  however, 
Delimlta-  in  which  the  principal  elements  of  di- 
tion  of  vine  service  are  combined  into  a 
Liturgy,  harmonioua  whole  is  of  less  vital  im- 
portanoe. Nevertheless,  side  by  side 
with  ecclesiastical  wisdom  and  orthodox  belief,  a  cer- 
tain sense  of  the  value  of  constant  types  and  modes 
of  confessional  expression  is  a  factor  of  moment, 
which,  in  its  turn,  reflects  a  common  need  that  finds 
its  support  in  the  force  of  historic  tradition.  Thus 
arises  the  liturgy,  or  the  form  of  worship  in  eccle- 
siastical communities.  In  a  restrictive  sense,  the 
idea  denotes  the  composite  aggregate  of  the  per- 
manent elements  of  worship  outside  the  sermon; 
that  is,  the  parts  which,  in  harmony  with  the  prin- 
ciples of  religious  logic,  are  comprised  in  the  official 
Church  manual,  or  liturgy  proper.  By  an  exten- 
sion of  the  liturgical  idea,  the  entire  order  of 
public  worship,  including  the  sermon,  is  thus  desig- 
nated. In  the  latter  case,  however,  only  the  rela- 
tive position  of  the  sermon,  and  not  its  content,  is 
considered,  the  theme  and  style  of  the  sermon  being 
independent  of  fixed  definition  (see  Homiletics; 
Preaching).  Equally  outside  the  realm  of  litur- 
gies is  the  fact  that  the  communion  is  celebrated 
according  to  Christ's  institution;  but  the  questions 
as  to  whether  the  words  of  institution  shall  be  re- 
cited, whether  a  formula  of  distribution  shall  be 
employed,  and  whether  an  altar  or  a  table  shall  be 
used,  are  distinctly  liturgic.  Indeed,  it  was  only 
through  the  liturgy  that  the  consecration  itself  be- 
came an  integral  element  of  the  divine  service.  At 
the  same  time,  in  virtue  of  its  peculiar  solemnity, 
the  Lord's  Supper  (q.v.;  see  also  Eucharibt; 
Mass)  became  the  central  point  of  lituigic  arrange- 
ment, so  that  the  term  ''  liturgy  "  found  its  prin- 
cipal application  in  connection  with  the  celebration 
of  the  Eucharist. 

The  result  of  a  liturgy  was  reached  neither  by 

divine    revelation    nor    by    canonical    enactment. 

The  worship  of  the  early  Church  re- 

2.  Theory  veals  an  exuberance  of   spiritual  life 
of  Liturgy,  and  a  great  diversity  of  spiritual  gifts, 

but  in  so  amorphous  a  state  that  Paul 
foimd  himself  obliged  to  urge  uniformity  in  worship 
(I  Cor.  xiv.).  Though  Paul  by  no  means  estab- 
lished a  working  principle  for  the  regulation  of  public 

*  This  article  should  be  read  in  connection  with  the  arti- 
des  Mass  (for  the  Roman  Catholic  development),  Agbnda, 
ET7CRABX8T,  and  Lord's  Suppkb  (for  the  Ftotestant  side). 


LITTJRGICS.« 

Christian  Use  of  the  Term  (|  5). 
IL  Historioal  Development. 

Bervioe  in  Temple  and  Synagogue 

(ID. 
Development  of  the  Christian  Serv- 

ioft  (i  2). 
Medieval  Elaborations  (|  3). 
After  the  Reformation  (|  4). 


IIL  Liturgical  Fonnulas. 
Amen  (|  1). 
The  Doxologies  (|  2). 
Alleluia  (|  3). 
Hosanna  (f  4). 
Kyrie  Eleison  (f  5). 
Pax  vobiscum,  Dominus  vobiaeixm 
(§6). 

worship,  the  liturgical  tendency  was  inherent  in  the 
factor  of  historic  conservatism  which  began  to  exert 
itself  from  the  very  first,  as  ib  shown,  for  instance, 
by  the  custom,  derived  from  the  synagogue  custom 
(see  below,  II.,  {  1),  of  congr^;ational  response  to 
the  prayers  of  thanksgiving.  The  tendency  to 
create  some  permanent  order,  the  significanoe  of 
which  should  reach  beyond  the  local  and  transient, 
implanted  itself  with  formative  and  regulative 
power  in  the  administrative  organism  of  the  spir- 
itual life.  Nevertheless,  this  process  never  gained 
the  character  of  a  law;  nor  were  liturgical  elabora- 
tions so  abstract  that  spontaneously  personal  ele- 
ments could  not  find  a  place  in  the  official  prayers. 
It  is  obvious  that  the  composers  of  particular  litur- 
gical forms  must  remain  in  the  background.  But 
notwithstanding  all  this,  each  liturgy  is  character- 
istic of  the  ecclesiastical  community  to  which  it 
appertains;  nor  must  it  be  foigotten  that  the 
phraseology  of  the  sermon  has  a  decided  influence 
upon  litiugical  expression.  Moreover,  this  festal 
robe  of  ceremonial  practise,  woven  by  custom,  re- 
ceives its  interwoven  warp  and  woof  of  symbolism 
and  artistic  ornament.  This  is  not  to  be  adjudged 
worldly  or  unevangelical;  since  here,  too,  is  dis> 
oemed  rather  a  vital  impulse,  proceeding  from  the 
divine  cosmic  dispensation  and  influencing  advan- 
tageously the  domain  of  spiritual  benefits.  The 
same  tendency,  in  a  narrower  sense,  has  given  ar- 
tistic adornment  to  such  liturgical  objects  as  the 
altar,  the  pulpit,  and  the  sacred  vessels,  and  has 
employed  special  colors  in  a  symbolic  scheme  to 
emphasize  the  proper  nature  of  the  festival  sesr 
sons  (see  Paramenta;  Stmbolibm).  A  redundancy 
of  these  subsidiary  devices,  to  the  repression  of 
what  is  essential  to  worship,  is,  however,  reprehen- 
sible. The  Reformation  rightly  returned  to  sim- 
plicity in  this  respect,  the  Reformed  Church  more 
decidedly  than  the  German,  though  even  Luther, 
for  all  his  unrestrained  appreciation  of  the  artistic 
and  symbolic,  contrived  to  observe  the  requisite 
bounds.    See  Worship. 

In  considering  the  relation  between  the  liturgy 
of  the  Church  and  its  doctrine,  it  is  clear  that  modi- 
fications of  doctrine  can  not  remain  without  influ- 
ence upon  the  litiugy,  as  is  attest^ 
3.  Relation  by  the  history  of  worship  at  every 
of  Liturgy  turn.    The  more   the  comprehension 
to  Doctrine,  of  the  salvation  wrought  by  the  death 
of  Christ  recedes  into  the  background, 
the  shallower  becomes  the  substance  of  the  Eucha- 
ristic  prayers.    The  more  strictly  the  Reformation 
returned  to  the  Scriptures  and  to  Christ's  purpose 
in  the  institution  of  the  Eucharist,  the  more  dis- 
tinctly was  this  reflected  in  the  revision  of  Evan- 
gelical liturgies.     On  the  other  hand,  if  the  true 
character  of  an  ecclesiastical  community  is  to  be 


499 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


LltnrgloB 


truly  known,  liturgy  as  well  as  doctrine  must  be 
considered.  It  may  be  laid  down  as  a  general 
principle  that  the  closer  the  adherence  to  the  sim- 
ple sense  of  the  Scriptures,  the  fewer  will  be  the 
lituigical  elaborations  in  question.  The  question 
as  to  what  is  essential  to  a  liturgy  is  not  abstract, 
but  should  be  answered  with  reverent  regard  for 
historic  and  conservative  forms.  For  even  if  his- 
toric usage  were  abandoned  and  a  course  of  abso- 
lute innovation  were  adopted,  nevertheless,  the 
new  forms  thus  created  would  themselves  exhibit 
a  marked  tendency  to  resist  subsequent  innovations. 

