,''*:.*''¦¦¦¦'¦';''-V'' ¦• . .¦.. '
',».'/,•¦''.  .. .
te'-- ¦'.¦'• •:.¦¦ ¦
,'-.»;,,%'¦:'•---••.¦ .;,
'* -'¦:':;;•. '-•¦ -•
'*J.'('. '. • -
Jl ', • "¦','••

'TAILIE«'¥]MH¥EIESIIir¥«

INTEODUCTION
TO THE STUDY OF THEOLOGY

INTEODUCTION

TO THB

STUDY OF THEOLOGY

BY
JAMES DEUMMOND, LL.D.
PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY IN MANCHESTER NEW COLLEGE. LONDON

T5 TTPevfjLa ir&VTa ipevvq^ koI t& ^Sd^i? tov 6eou

ILonftotr
MACMILLAN AND 00.
1884

Printed by R. & R. Clark, Edinburgh.

PEEFACE.
, The Introduction to the Study of Theology, which is
here offered to the public, has been delivered, during
the last few sessions, in the form of a course of
lectures, to Students of Manchester New College. It
is hoped that it will be more serviceable to them in
its present shape, and that some few beyond the circle
for whom it is more immediately intended will find
it of use. Its object is to deal, not with the matter
but with the scientific form of Theology, and to bring
before the student the nature, method, and mutual
relations of the various branches of theological study,
so that he may see more clearly the bearing of his
labours, and view the several departments of his work,
not as incoherent fragments, but as constituent mem
bers, each with an appropriate place, in a collective
organism which embraces them aU.
In determining the character and position of the
numerous topics which come under review I have not
thought it necessary to allude at any length to the
opinions of others, being anxious rather to give the
student a clear survey of the country to be traversed
than to encumber him with details which might only
confuse his vision. I have therefore contented myself

VI PKEFACE.
with referring to a few well-known books when it
seemed desirable to defend my own position or to
illustrate the possible variety of treatment. The
Bibliography, which forms so useful a feature of
Hagenbach's " Encyklopadie," has been omitted, both to
bring the volume within a more moderate compass, and
oecause it seems best for each teacher to recommend
such books as, under any given circumstances, he may
deem most suitable for the beginner.
It has been my endeavour, in accordance with
the principles on which Manchester New College is
founded, to treat the subject with impartiality; and
while some, no doubt, will discover and reprobate the
coloured medium from which human thought is never
exempt, others may see only coldness and indifference
in the attempt to be just. The number, however, is
increasing of those who think that Theology should
have the same freedom as physical science, and not be
always viewed through a sectarian haze. In plead
ing for perfect liberty in theological research we ask
for no more than is admitted to be the indispensable
condition of truth in every other subject of human
inquiry. Liberty does not mean exemption from the
restraining laws of thought and evidence, but submis
sion to those laws, without regard to inherited preju
dice or party demands. In pressing upon the young
student the claims of freedom, we do not mean that he
may " believe what he likes," that he may follow mere
subjective fancies, or treat with disdain the past ac-

PEEFACE. Vii
quisitions of Theology, or reject without solid, reason
what his teacher presents as ascertained fact, but on
the contrary, that he is bound to seek for the fullest
knowledge and to follow the laws of evidence which
belong to his subject. It is only through this higher
service that mental freedom is secured. If a similar
plea is not made when we begin to teach astronomy
or geology, that is only because it is no longer neces
sary. We cannot say that in Theology the time has
yet come when important differences are discussed
without heat, and when party allegiance never disturbs
the vision of truth. Till that time has come we must
point out to the learner that large, serene, and candid
soul, without which he can never hear what the
Spirit saith, unconfused by earthly din.
The origin of this work in the friendly intercourse
of the Lecture-room wiU account for the occasional
retention of the direct form of address, which may
appear less suited to a treatise intended for perusal.
I have, however, omitted a lecture which I still prefer
to deliver orally, relating to the personal habits of the
theological student, and to the practices of our own
College. A similar lecture, from his own point of
view, might be usefully given by any teacher who
thought the present volume a suitable handbook for
his class.
The student will readily perceive that it is
impossible for one mind to master the vast range
of subjects wliich here come under review, and he