The  present  status  of  the  Lutheran  liturgy  shows 
evidence  of  the  influence  of  the  principles  of  con- 
servative reform.  In  some  respects  there  has  been 
a  reaction  as  regards  Luther's  altera^ 

4.  Exem-    tions  in  the  Deutsche  Mease,  in  favor 

pUfication  of  still  older  forms.  To  the  introit  of 
by  the      the   Mass   there    corresponds   in   the 

Lutheran  Evangelical  order  of  worship,  after 
Liturgy,  the  opening  hjrmn,  an  antiphon  in 
Scriptural  phraseology  adapted  espe- 
cially from  the  Old  Testament.  In  this  the  dis- 
tinctive character  of  the  feast  or  the  church  season 
concerned  must  be  reflected  from  the  very  first. 
The  ConJUeor,  instead  of  remaining  a  priestly  act 
of  preparation,  became  a  congregational  confession 
of  sin — again  a  return  to  the  pre-Lutheran  liturgy. 
The  Kyrie  and  Gloria  following  the  Confiteor  were 
incorporated  in  the  Lutheran  liturgy.  The  saluta- 
tion Dominus  vobiscum,  together  with  the  response 
Et  cum  spiritu  tuo,  both  omitted  by  Luther,  were 
very  early  restored  in  the  Evangelical  liturgies. 
The  reading  of  Scripture  has  no  longer  for  its  mission 
the  famili^ization  of  the  congregation  with  the 
Bible,  but  is  designed  solemnly  to  remind  them  of 
this  treasiue,  with  the  accompaniment  of  responses 
which  may  be  freely  supplemented  on  occasion .  The 
"  voice  of  Scripture  "  is  followed  by  the  "voice  of 
the  Church,"  the  recitation  of  the  Apostles'  Creed 
for  which,  however,  a  hymn  of  like  purport,  such  as 
Luther's  Wir  glauben  all  an  einen  Gott,  may  be  sub- 
stituted. In  the  commtmion  service,  Luther  still 
spared  the  ancient  Preface,  and  also  accepted  the 
Agnu8  Dei.  But  even  in  this  domain,  a  refined 
liturgical  sense  decided  largely  in  favor  of  earlier  ec- 
clesiastical usage.  For  instance,  the  Lord's  Prayer 
was  reinstated  in  its  rightful  place,  before  the  Pax 
and  the  distribution,  while  the  form  of  distribution 
was  again  duly  honored.  In  every  direction  there 
was  careful  insistence  upon  historic  connection,  in 
harmony  with  Protestant  tenets. 

With  reference  to  the  application  of  the  term 

"  liturgy "  to  the  sphere  of  divine  service,   the 

Christian  use  of  the  word  is  based  on  the  Septua- 

gint,    which    translates   the    Hebrew 

5.  Christian  'aboda,  in  relation  to  the  Temple  serv- 

XJsc  of  the  ice,  by  leitourgia.  In  the  New  Testa- 
Term.  ment,  however,  the  word  does  not 
occur  in  connection  with  ceremonial 
affairs,  but  indicates  the  service  which  the  Christian 
renders  to  God  in  faith  and  obedience,  as  in  Heb. 
viii.  2, 6;  Phil.  ii.  17;  Rom.  xv.  16;  or  with  reference 
to  brotherly  support,  as  in  Rom.  xv.  27;  Phil.  ii. 
25,  30;  II  Cor.  ix.  12.  The  relation  to  ceremonial 
practises  recurs  most  closely  in  Acts  xiii.  2;  though 


here,  too,  the  idea  of  ceremonially  regulated  usage 
is  to  be  rejected.  The  ecclesiastical  use  of  the  term 
reverts  principally  to  the  Old  Testament,  signifi- 
cantly implying  a  transfer  of  pre-Christian  legal- 
ism to  the  Christian  dispensation.  Hence  the  cuiv 
rent  expressions  for  Levitical  and  priestly  acts  were 
applied  to  divine  worship,  especially  in  order  to 
designate  the  central  and  sacrificial  act.  More- 
over, leiiourffia  and  leitaurgein  were  once  more  em- 
ployed in  the  ceremonial  sense.  The  Western 
Church  early  borrowed  the  term  to  designate  the 
Eucharist.  The  Evangelical  confessions  gave  pref- 
erence to  the  term  ccerimonia;  and  it  was  only 
under  the  influence  of  Humanism  (q.v.),  beginning 
with  the  sixteenth  century,  that  the  word  liiurgia 
came  into  current  use,  first  among  the  Roman 
Catholics,  and  later  among  the  Protestants.  The 
term  is  now  often  used  in  a  widened  sense,  and  the 
phrases  baptismal,  marriage,  confirmation,  and 
burial  liturgies  are  loosely  employed.  For  the  his- 
tory of  Lutheran  liturgies  see  Agenda. 

Hermann  Bering. 
IL  Historical  Development:  The  first  Chris- 
tians, being  members  of  the  Jewish  Church,  fol- 
lowed naturally  the  Jewish  manner  of  worship. 
The  services  to  which  they  were  accustomed  were 
those  of  the  Temple  (q.v.)  and  of  the  Synagogue 
(q.v.).  The  temple  service  was  elaborate,  and  was 
for  the  purpose  of  worship;  the  syna- 
z.  Service  gogue  service  was  simple  and  was  for 
in  Temple  the  purpose  of  instruction.  The  tem- 
and  Syna-  pie  contributed  to  litiugical  develop- 
gogtte.  ment  the  tradition  of  a  noble  service, 
in  a  stately  building,  with  vested  clergy, 
with  prayers  accompanied  by  the  symbol  of  Incense 
(q.v.),  with  praises  sung  from  the  book  of  psalms, 
with  an  altar,  and  with  the  varied  interest  and  sig- 
nificance of  an  ordered  sequence  of  feasts  and  fasts. 
The  fact,  however,  that  the  temple  was  in  Jerusa- 
lem, and  that  it  was  destroyed  and  its  services 
ended  forever  in  70  a.d.,  gave  its  lituigical  prece- 
dents a  minor  part  in  the  making  of  the  primitive 
Christian  devotions.  These  were  patterned  mainly 
upon  those  of  the  synagogue.  The  synagogue  was 
a  plain  building,  having  a  platform  at  the  further 
end.  On  the  platform  were  seats  for  church  ofii- 
cials,  and  in  the  midst  was  a  pulpit.  Over  the  pul- 
pit hung  an  ever-burning  lamp,  and  back  of  the 
pulpit,  behind  a  curtain  against  the  wall,  was  a 
chest  containing  the  rolls  of  the  sacred  books.  The 
ordinary  service  began  with  the  Shema,  a  habit- 
ual, daily  devotion,  like  the  Lord's  Prayer,  consist- 
ing of  three  passages  of  Scripture,  Deut.  vi.  4-9, 
xi.  13-21;  Num.  xv.  37-41.  After  this  came  the 
Shemoneh  esreh,  or  eighteen  benedictions,  each  with 
a  recurring  phrase  or  refrain,  followed  by  an  Amen 
as  a  congregational  response.  This  was  succeeded 
by  the  first  lesson,  taken  from  the  Law,  read  in 
seven  parts  by  seven  readers,  each  pronouncing  a 
few  verses,  the  verses  being  translated  into  Aramaic, 
with  explanation,  comment,  and  application.  The 
second  lesson  was  a  single  reading  from  the  Prophr 
ets,  translated  and  explained  as  before  (cf.  Luke 
iv.  16  sqq.).  With  a  collection  for  the  poor,  and 
a  benediction,  perhaps  with  some  singing  of  poEdms, 
the  service  ended. 


X«itiix!gios 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


000 


To  this  service  the  Christians  added  a  Liturgy 
of  Christ  in  the  Holy  Communion;  and  a  Lituigy 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  short-lived  enthusiasm  of 
the  speaking  with  tongues,  and  a  Liturgy  of  God 
the  Father  in  the  agapS,  or  love-feast, 
3.  Develop- which  assembled  the  faithful  as  the 
ment  of  the  family  of  God  to  the  enjoyment  of  his 
Christian  blessings.  (See  Aqape;  Eucharist; 
Service.  Lord's  Suppbr).  The  synagogue 
service  grew  into  the  homileti^  in- 
troduction to  the  Holy  Communion,  called  the 
Missa  Catechumenorum,  with  the  reading  of  pas- 
sages from  the  Epistles  and  the  Gospels,  followed 
by  a  sermon.  It  affected  also  the  daily  prayers. 
These  daily  devotions,  which  came  to  be  called  the 
Divine  Office,  had  their  beginning  in  the  observ- 
ance of  hours  of  prayer.  Two  such  hours  were  sug- 
gested by  the  natural  instincts  of  the  religious  life: 
the  morning,  at  cock-crowing,  called  matins;  the 
evening,  at  candle-lighting,  called  vespers.  These 
were  at  first  observed  in  private  or  as  times  for 
family  worship;  but  presently  they  were  kept  in 
the  consecrated  quiet  of  the  churdi,  people  com- 
ing in  at  these  seasons  and  saying  their  prayers, 
each  person  by  himself.  Gradually,  other  seasons 
of  devotion  b^an  to  be  observed.  First,  the  vigil, 
which  in  its  original  form  was  a  night  of  prayer 
before  Easter,  and  then  came  to  precede  ordinary 
Sundays,  and  then  to  be  a  time  of  spiritual  prepa- 
ration for  saints'  days.  On  these  occasions  the 
morning  prayer  was  in  two  parts,  one  in  the  night, 
called  matins  or  noctums;  the  other  at  dawn, 
called  lauds.  Then,  to  meet  the  eagerness  for  the 
privilege  of  prayer,  three  hours  were  kept  in  the 
day:  the  third  hour,  nine  o'clock,  called  terce,  re- 
membering the  disciples  on  the  Day  of  Pentecost; 
the  sixth  hour,  twelve  o'clock,  call^  sezt,  remem- 
bering St.  Peter  on  the  housetop;  the  ninth  hour, 
called  none,  remembering  how  Peter  and  John 
went  into  the  temple  at  the  hour  of  prayer.  Thus 
there  were  six  times  for  daily  prayer:  matins,  lauds, 
terce,  sext,  none,  and  vespers.  The  next  step  was 
to  make  these  individual  devotions  public  and  con- 
gregational, and  to  have  them  led  by  the  clergy. 
Of  course,  for  busy  people,  such  a  continual  exer- 
cise of  prayer  was  impossible.  For  them,  as  is 
common  to-day,  the  daily  devotions  were  for  the 
most  part  the  private  prayers  which  they  said  at 
the  cock-crow  and  at  the  candle-lighting.  The 
faithful  who  went  to  church  six  times  a  day  were 
mainly  ascetics,  whose  chief  interest  and  occupa- 
tion in  life  was  the  act  of  prayer.  Presently,  these 
devout  persons  were  gathered  into  groups  and  so- 
cieties, and  disappeared  from  sight  in  monasteries. 
There  they  added  to  the  six  daily  services  two 
more:  Prime,  as  the  prayers  before  the  daily  chap- 
ter meeting,  and  CompUne,  before  going  to  bed. 
Thus  the  cycle  was  completed.  It  had  never  had 
much  place  in  the  experience  of  the  ordinary  lay- 
man. It  was  understood  to  be  intended  for  the 
clergy  and  for  the  members  of  religious  orders. 

The  heart  of  the  daily  services  was  the  book  of 
psakns.  To  recite  or  sing  these  psalms  was  the 
purpose  for  which  the  faithful  met  at  the  appointed 
hours.  The  psalter  was  arranged  to  be  gone  over 
in  a  week.     To  the  psalms  were  added  Scripture 


readings,  and  a  few  prayers,  with  versides  and  re- 
sponses.  The  Latin  Church  introduced  hymns  in  me- 
ter, and  lengthened  lauds  and  vespera  with  commem- 
orations of  the  saints.    And  the  saints, 
3.  Medieval  in  rapidly  increasing  numbers,  claimed 
Elabon-    their  rights    in  the  services,    having 
tions.       lessons  and    prayers    appropriate   to 
their  virtues.    And  the  Little  Office  of 
the  Viiigin  paralleled  all  the  eight  services  with  an 
order  of  its  own.    These  enrichments  came  to  their 
fulness  in   the  thirteenth  century.    They  made  it 
necessary  to  use  a  great  number  of  books  in  the 
conduct  of  the  service:    the  psalter,  the  antiphonal, 
the  hymnal,  the  Bible,  the  collect  book,  the  pro- 
cessional;  and  for  direction,  the   consuetudinary, 
the  ordinal,  and  the  directorium.    With  the  rise  of 
the  Franciscans  in  the  thirteenth  century,  and  the 
free  movement  of  persons  committed  to  the  life  of 
religion,  it  became  necessary  to  bring  this  liturgical 
library  into  some  condensed,  compact  and  portable 
form,  and  the  Breviary  (q.v.)  was  the  result.    The 
order  for  the  Holy  Communion  had  been  similarly 
enriched  and  was  correspondingly  simplified  in  the 
Missal  (see  Mass). 

As  the  era  of  the  Protestant  Reformation  came 
on,  the  need  of  further  liturgical  revision  was  felt 
by  many,  and  steps  in  that  direction  were  taken 
both  with  and  without  ecclesiastical  authority. 
Thus  in  1535,  Cardinal  Qujgnon  at  the 
4.  After  request  of  Pope  Clement  VII.  under- 
the  Refor-  took  are  vision  of  the  breviary,  dem- 
mation.  ent  died  before  the  completion  of  this 
work,  and  it  was  dedicated  to  Pope 
Paul  III.,  who  formally  permitted  the  secular  dei^ 
to  substitute  it  for  the  breviary  unreformed.  Quig- 
non  altered  some  things  and  some  he  added;  he 
removed  some  legends  from  the  lectionary;  he  ar- 
ranged to  have  the  Bible  read  at  length  and  not, 
as  had  come  to  be  the  usage,  in  detached  frag- 
ments; he  arranged  the  psalter  so  as  to  be  read 
in  course  and  not  interrupted  by  substituting  special 
psalms.  Also  he  took  out  two-thirds  of  the  saints' 
days  and  all  the  offices  of  the  Virgin,  and  omitted 
a  great  number  of  versicles,  responses,  invitationes, 
aiid  antiphons.  In  a  second  edition,  however,  he 
restored  the  antiphons  by  request  of  the  theological 
faculty  of  Paris.  This  was  the  authorised  breviary 
of  the  Western  Church  until  it  was  superseded  in 
1568  by  the  present  book,  made  by  a  commission 
of  the  Coimcil'  of  Trent.  In  1543,  Archbishop  Hei^ 
man  of  Cologne  (see  Herman  of  Wied)  published 
a  directory  of  public  worship,  in  sympathy  with 
the  Reformation.  This  was  composed  at  his  re- 
quest by  Butser  and  Melanchthon,  on  the  basis  of 
a  form  compiled  by  Luther,  called  the  Nuremberg 
Liturgy.  The  book  contained  forms  of  prayer  and 
a  litany,  with  directions  for  the  administration  of 
the  sacraments,  and  for  other  services,  with  many 
explanations.  One  of  its  characteristic  features  was 
the  addressing  of  exhortations  to  the  people.  This 
book  was  disaJlowed  by  the  Church,  and  the  arch- 
bishop was  expelled.  These  two  liturgical  revisions 
were  in  the  hands  of  Archbishop  Cnmmer  during 
the  preparation  of  the  English  Book  of  Common 
Prayer,  and  he  made  great  use  of  both.  For  the 
history  of  this  work  see  Common  Prater,  Book  of. 


501 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lltursios 


Meanwhile,  both  in  England  and  on  the  Continent 
the  conditions  of  ecclesiastical  strife  were  inducing 
among  many  a  liturgical  reaction.  The  Lutheran 
Church,  indeed,  held  to  many  of  the  traditions  of 
devotion,  but  the  Calvinistic  churches  of  Switzer- 
land and  France,  and  the  Puritan  churches  of 
England  and  Scotland,  abandoned  the  old  forms 
and  adopted  for  the  most  part  an  extemporaneous 
worship.  This  was  an  incident  in  a  bitter  con- 
tention, and  proceeded  not  so  much  from  a  dislike 
of  the  ancient  prayers  as  from  a  dislike  of  the  people 
who  insisted  on  them.  This  dislike  the  course  of 
time  has  mitigated,  and  at  present  there  is  a  gen- 
eral return  in  most  of  the  Protestant  churches  to 
the  liturgical  treasures  which  the  fathers  left 
behind.  George  Hodges. 

in.  Liturgical  Formulas:  Under  this  head  it 
is  convenient  to  group  together  several  traditional 
phrases  frequently  used  in  divine  worship,  and  ap- 
pearing again  and  again  in  the  most  various  litur- 
gies. 

The  Hebrew  amen,  when  used  adverbially  in  the 
Scriptures  (e.g.,  Num.  v.  22;  Deut.  xxvii.  15;  Ps. 
xli.  13),  has  the  force  of  strong  affirmation  or  as- 
sent, usually  to  the  words  spoken  by  another,  al- 
though it  may  also  be  used  as  a  pre- 
z.  Amen,  liminary  affirmation  of  the  speaker's 
own,  occurring  frequently  in  this  sense 
in  the  words  of  Jesus.  Its  lituigical  use  is  the 
former.  It  is  thus  found  in  the  Jewish  rites,  as  an 
assent  by  the  congregation  to  the  content  of  a 
prayer.  The  Christian  Church  borrowed  this  usage, 
keeping  the  Hebrew  form,  the  meaning  of  which 
was  always  familiar  to  theologians,  though  perhaps 
not  always  to  the  people  at  large,  for  whom  a 
translation  was  sometimes  appended,  as  in  the 
Coptic  liturgies.  Its  primitive  use  as  conveying 
the  assent  of  the  whole  congregation  to  the  prayer 
of  any  member  (cf.  I  Cor.  xiv.  16)  remained  when 
the  utterance  of  the  prayer  became  the  office  of  a 
distinct  clerical  class,  as  is  shown  by  nearly  all  the 
Eastern  liturgies.  An  exceptional  case  is  the 
liturgy  contained  in  the  eighth  book  of  the  Apos- 
tolic Constitutions,  where  the  **  Amen  "  is  assigned 
to  the  congregation  after  three  prayers  only — the 
Trisagion  (q.  v.),  the  prayer  of  intercession,  and  the 
formula  of  administration.  In  the  modem  Greek 
Church,  the  '*  Amen ''  is  taken  from  the  congrega^ 
tion  and  given  to  the  choir — and  then  in  compara- 
tively few  places.  In  some  Eastern  baptismal 
rites,  as  still  among  the  Nestorians,  it  seems  to  have 
been  customary  for  the  congregation  to  say  Amen 
after  each  part  of  the  baptismal  formula;  in  the 
present  Eastern  Church  it  is  thus  pronounced  by 
the  priest,  having  lost  its  original  meaning  and  be- 
come a  mere  concluding  word.  The  most  obvious 
retention  of  the  old  usage  in  the  West  occurs  in  the 
Mozarabic  Liturgy  (q.v.),  where  some  of  the  re- 
sponses are  indeed  assigned  to  the  choir,  but  the 
congr^ation  is  bidden  to  answer  in  other  cases, 
especially  with  "  Amen."  In  the  present  Roman 
rite,  the  "  Amen  "  belongs  either  to  the  assistants 
or  to  the  choir,  or  is  pronounced  by  the  priest  him- 
self, as  in  the  formiila  of  administration  at  com- 
munion and  at  the  end  of  the  Lord's  Prayer  in  the 
mass.     Luther  interpreted  the   "  Amen "  in   the 