VIU PEEFACE.
may be alarmed by the almost boundless claims of
theological learning. It is not, however, expected that
any single mind should be versed in every subdivision
of Theology. Out of the immense mass of material
the scholar must select one or more departments to
which he wUl especially devote his attention; but
whatever department he may prefer he wiU study it
with more interest and with wider sympathy if he
clearly per&eive its position and bearing in the com
plete circle of theological knowledge.
Owing to the limitation of human faculty here
indicated I can hardly hope to have altogether avoided
mistakes in travelling over so wide a field, with many
parts of which I have no special acquaintance ; but I
trust that they wUl be foimd neither numerous nor
serious. I must express my obligations to my col
leagues, and particularly to Dr. Martineau, for some
corrections and suggestions ; but, while I have reason
to hope that the work will on the whole meet with
their approval, they are in no way responsible for its
plan or execution, or for the opinions which it
enunciates. Such as it is, it is now sent forth vrith
the earnest wish that it may render some modest
service to the cause of genuine scholarship and
spiritual faith, and help some few wayfarers towards
the fresh uplands of Christian love and communion.
Hampstead, 20th October 1883.

CONTENTS.

PART I.
PAGE
Nature, Importance, and Principles of TheologicaIi
Stitdt . ..... 1
Section I. Definition, basis, and compass of Theology . 1
Section II. Importance of theological study . . .7
Section IIL Principles of theological study . . .20

PART II.
Relation of Theology to other studies

32

PART III.
Synoptical View of the various branches of Theology
Introduction ....

Section I. Philosophy
Its place in the theological scheme
1. Mental Philosophy
2. Ethical Philosophy
3. Religious Philosophy
Section II. Comparative Religion

4242
51 515660
6163

CONTENTS.

Section III. Biblical Theology . . . •
Character and position of the study
1. Biblical languages . . • •
2. Textual Criticism . . • •
3. Hermeneutics . . . ¦
4. Introduction, or History of the origin and collection of
the Biblical writings . . . •
5. Archaeology . . . . •
o. Biblical Geography ....
I. Biblical Physiography
c. Social Antiquities of the Bible
d. Political Antiquities of the Bible .
e. Sacred Antiquities of the Bible
/. Arts and sciences of the Hebrews .
6. History of the Israelites down to the destruction of the
Jewish nationality by the Romans
7. Exegesis ......
8. History of religious ideas among the Israelites down to
the time of Christ ....
9. Life of Christ .....
10. Lives of the Apostles, or History of the Apostolic age
11. Theology of the New Testament .
Conclusion .....
Section IV. Ecclesiastical History
Position and advantages of tKe study
Scope and method ....
Preparatory studies ....
Mode of dividing the subject
Separate consideration of the more important phases of the
Christian life .....
1. History of the Constitution of the Church .
2. History of the Ritual
3. History of Doctrines ....

CONTENTS.

Xl

Subjects selected for separate treatment
(ffl.) Symbolics
(6.) Patristics
History of Morals
History of Literature
History of Art

4.
5.6.
Ecclesiastical Statistics

Section V. Systematic Theology
Need of it
DefinitionDistinguished from Historical Theology
Its relation to speculative philosophy
Division of the subject
1. Sources of Doctrine
{a,) The Religious Element in
(6.) The Bible .
(c.) The Church
2. Doctrinal Theology
3. Theological Ethics
Section VI. Practical Theology -
Object and definition
Relation to Systematic Theology
Its scientific character
Division of the subject .
1. Ecclesiastical Organisation
I. Principles of Ecclesiastical Association
A. Composition of the Church .
B. Constitution ofthe Church .
II. Principles of Ecclesiastical Law .
A. Relation of Ecclesiastical Law to
other societies

that

xu CONTENTS. PAGE
B. Principles of legislation . . . 234
(a. ) Subjects for legislation . . 235
(J.) Means of enforcing compliance with
the law . . . .236
2. Agencies for the expression and cultivation of religion . 237
I. Liturgies ...... 237
II. Homiletics ..... 242
III. Poimenics, or Pastoral Theology . . . 246
IV. Paedeutios ...... 248
A. Catechetics ..... 248
B. Didactics ..... 250
3. Agencies for the propagation of religion outside the
Church ....... 251
4. Action of the Churcli outside the sphere of religion . 253

PAET I.
NATURE, IMPORTANCE, AND PRINCIPLES OF
THEOLOGICAL STUDY.