sense  of  his  own  doctrine  of  faith,  as  "  an  expres- 
sion of  firm  and  hearty  belief,"  and  the  Reformar 
tion  restored  the  use  of  it  in  a  number  of  cases, 
though  not  in  all,  to  the  congregation.  In  the 
Anglican  Book  of  Common  Prayer  it  occurs  at  the 
end  of  every  prayer  as  the  response  of  the  people, 
except  after  the  first  Lord's  Prayer  in  the  Commu- 
nion Office. 

In  continuation  of  the  old  synagogal  custom,  the 
primitive  Christians  closed  every  important  litui^ 
gical  prayer  with  a  doxology,  and  the  custom  was 
extended  to  sermons  also.  The  simplest  form  was 
''to  thee  (or  '' to  whom")  be  glory  throughout 
all  ages  "  (cf.  Rom.  xi.  36;  Phil.  iv.  20;  Didache 
ix.  2,  3;  Apostolic  Constitutions  II., 
2.  The  xxii.  11).  A  number  of  formulas  grew 
Doxologies.  up  in  the  ooiu'se  of  time,  differing  ac- 
cording to  the  influence  of  the  dogma 
of  the  Trinity.  While  from  the  second  to  the  be- 
ginning of  the  fourth  century  the  form  "  to  thee 
be^  glory  in  the  Holy  Ghost  through  Jesus  Christ  " 
was  usual,  when  it  became  possible  to  suspect 
Arianism  in  such  a  phrase,  it  was  changed  to  one 
which  completely  coordinated  the  three  Persons, 
"  Glory  to  the  Father,  and  to  the  Son,  and  to  the 
Holy  Ghost."  The  Gloria  Patri,  known  as  the  les- 
ser doxology  to  distinguish  it  from  the  Gloria  in 
exceUnSf  was  slow  to  find  its  way  into  all  the 
Eastern  liturgies.  Thus  it  is  not  found  in  the 
Clementine  liturgy  of  the  Apostolic  Constitutions 
or  in  that  of  St.  James,  and  even  the  ninth- 
century  liturgies  of  St.  Chrysostom  and  St.  Basil 
do  not  contain  it.  It  is  of  frequent  occurrence, 
on  the  other  hand,  in  the  Nestorian  and  Ar- 
menian liturgies  and  in  the  present  liturgy  of 
St.  Chrysostom,  as  well  as  less  often  in  the  vari- 
ous Jacobite  rites.  The  second  half,  '*  As  it  was 
in  the  beginning,  is  now,  and  ever  shall  be,  world 
without  end.  Amen,"  does  not  occur  in  the  East, 
and  is  probably  of  Roman  origin.  The  Synod  of 
Vaison  (529)  asserts  that  its  use  was  universal  in 
Italy  and  Africa,  and  directs  its  introduction  into 
Gaul.  It  is  not  in  the  Mozarabic  liturgy,  where  the 
formula  runs  *'  Glory  and  honor  to  the  Father,  and 
to  the  Son,  and  to  the  Holy  Ghost  throughout  all 
ages."  In  the  Extern  rites  the  doxology  was  used 
in  many  different  places.  The  Roman  b'turgy,  on 
the  other  hand,  lays  down  fixed  rules  for  its  use. 
It  occurs  regularly  at  the  end  of  each  psalm,  and 
the  first  half  of  it  in  the  responsories  of  the  day  and 
night  hours;  in  the  Mass  it  occurs  in  the  prepara- 
tion, after  the  Introit  or  anthem  sung  at  the  be- 
ginning of  the  communion  service  in  tha  Roman 
Catholic  Church,  and  after  the  Lavabo  psalm.  The 
custom  of  using  it  thus  at  the  end  of  psalms  or 
parts  of  psalms  is  first  attested  by  John  Cassian 
(before  426),  and  next  by  Pope  Vigilius  (d.  555). 
The  assertion  of  medieval  liturgiologists  that  the 
practise  was  introduced  by  Pope  Damasus  is  pos- 
sibly true.  As  the  Gloria  Patri  has  a  more  or  less 
festival  or  triiunphant  character,  it  is  wholly  or 
partly  omitted  on  occasions  of  mourning,  as  in  Holy 
Week  and  in  services  for  the  dead:  in  the  latter 
case  the  Greeks  still  use  it.  Luther  seems  to  have 
ignored  the  Gloria  Patri,  although  modem  Lutheran 
liturgies  put  it  after  the  introit.    The  Gloria  in  ex- 


Liturgies 


THE  NEW  8CHAFF-HERZ0G 


502 


ceUia,  or  Greater  Doxology,  by  an  unknown  author, 
occurs  in  the  Eastern  liturgies,  which  vary  in  the 
position  assigned  to  it,  and  also  forms  the  opening 
of  a  service  for  morning  prayer  found  in  the  Apos- 
tolic Constitutions  (VII.,  xlvii.),  the  pseudo-Atha- 
nasian  De  virffinUaie,  and  the  Codex  Alexandrinus. 
The  Latin  version  used  in  the  Mass,  said  to  have 
been  made  by  Hilary  of  Poitiers,  is  slightly  altered 
from  the  original.  According  to  the  Liber  pofiH- 
ficalis,  Pope  Telesphorus  (q.v.)  prescribed  the  use 
of  the  angelic  hymn  as  found  in  Luke  ii.  14  for  the 
Christmas  service,  and  Pope  Symmachus  (q.v.)  of 
the  expanded  form  for  all  Sundays  and  feasts  of 
martyrs.  It  was  then  to  be  used  only  by  bishops; 
priests  might  recite  it  only  at  Easter  and  in  their 
first  Eucharist.  At  the  end  of  the  eleventh  cen- 
tury its  use  was  permitted  to  priests  at  all  times 
when  it  was  lituigically  prescribed.  By  the  pres- 
ent Roman  use,  it  is  omitted  on  all  days  not  of  a 
festal  character.  Luther  retained  it  in  his  Formula 
mxMiBf  but  does  not  mention  it  in  his  Deutache 
Mease,  though  this  may  be  because  it  was  taken  by 
many  as  going  with  the  Kyrie,  Most  of  the  Lu- 
theran service-books  retained  it,  and  so  did  the  Re- 
formed; Zwingli  provided  that  it  should  be  intoned 
by  the  minister  in  German,  and  then  taken  up  by 
the  men  and  women  of  the  congregation  alter- 
nately. In  the  Anglican  Book  of  Common  Prayer 
it  was  removed  from  the  beginning  to  the  end  of 
the  communion  service;  and  in  the  American  it 
was  also  permitted  to  be  used  as  an  alternative  to 
the  Gloria  Patri  after  the  psalms. 

The  Hebrew  formula  haUeluyah,  "  praise  ye  Yah- 
weh,"  which  was  frequently  used  in  Jewish  worship, 
passed  over  untranslated  into  the  Christian  serv- 
ices. The  earliest  indication  of  this  use  is  Rev. 
xtx.  1-8.  In  the  earliest  definitely  liturgical  use  it 
occurred  after  the  reading  of  the 
3.  Alleluia,  epistle  and  at  the  time  of  commu- 
nion. In  the  Eastern  Church  it  is 
still  used  even  in  penitential  seasons  and  in  serv- 
ices for  the  dead.  For  the  West  the  earliest  evi- 
dence is  Tertullian,  De  oratione,  xxvii.  Here,  with 
the  stronger  emphasis  laid  on  ecclesiastical  sea- 
sons, it  is  not  surprising  that  in  the  African  Church 
it  became  customary  to  omit  it  in  Lent  (Augustine, 
EnoarraHo  in  Psalmoe  ex.  cxlviii.),  while  another 
passage  of  Augustine  {Epiet,  ad  Januarium,  Iv.) 
impli^  that  in  his  day  it  was  regularly  sung  be- 
tween Easter  and  Pentecost,  and  occasionally  at 
other  times.  According  to  Sosomen  {Hist,  ecd,, 
VII.,  xix.),  it  was  simg  at  Rome  only  on  Easter- 
day,  and  this  statement  is  accepted  by  Cassiodorus 
(c.  570)  and  supported  by  a  mention  of  Vigilantius 
(c.  400)  in  Jerome  {Contra  Vigilantium,  i.),  although 
Johannes  Diaconus,  in  the  fifth  century,  speaks  of 
its  being  used  at  Rome  during  the  whole  paschal 
season.  According  to  the  most  probable  inter- 
pretation of  a  passage  in  Gregory  the  Great's  letters 
{MPLf  Ixxvii.  956),  it  would  seem  that  in  the  pon- 
tificate of  Damasus  (36&-384)  the  eastern  custom 
of  singing  Alleluia  throughout  the  year  found  foot- 
ing in  Rome,  and  that  in  the  fifth  century  it  began 
to  be  restricted  to  the  paschal  season,  while  Greg- 
ory permitted  a  wider  use.  This  may  be  recon- 
ciled with  the  statement  of  Sozomen  by  supposing 


that  he  referred  to  a  special  anthem  containin^^  the 
word  "  Alleluia,"  and  not  to  the  word  itself.  Ac- 
cording to  present  Roman  usage,  the  word  is 
omitted  altogether  from  Septuagesima  to  Easter, 
being  replaced  at  the  beginning  of  the  choir  offices 
by  "  Praise  to  thee,  O  Lord,  K^  of  eternal  glory." 
In  the  paschal  season,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is 
frequently  used,  being  appended  to  antiphons,  ver- 
sicles  and  responses,  and  to  the  gradual  and  offer- 
tory in  the  Mass.  Luther  retained  it  in  the  Form- 
ula misscB  with  the  gradual,  and  in  the  later 
Lutheran  services  it  is  usually  placed  after  the 
epistle,  except  in  Passion-tide — although  Luther 
prescribed  it  even  here. 

Hosanna  as  a  word  of  praise  occurs  in  the  an- 
cient liturgies  only  in  the  anthem  known  as  Bene- 
dictus  (Matt.  xxi.  9);  and  here  it  is  absent  from  all 
the  liturgies  belonging  to  the  Egyptian  type  and 
from  many  of  the  Syrian  class;  it  was 
4.  Hoeaima.  unknown  at  Antioch  in  Chrysostom'a 
time,  at  Jerusalem  in  Cyril's,  and  in  the 
Byzantine  lituigies  of  the  fifth  to  the  eighth  centuries 
as  reconstructed  by  Brightman.  It  is  found,  on  the 
other  hand,  in  the  Didache  (x.  6)  and  correspond- 
ingly in  the  Apostolic  Constitutions  (VII.,  xxvi.  1; 
also  VIIL,  xiii.  3);  in  the  Byzantine  liturgies  of 
St.  Basil  and  St.  Chrysostom;  in  the  lituigy  of  St. 
James;  in  the  Armenian  and  Nestorian  liturgies, 
and  in  the  ninth-century  Byzantine.  Except  in 
the  two  first-named  sources,  it  occurs  uniformly 
after  the  Trissgion  or  Sanctus.  There  is  reason  to 
believe,  however,  that  this  is  a  later  innovation, 
and  that  the  primitive  ixsage  is  preserved  in  the 
Clementine  liturgy  of  the  Apostolic  Constitutions, 
where  it  occurs  immediately  before  the  adminis- 
tration, following  the  proclamation  "  Holy  things 
to  holy  persons."  It  is  even  possible  that  just  as 
the  Jews  sang  Ps.  cxviii.  25  sqq.  after  the  Passover 
meal,  so  the  Christian  Benedictus  was  originally 
sung  at  the  conclusion  of  the  whole  service;  and 
this  theory  ia  supported  by  the  fact  that  in  the 
Armenian  liturgy  and  that  of  the  Coptic  Jacobites 
the  phrase  "  Blessed  is  he  that  cometh  in  the  name 
of  the  Lord  "  is  placed  after  the  commimion  of  the 
people.  In  the  West  the  Benedictus  is  found  in  all 
the  most  various  types  of  liturgical  production, 
almost  without  exception  in  connection  with  the 
Sanctus,  The  only  noteworthy  variant  phenome- 
non is  that  in  the  Gallican  liturgy  it  seems  not  to 
have  been  simg  by  the  choir,  as  the  Sanctus  ^was^ 
but  to  have  more  often  formed  the  b^inning  of  a 
coQectio  post  Sanctus  recited  by  the  priest — or  per- 
haps, having  been  already  simg,  it  was  repeated  by 
him  to  connect  the  prayer  with  what  had  gone  be- 
fore. Luther  retained  both  Sanctus  and  Benedic- 
tus in  his  Formula  misscB,  but  placed  them  after  the 
words  of  institution;  in  the  Deutsche  Mease  he  does 
not  mention  the  Benedictus,  In  the  later  Lutheran 
service-books  the  Sanctus  and  Benedictus  usually 
follow  the  preface.  The  Anglican  Prayer-Book 
retains  the  Sandus  but  omits  the  Benedidus;  it  is 
very  frequently,  however,  at  the  present  time,  sung 
immediately  before  the  consecration,  as  is  the 
Agnus  Dei  after. 

The  prayer  **  Lord  have  mercy  upon  me "  or 
"  us  "  (Gk.,  Kyrie  eleison  me  or  hBmas)  occurs  a 


503 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Xdturglos 


number  of  times  in  the  Old  and  New  Testaments, 
and  probably  formed  a  recognized  part  of  the  Jewish 
ritual,  from  which  it  passed  over  into  the  Chris- 
tian. The  way  in  which  it  is  men- 
5.  Kyrie  tioned  by  the  authorities  for  the  seo- 
Eleison.  ond  half  of  the  fourth  century — ^the 
Apostolic  Constitutions  (VIII.,  vi.  1,2, 
viii.  3),  Chrysostom,  and  the  Peregrinatio  Silvia 
(ed,  Gamurrini  p.  78,  Rome,  1888) — ^implies  old- 
established  and  wide-spread  use.  Prayers  in  the 
form  of  litanies  seem  to  have  grown  up,  in  which 
this  response  was  made  by  the  people  to  the 
deacon;  they  were  frequently  of  an  intercessory 
character.  The  use  of  the  Kyrie  eUison  as  an 
independent  prayer  seems  to  have  been  later.  In 
this  way  it  is  used  twelve  times  in  the  liturgy  of 
St.  James,  and  three  times  in  that  of  St.  Mark 
and  the  Alexandrian  liturgy  of  St.  Basil,  before 
the  act  of  communion;  it  also  occurs  in  the  prep- 
aration and  the  dismissal,  and  was  used  some- 
times in  solemn  processions.  The  Greek  form  is 
preserved  throughout  in  the  Coptic,  Abyssinian, 
and  Syriac  liturgies.  As  for  Western  usage,  it  may 
be  inferred  from  the  Peregrinatio  Silvia  that  the 
Latin  form  Miserere  Domine  but  not  the  Greek  was 
familiar  to  her  Gallic  fellow  countrymen.  The 
same  inference  may  be  drawn  from  the  next  oldest 
witness,  also  Gallic,  the  second  Synod  of  Vaison 
(529),  which  prescribes  the  "  more  frequent  \ise  " 
of  the  Ki^  deison  at  mass  and  morning  and  even- 
ing prayers.  It  was  familiar  to  the  Gallic  monks, 
as  is  shown  by  the  Regula  ad  numachoa  of  Bishop 
Aurelian  of  Aries  (d.  550),  where  it  appears  as  an 
independent  prayer,  sung  three  times,  so  also  in 
the  rule  of  St.  Benedict.  This  development  on 
different  lines  from  the  East  is  shown  again  by  a 
passage  in  Gregory  the  Great's  letters  (IX.,  xii), 
from  which  the  conclusions  follow  that  the  Latins, 
unlike  the  Greeks,  had  by  this  time  the  response 
Chriete  eleison;  and  that  Gregory  was  thinking  not 
of  the  response  to  the  deacon's  bidding-prayer,  but 
of  an  independent  formula  repeated  a  definite  num- 
ber of  times.  This  number  is  first  positively  fixed 
by  a  ninth-century  ordo  published  by  L.  Duchesne 
(Originee  du  cuUe  chrHien,  p.  442,  Paris,  1889),  in 
which  it  is  directed  to  be  sung  nine  times,  three  for 
each  invocation,  as  it  is  to-day  in  the  Roman  mass. 
Before  the  discovery  of  this  onio,  Honorius  of  Autun 
(d.  1120)  was  the  oldest  witness  known  for  the  nine- 
fold Kyrie,  In  the  Milanese  liturgy  the  Kyrie  ap- 
pears after  the  Gloria  in  exceUie,  after  the  Gospel, 
and  at  the  end,  three  times  in  each  place.  In  the 
Mozarabic  liturgy  it  occurs  only  in  one  mass,  where 
it  is  probably  due  to  Roman  influence.  In  a  word, 
the  general  use  of  the  prayer  probably  grew  up  in 
Rome  and  spread  thence  throughout  the  West. 
In  the  Eastern  form  of  a  response  to  the  deacon  it 
occurs  in  the  African  liturgy,  in  the  Celtic  as  ex- 
hibited in  the  Stowe  Missal,  and  in  a  Lenten  litany 
at  Milan.  Luther  retained  the  Kyrie  eleison  nine 
times  in  the  Formula  missa,  but  only  three  times 
in  the  Deutsche  Messe;  and  thus  it  remains  (in 
either  German,  Latin,  or  Greek)  in  nearly  all  Lu- 
theran service-books.  The  Reformed  liturgies 
dropped  it  altogether,  and  the  Anglican  ritual, 
while  retaining  it  in  the  Litany,  the  Visitation  of 