Section I.
Definition, Basis, and Compass of Theology,
Theology denotes, according to the strict meaning
of the word, the science^ of God. This definition of
our subject, however, is frequently considered unsatis
factory ; for it seems on one side to be too narrow, and
on the other to be too comprehensive. It may suggest
a purely abstract and speculative inquiry, which is
far removed from the recognised practice of Christian
theologians. It is their province to unfold in a syste
matic way the contents of the Christian revelation, to
interpret the spiritual life of the Church, and to estab
lish a theoretic basis for its activities; and theology,
therefore, is not so much the science of God as the
exposition of a great historical fact, in which the Divine
^ For convenience, I shall occasionally use the word science in its
widest sense, to denote reflective and formulated knowledge, and shall
not confine it to the study of phenomena. B

2 DEFINITION OF THEOLOGY. [part i.
and the human meet one another. On the other hand,
if our definition be strained so as to include a human
and historical interest, it must comprise far more than
Christianity. Theology will have to, survey impartially
all the great religions of the world, and to take up
Christianity among the rest, simply for the purpose of
niustratiag its own philosophical conclusions. The
theologian who followed this method would be like a
lawyer who, instead of devoting his special attention to
English law and the practice of English courts, expa
tiated in the principles of jurisprudence as exemplified
in the legislation of various times and races.
Notwithstanding these objections, I am disposed to
adhere to the etjrmological meaning of our term, because,
so far as they are really valid indications of the true
lines of study, they apply, not to the definition, but to
the interpretation of it. Each of them demands a few
remarks. A science of God naturaUy includes a consideration
of the sources from which our knowledge is derived,
and of the relations in which he stands to existences
which are usually distinguished from him by difference
of name. Now, as God cannot become an object of
knowledge apart from his relations, these two orders of
inquiry coalesce. It is as related to nature and to man
that it is possible for us to know God ; and it is from
the phenomena of nature and of the human conscious
ness that our knowledge must be drawn. In sayino
this I am by no means prejudging the question of a

SECT. I.] OBJECTIONS CONSIDEEED. 3
supernatural revelation ; for this, if given, must have
been disclosed in consciousness, and comes, whether
normally or abnormally, under the head of human
experience. Neither do I deny that God may stand in
relation to higher beings than man ; but these are not
directly cognisable by us, and, if known at all, can be
so only on the authority of some one possessed of
superhuman knowledge. Prior, then, to the discovery
of such an authority, nature and man exhaust for us
the sources of theological knowledge and the objects of
Divine relationship. Starting from nature we contem
plate God as the permanent Cause of the phenomenal
world. Here our inquiry is simply speculative; and
though it is difficult for any spiritually-minded man to
disengage the religious interest from so exalted a theme,
yet it is one which may be pursued as a pure science —
that is, solely for the truth wliich it contains, and with
out any thought of its connection with human needs
and hopes, and its application to human practice. But
the case is altered when we start from man. We
breathe no more the cold and bracing air of abstract
thought, but are plunged into the burning struggle
of living interests, and, the whole vast range of religious
experience and history opens to our view. Yarious
Churches put in their claims ; divergent types of
thought ask for recognition ; and rising altitudes of
religious illumination and prophetic fervour attract our
eyes towards one resplendent summit. While keeping
paramount the love of truth, we can no longer seek it

4 DEFINITION OF THEOLOGY. [part i.
without any ulterior aim. We cannot forget that our
quest must affect our deepest personal life, and has an
immediate bearing on the structure and the purpose of
society. Thus theology passes from the domain of pure
science, and its truths are now unfolded, not merely for
their own sake, but, as in law and medicine, for the sake
of their influence upon the highest form of human wel
fare. It is apparent, then, that a science of God cannot
linger in barren though sublime abstractions, but must
descend into the concrete facts of history and immerse
itself in the problems of our social organism ; and so it
may ramify into directions which, at first sight, seem to
have little connection with our definition of theology.
But whatever may be our immediate pursuit, whether
hisijOrical, philological, exegetical, or critical, it is only
through its union, more or less close, with the thought
of God and his relation to nature or to man, that it
properly comes under the survey of the theologian.
The study of Greek, for instance, on account of the
beauty of its literature, is not theological ; but the same
study, conducted because it is the key to the interpre
tation of certain religious books which record some of
the profoundest thoughts and experiences of the human
soul, and thus increase our knowledge of God, enters
thereby the province of theology. I think, therefore,
that our definition is at once sufficiently comprehensive
of that which properly belongs to our science, and
exclusive of that which is alien to it.
We must now turn to the other objection. If, by