the  Sick,  and  the  Churching  of  Women  (omitted 
in  the  latter  place  by  the  American  book),  substi- 
tuted in  a  corresponding  position  the  recitation  of 
the  Commandments  with  the  response  after  each 
"Lord,  have  mercy  upon  us,  and  incline  our 
hearts  to  keep  this  law."  In  the  American 
ritual,  however,  the  Kyrie  is  to  be  said  if  the  sum- 
mary of  the  Decalogue  (Matt.  xxii.  37-40)  is  sub- 
stituted in  the  Ante-Communion  for  the  Decalogue 
itself. 

The  Jewish  form  of  salutation  "  Peace  be  unto 
you,"  used  by  the  risen  Christ  to  his  disciples  (John 
XX.  19,  21,  26),  passed  into  lituigical  usage  as  the 
greeting  of  the  bishop  to  the  congre- 
6.  Pax  gation  at  the  beginning  of  public  wor- 
vobiscum,  ship.  In  the  form  eirini  pasin,  **  peace 
DominuB  be  to  all,"  it  is  found  in  nearly  all 
vobiscum.  Eastern  liturgies,  usually  with  the 
response  "And  to  thy  spirit."  The 
formula  was  frequently  used  at  the  banning  of  a 
new  division  of  the  service;  thus  it  occurs  ten  times 
in  the  liturgy  of  St.  Mark.  In  the  West  Pax  vobis 
or  vobiscum  is  attested  by  Augustine,  Optatus  of 
Mileve,  and  Ambrose,  but  it  was  gradually  replaced 
by  Dominus  vobiscum  (derived  from  II  Thess.  iii.  16), 
probably  originating  at  Rome,  and  originally  used  in 
the  introduction  to  the  Preface,  where  it  appears  in 
the  Canones  HippolyU  (in  Greek),  in  the  Gelasian 
and  Gregorian  sacramentaries,  and  in  the  first  Ordo 
Romanus,  as  well  as  in  the  oldest  Milanese  lituiigy. 
It  is  likewise  found  in  the  Ethiopic  and  EJgyptian 
liturgies,  and,  in  an  extended  form,  in  the  Moz- 
arabic, but  does  not  occur  in  the  Syrian  or  Byzan- 
tine rites.  In  the  Roman  Mass  of  to-day  the  old 
custom  of  the  kiss  of  peace,  though  preserved  only 
in  a  symbolic  form,  is  accompanied  by  the  phrase 
"  the  peace  of  the  Lord  be  always  with  you,"  with 
the  response  "  And  with  thy  spirit."  The  Dominus 
vobiscum  is  used  regularly  before  collects,  both  in 
the  mass  and  in  the  choir  offices;  when  the  latter 
are  recited  by  laymen  without  a  priest,  the  versicle 
and  response  "  O  Lord,  hear  my  prayer  "  "  And 
let  my  cry  come  imto  thee  "  are  substituted;  just 
as  in  the  early  Middle  Ages  a  distinction  was  made 
between  Fax  vobiscum  as  the  episcopal  and  Dominus 
vobiscum  as  the  priestly  salutation. 

In  the  Formtda  missa  Luther  retained  the  Pax 
vobiscum  and  the  response  before  the  Preface,  but 
not  after  the  Gloria^  while  in  the  Deutsche  Messe  he 
ignored  it  entirely.  The  majority  of  Lutheran 
lituigies  of  the  sixteenth  century,  like  Zwingli,  on 
the  other  hand,  retained  it  after  the  Gloria,  but  not 
before  the  commimion.  Modem  Lutheran  litur- 
gies likewise  place  it  after  the  Gloria  before  the 
collect.  In  the  Anglican  Prayer-Book  the  Dominus 
vobiscum  and  its  response  are  placed  after  the  Creed 
in  morning  and  evening  prayer,  and  it  is  also  used 
in  confirmation.  (P.  Drews.) 

Bibuoobapht:  I.-II.:  Much  literature  that  is  pertinent 
will  be  found  cited  under  Breviary;  Common  Prater, 
Book  or;  Eucharist;  Litany;  Lord's  Supper;  Mass; 
and  Worship.  A  vast  body  of  sources  and  discussions  is 
indicated  in  the  three  sections  of  the  BrUUh  Muaeum  Cat- 
alogue devoted  to  liturgies,  the  entries  being  admirably  ar- 
ranged for  consultation  under  convenient  captions,  making 
reference  easy.  The  following  list  comprises  principally 
later  works.  Lists  of  Mss.  are:  W.  H.  J.  Weale.  Biblio- 
graphiea  liturgioa  eatalooiM  mit^alium  ritua  Latini,  London, 


Xatnrffios 
Ziiud^er,  8«int 


THE  NEW  SCHAFF-HERZOG 


504 


1886;  H.  Ehmuberser,  Bibiiotksea  lititrgica,  C»rlanilie, 
1889;  BibUotKeea  nuuieo—Utitrgica,  London.  1894  (a  liat  of 
muBOAl  and  LatinJitiuvioaJ  manuacripU  of  the  Middle  Acee). 

Among  the  louroes  may  be  named:  James  Brogden, 
iUuatratumB  of  the  Litwroy  and  Ritual  of  ths  United  Church 
of  Bnofand  and  Irtland  during  the  Seventeenth  Century, 
London,  1842;  W.  Palmer,  Oriifinet  Liturgicm;  or,  An- 
Oquitiee  of  Oke  Englieh  Ritual,  2  toIs..  ib.  1845;  P.  Hall, 
Fragmenta  Liturgiea^  Doeumentt  lUuetrative  of  the  Lilturgy 
of  ike  Churth  of  Bngland,  7  vols..  Bath.  1848;  W.  Trol- 
lope.  The  Greek  Liturgy  of  St.  Jamee,  Edited  with  an  Bng- 
Ueh  introduction  and  Notee;  together  with  a  Latin  Vereion 
<4  ihe  Syriae  Copy,  and  the  Greek  Text  reetared  to  ite  orig' 
inal  Purity  and  accompanied  by  a  literal  BngUth  Tran*' 
iaOon,  8  vola.,  Edinburgh.  1848;  The  Baetem  Liturgy  of 
dU  Holy  Catholie,  ApoetoUe,  eimpUfied  and  eupjdemenied 
by  Jasnee  Ferretti  of  Damaeeue,  London,  18M;  The  Book 
of  Common  Order  of  the  Churth  of  Scotland,  eomimonly 
Known  ae  John  Knox*e  Liturgy  and  the  Directory  for  the 
Public  Worehip  of  God  Agreed  upon  by  the  AaeenMy  of 
Divinee  at  Weetmineter;  Notee  by  O.  W,  SproU  and  T. 
Leiahman,  Edinbtugh,  1868;  S.  C.  Malan,  Divine  Liturgy 
of  the  Armenian  Churdi  of  St.  Gregory,  London,  1870; 
F.  E.  Warren,  The  Liturgy  and  Ritual  of  the  Celtic  Church, 
8  Tols..  New  York.  1882;  J.  M.  Neale.  The  Liturgie§  of 
St  Mark,  St.  Jamee,  St.  Clement,  St.  Chryeoetom,  St.  Baeil 
and  the  Church  of  Malabar;  tranelaled  %pith  Introduction 
and  Appendieee,  London,  1883;  C.  A.  Swainson,  The 
Greek  lAturgiee,  chiefly  from  Original  Authorities.  With 
an  Appendix  containing  the  Coptic  Ordinary  Canon  of  the 
Mtue  from  two  Manuecripte  in  the  Britieh  Mueeum,  ed. 
and  tranel.,  Dr.  C.  Bexold,  ib.  1884;  The  Divine  and 
Sacred  Liturgiee  of  John  Chryeoetom  and  Baeil  the  Great, 
with  an  Bng.  trand.,  ed.  J.  N.  W.  B.  Robertaon.  ib.  1886; 
A.  Malteev,  Die  gdtUiehen  Liturgien  Johannee  ChryeoO' 
tomoe,  Baeilioe  dee  Groeten  und  Gregarioe  Dialogoe,  Ber- 
lin, 1890;  idem.  Die  Liturgien  der  orthodox-katht^iechen 
Kirdie  dee  Morgenlandea,  Berlin,  1894;  H.  A.  Wilson, 
The  Galaeian  Sacramentary,  Liber  eacramentorum  Ro- 
manes eccleeiiK,  ed.  with  Introduction,  critical  Notee,  and 
Appendix  with  two  Faceimiiee,  New  York.  1894;  C.  E. 
Hammond.  lAturgiee  Baetem  and  Weetern,  Ozfonl.  1896; 
F.  E.  Warren.  The  Liturgy  and  Ritual  of  the  Ante-Nicene 
Churdi,  London,  1897;  F.  Gabrol  and  H.  Ledereq,  Mon^ 
umenta  eceleeiae  liturgica,  Paris.  1900;  E.  C.  N.  Barfoed. 
Oldkirkene  Liturgier,  Copenhagen,  1902;  Benedictional  of 
Arehbiehop  Robert  of  Rouen,  ed.  H.  A.  Wilson  in  Publico^ 
tiona  of  ffte  Henry  Bradahaw  Society,  vol.  xxiv..  London, 
1903;  V.  Staley,  Hierurgia  Anglicana;  Doeumente  and 
ErtraetM  illuetrative  of  lAe  Ceremonial  of  the  Anglican 
Church  after  the  Reformation,  edited  by  Membere  of  the 
Eedeeiaetical  Society,  ib.  1903;  Die  neetorianieche  Tauf- 
liturgie  ina  Deuteche  Hberaetet  von  O.  Dietirich,  Giessen, 
1903;  A.  Baumstark,  Liturgia  Romana  e  liiurgia  deWEear- 
eato.  II  rUo  detto  Patriarchino  e  le  origini  del  Canon  Mieea 
Romano,  Rome,  1904;  A.  Schoenfelder.  Liturgieche  Biblio- 
thek;  Sammlung  gotleedienetlicher  BUdier  aue  dem  deutedten 
MitteUdter,  Paderbom.  1904;  C.  Wordsworth  and  H.  Little- 
hales,  out  Service  Booke  of  thM  Englieh  Churdi,  London, 
1904;  The  Baet  Syrian  or  Neetorian  Rite,  traneL  by  A.  J. 
Madean,  ib.  1905;  Ordo  Romanue  primue,  with  Introduction 
by  E.  G.  C.  F.  Atchley,  ib.  1905;  Rituale  Armenorum,  the 
Adminietration  of  the  Sacramente  and  the  Breviary  Ritee  of 
the  Armenian  Church,  edited  by  F.  C.  Gonybeare.  Oxford. 
1905;  The  Divine  Liturgy  of  the  Holy  Apoetdic  Church  of 
Armenia,  Trandated  by  two  Armenian  Prieete,  London, 
1908;  D.  Levi,  The  Form  of  Prayers  for  the  New  Year,  Day 
of  Atonement,  Feaet  of  the  Tabernaclee,  etc.,  according  to  the 
Cuetom  of  the  German  and  the  Polieh  Jewe  as  read  in  their 
Synagoguee  and  ueed  in  their  Familiee.  Carefully  revieed 
by  I.  Levi,  6  vols.,  London,  n.d. 

Discussions  of  the  subject  are:  F.  Ehrenfeuchter, 
Theorie  dee  chrietlichen  Cultua,  Hamburg,  1840;  T.  Klie- 
foth,  Theorie  dee  Cultue  der  evangdiechen  Kirdie,  Lud- 
wigslust,  1844;  idem,  Liturgieche  Abhandlungen,  8  vols., 
Schwerin.  18M-62;  C.  W.  Baird,  Eutaxia,  or.  The  Preeby 
teriun  Liturgies:  Hidorical  Sketches,  New  York,  1855,  re- 
printed under  the  title,  A  Chaj>ter  on  Liturgiee:  His- 
torical Sketches^  with  an  introductory  Preface  and  an  .Ap- 
pendix by  Rev.  Thos.  Binney,  London.  1856;  H.  Alt, 
Der  christliche  KtUtus  nach  seinen  verschiedenen  Ent^ 
ufickdungsformen  und  seinen  eimdnen  Theilen,  2  vols., 
Berlin.  1860;  Ivan  Borovnitsky,  Origin  and  Composition 
0/  the  Rofnan  Catholie  Liturgy ,  and  ite  Difference  frwn  tkad 


of  Os  OrthodoK  Chwrd^  London.  1863;  J.  M.  Neale.  Beeays 
on  Liturgidogy  and  Church  Hiatary:  with  an  Appendix 
on  liturgical  QuotaOone  from  the  IsapoetoUe  Fathers  by  J. 
MouUrie,  8  vols.,  ib.  1867;  F.  Probst.  Liturgie  der  drei 
ersten  chrietlichen  Jahrhunderte,  TQbingen,  1870;  H.  C. 
Romanoff.  The  Divine  Liturgv  of  St.  John  Chryeoetom,  ib. 
1871;  T.  Bemazd.  Cours  de  Kiurgie  romaine.  Pans. 
1884-93;  P.  L.  P.  Gu^ranger.  Institutions  Uturgigues,  ib. 
1885;  idem.  The  Liturgical  Year,  Worcester,  1805;  H. 
Hering,  HClfsbuch  eur  BinfUhrung  in  doe  liturgieche 
Studium,  Wittenberg.  1888;  P.  Freeman,  The  Principles 
of  Divine  Service,  London.  1889;  H.  M.  Luckoek,  7%e 
Divine  Liturgy,  ib.  1889;  F.  Probet,  Lihirgie  dee  vierten 
Jahrhunderte  und  deren  Reform,  MOnster.  1893;  V.  Thai- 
hofer,  Handbudi  der  kathoUschen  Liturgik,  Freiburg.  1894; 
L.  Qugnet.  Dictionnaire  gr^franpais  des  name  liturgiq^es 
en  usage  dans  I'iglise  greeque,  Paris,  1895;  A.  Ebner. 
Qudlen  und  Forsdiungen  tur  Geschidiie  dee  Miesale  Ro- 
manum  im  Mitidalter,  Freiburg,  1896;  F.  Magani,  L*An- 
tica  liturgia  Romana,  Milano.  1897-99;  J.  Comper,  A 
Popular  Handbook  of  the  Orioin,  Hist.,  and  Structure  of 
Liturgiee,  London,  1898;  G.  Rietechel,  Lehrbuch  der 
Liturgik,  2  vols.,  Berlin.  1899;  F.  Gabrol.  Le  lAvre  de  la 
prikre  antique,  Paris.  1900;  idem,  DicUonnaxre;  J.  W.  Legg, 
Some  Load  Reforms  of  the  Divine  Service  Attempted  on 
the  Continent  in  the  Sixteenth  Century,  London,  1901;  L. 
Duchesne,  Christian  Worship,  a  Study  of  the  Latin  Liturgy 
up  to  the  time  of  Charlemagne,  ib.  1904;  Nerses  Ter- 
Biikaelian,  Dae  armenisAe  Hymnarium.  Studien  su  eeiner 
gesehiehUichen  Entwiddung,  Letpsic.  1905;  F.  Gabrol.  Lbs 
Origines  liturgiques,  Paris.  1906;  P.  G.  Yorke,  The  Roman 
Liturgy,  a  Hist,  and  Explanation  of  the  Ceremonies  and 
Prayers,  San  Frandsoo,  1906;  P.  Drews.  Die  dementini- 
sche  Liturgie  in  Rom,  Tfibingen,  1906;  W.  H,  Frere.  The 
Principles  of  Rdigious  Ceremonial,  London.  1906;  V. 
Staley.  Studies  in  Ceremonial:  Essays  illustrative  of  Eng- 
lish Ceremonial,  London,  1907;  H.  Bftuerle.  Liturgie: 
Theorie  dee  rSmisdi-katiiolisdien  Kultus,  Bjegensbur^ 
1908;  G.  P.  A.  Burnett,  Ritual  and  Ceremonial,  London, 
1908;  L.  Duchesne.  Origines  du  cults  dwHienne,  I^ns. 
1908;  J.  Braun,  Die  liturgieche  Oewandung  im  Occident  und 
Orient  n€uh  Ursprung  und  Entwiddung,  Verwendung  und 
Symbdik,  Freiburg.  1908;  Beitrdge  sur  Kenntnxs  der  byian- 
tinisdien  Liturgie,  Berlin,  1908. 

III.:  For  the  Amen  the  most  notable  contribution  is  is 
Gabrol.  Dictionnaire,  Case,  vi.,  cols.  1554r-73.  Consult 
also:  Bingham,  Originee,  XV..  iii.  26;  Thalhofer,  ut  sup^ 
i.  512  sqq.;  H.  W.  Hogg,  in  JQR,  ix  (1896).  1-23:  E. 
F.  von  der  Golts.  Dae  Gebet  in  der  dUesten  Christenheil, 
pp.  157  sqq.,  Leipeio,  1901;  DC  A,  i.  75-76.  On  the  Dox- 
ology  consult:  Chase,  in  TS,  i.  3  (1891).  168  sqq.;  Bing> 
ham.  Origines,  XIV.,  i  8.  ii.  1-2;  V.  Thalhofer.  ut  sup., 
i.  490  sqq..  ii  77  sqq.;  E.  O.  Achelis,  Lehrbuch  der  prak- 
tiechen  Theologie,  I  394,  Leipeio,  1898;  E.  F.  von  der 
Golts,  ut  sup.,  pp.  157  sqq.;  DCA,  i.  577-579.  For  Al- 
leluia consult:  Gabrol,  Dictionnaire,  fasc  v.,  cola.  1236- 
1246;  Bingham,  Origines,  XIV.,  ii  4;  V.  Thalhofer,  ut 
sup.,  i  515  sqq.,  ii  100  sqq.;  OUahony,  in  Dublin  Re- 
view, cxz  (1897),  345-350;  L.  Duchesne,  Chrietian  Wor- 
ship, London.  1904;  DCA,  i  56-56;  DB,  ii  287;  EB,  ii 
1943-44.  On  the  Hosanna  consult:  V.  Thalhofer.  ut 
sup.,  ii  185:  Bingham.  Origines.  II.,  ix.  3,  XFV..  ii  5; 
DCA.  i  785;  DB.  ii  418^-419;  «B,ii  2117-20;  DCA,  i  74^ 
751.  On  the  Kyrie  eleison  consult:  V.  Thalfhofer.  ut  sup., 
i  495-500;  E.  C.  Achelis.  in  Monatssdtrift  /fir  Gottea- 
dienst  und  kirdUiehe  Kunst,  iv.  161  sqq.,  211  eqq.;  L. 
Duchesne.  Christian  Worship,  London.  1904.  On  the 
Pctx  vobiscum  consult:  Bingham,  Origines,  XIII..  viii 
13.  X.  8,  XIV.,  iv.  14.  XV.,  iii.  2;  V.  Thalhofer.  ut  sup., 
i  503  sqq..  ii  82.  85.  422;   DC.4,  i  572. 

LIUDGER,    ItJd^ger     (LUDGER),  SAINT:    Mi^ 

sionaiy  to  the  Frisians  and  first  bishop  of  Mun- 
ster;  b.  in  Frisia,  probably  between  740  and  751); 
d.  at  Billerbeck  (15  m.  w.n.w.  of  MQnster)  Mar. 
26,  809.  He  was  educated  at  Utrecht,  and  thence 
went,  about  767,  to  York,  where  for  a  year  he  en- 
joyed the  instruction  of  Alcuin  and  was  ordained 
deacon.  After  remaining  there  for  some  time 
longer,  he  returned  to  Frisia  and  was  employed  as 
a   missionary  among   his   fellow   countiTmen    by 


505 


RELIGIOUS  ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lltnr^ca 
Liudyer,  Saint 


Alberic,  the  suooessor  of  his  old  teacher  Gregory. 
When  Alberic  was  consecrated  bishop  of  Utrecht 
at  Cologne  in  777,  Liudger  was  ordained  priest  and 
spent  seven  years  at  Dockum,  although  he  passed 
the  autumn  of  each  year  at  Utrecht  as  a  teacher 
in  the  school  of  that  city.  An  invasion  of  the 
Saxons  under  Widukind  in  784  forced  him  to  leave 
Frisia,  and  he  went  to  Rome  and  Monte  Cassino, 
where  he  spent  two  and  a  half  years  in  the  famous 
monastery,  although  he  himself  did  not  become  a 
monk.  On  his  return,  Charlemagne,  to  whom  he 
was  reconmiended  by  Alcuin,  gave  him  as  a  new 
sphere  of  activity  the  five  Frisian  districts  of  Hug- 
merchi,  Himusga,  Fivilga,  Emisga,  and  Federitga, 
as  well  as  the  island  of  Bank.  There  he  worked 
with  eminent  success,  extending  his  labors  as  far 
as  Fosetesland  (Heligoland),  his  center  of  admin- 
istration being  the  abbey  of  Lotusa  (doubtless  the 
modem  Zele,  14  m.  e.  of  Ghent).  After  the  country 
of  the  Saxons  had  become  so  far  pacified  that  the 
establishment  of  bishops  became  feasible,  Liudger, 
who  seems  previously  to  have  declined  the  bishopric 
of  Treves,  was  consecrated  to  the  see  of  southern 
Westphalia  with  his  episcopal  seat  at  Mimigemar 
ford,  the  modem  MQnster,  his  diocese  including 
the  five  Frisian  districts  in  which  he  had  formerly 
labored.  The  precise  date  of  this  event  is  un- 
certain, but  in  Jan.,  802,  a  docim:ient  terms  him 
abbot,  the  first  to  designate  him  bishop  being  dated 
Apr.  23,  805.  Of  his  episcopal  activity  little  is 
known.  He  built  a  cathedral  at  Mimigemaford 
and  probably  erected  a  church  of  the  Virgin  at 
Ueberwasser.  His  chief  foundation,  however,  was 
the  monastery  of  Werden  on  the  Ruhr,  but  here 


again  the  date  is  unknown,  although  a  document 
of  Biay  1,  801,  shows  that  the  relics  which  he  had 
brought  from  Rome  were  already  there.  The  only 
literary  work  of  Liudger  was  his  biography  of  his 
teacher  Gregory  (ASB,  Aug.,  v.  254). 

Later  tradition  made  Liudger  a  Benedictine  and 

asserted  that  he  baptised  Widukind,  calling  him 

by  his  own  name.     A  reminiscence  of  this  legend 

is  found  in  the  third  "  adventure  "  of  the  Nibelr 

ungenliedf  where  the  Saxon  duke  is  called  Liude- 

g^r.    He  is  also  connected  traditionally  with  the 

diocese  of  Halberstadt,  of  which  his  brother  Hilde- 

grim,  really  bishop  of  ChAlons  and  rector  of  Werden, 

is  said  to  have  been  bishop,  while  Liudger  himself 

is   described   as   establishing   the   LiudgerisHft   in 

Helmstadt,  although  this  seems  to  have  been  merely 

a  colony  from  Werden,  founded  in  the  beginning 

of  the  tenth  century  with  Liudger  as  its  patron 

saint.  (G.  Uhlhorn  f.) 

Bibliooraprt:   SpeouU  study  has  been  made  of  the  sourcee 

by  W.  Diekamp,  who  has  oolleoted  the  early  Vila  in  O^ 

9ehithiaq%MUen  det  ButhumB  MUn»ter,   vol.  iv..  Mtinster, 

1881.  also  published  separately,  ib.  1882.     The  Vita  are 

collected  with  less  oompletenees,  with  commentary,  in  A  SB, 

Mar.,  iii.  626-661;  in  MPL.  xdx.  760-796;  and  ed.  G.  H. 

Perts.  in  MGH,  ScHpt.,  u  (1829),  403-425.     Modem  dia- 

cussions  are:  C.  Krimphove.  Leben  und  Wirken  dea  heilioen 

Lvdgerua,   Mfinster,  1860;   idem,  Der  heilioe  Ltidgenu,  ib. 

1886;   A.  Basing.  Der  heUioe  Liudger,  ib.  1878;    L.  T.  W. 

Pingsmann.  Der  heUioe  Liudgerue,  FreibuiK,  1879;    K.  F. 

yon   Richthofen,    Ufdereuehungen  fiber  frieeieehe  RechU- 

oeeehuJUe,  u.  1.  pp.  376  sqq..  398  sqq..  Berlin.  1882;    G. 

F.  Maclear,  Apoetiee  of  Mediaval  Europe,  pp.   143-160, 

London,  1888;  E.  Knodt,  Sturm,  Anagar,  Liudger,  Gflters- 

loh.  1900;    Hietoire  litUraire  de  la  France,  iv.  369-362, 

V.  659-661;    Hauck.  KD,  U.  317  sqq.,  369  sqq.;    DCS, 

iii.  729-731;    Neander.  Chriatian  Church,  iii  79^1;    Ceil- 

lier,  Auieure  waerit,  zil  218,  xiii.  66. 


END    OP    VOL    VI. 


i  :.  •■:'■. 


i<v^  «-.i 


v"  •         * 


Vl»     1'    ^  I     *  •  I*' 


^^y.  i  :.   .     . 


''4  •  *-!;  ■'  I 


.>  •  »'. 


^  r,i  *  t  It  .'• "  V 


:*i^^-        - 


V  i 


^^■"f^"