SECT. I.]' OBJECTIONS CONSIDEEED. 5
the process which I have indicated, we come to include
under theology the varying forms of faith and the
history of Churches, must we not stand as impartial
critics before them aU, and refuse to give, by the length
and minuteness of our treatment, a disproportionate
prominence to any ? If, in a matter of this kind, it
were possible for us to foUow the rules of abstract
science, and take our position above the world as dis
interested spectators of its movements, we might be
forced to give an affirmative answer. And to this
extent we accede, in our College, to the scientific
demand ; we esteem every inquiry legitimate, and lay
the ban upon no conclusion which is honestly reached
and reverently held. The exclusive credibUity of the
Christian religion is not assumed at starting, but forms
of faith the most remote from our own are open to
sympathetic study, and the footsteps of God are traced
even across the wUds where uncivilised men first sought
for the Divine. But it is obvious that it would be im
possible, in the time at our disposal, to discuss all reli
gions with equal fulness, and it becomes a practical
necessity to select one of the richest and highest types
of belief for more exhaustive treatment. This being
the case, Christianity commends itself by indisputable
claims to our attention. In the first place, whatever
may be our doctrinal conclusions, our own religious
consciousness has grown up under the influence of
Christianity, and therefore we cannot give an inteUigent
interpretation of that which is deepest and most per-

o DEFINITION OF THEOLOGY. [part i-
manent within ourselves, of that which Ues nearest to
our investigation, and accompanies us either as a dis
torting or a reveaUng mediiun of perception into every
inquiry, unless we make ourselves acquainted with the
genesis and development of Christian thought and
worship. Again, Christianity is not only one of the
great reUgions of the world, it is the professed reUgion
of the most cultivated and progressive nations, and its
sacred books, apart from aU dogmatic authority that
may be supposed to attach to them, confessedly occupy
a lofty, if not a supreme and unique position in Utera
ture of this class. And lastly, it is among Christians
that those of you who choose the ministry as a profes
sion wUl be called to labour; and, whether with reform
ing zeal you place yourselves outside this ancient faith,
or, impressed by the majesty of its teaching, range
yourselves among its disciples, it is equaUy incumbent
upon you to obtain the fuUest critical knowledge of its
form and the deepest experiential knowledge of its
spirit, in order that you may neither assail nor defend
it with the crudities of an ignorant and shaUow fanati
cism. For these reasons, whUe it appears to me arbi
trary, at least at the outset, to confine theology to the
study of the Christian religion, that reUgion must
nevertheless engage a large share of our attention;
and we shaU all the more cheerfuUy accord to it what
might otherwise seem an undue proportion of our time,
if, in the progress of our inquiries, we come to view it
as (what I beUeve it to be) the purest reflection of the

SECT. 11.] PLACE OF THEOLOGY IN EDUCATION. 7
thought of God, and a revelation of the highest ideal of
human duty. Section II.
Importance of Theological Study,
Ilaving thus obtained some general conception of
the nature and extent of theological study, we shaU
have Uttle difficulty in admitting that it ought to be a
recognised and honoured part of a Uberal education.
The truths, if they be truths, which it brings before us
are of the very highest moment; for they affect the
scope and colouring of every part of our lives, and
stand Uke solemn witnesses and appraisers of our most
private and intimate concerns. And though the grand
est of these truths may be a source of strength and
gladness to people who have neither time nor capacity
for an elaborate theological training, it is the part of an
educated man to form an inteUectual estimate of his
beUefs, and with clear and instructed judgment con
sciously to choose his way among the conditions of his
time and country. To accept without consideration the
traditional creed of the party into which you have been
born is creduUty; to reject without anxious reflection
the sublime claims of reUgion at the bidding of the most
recent hypothesis in science or criticism is frivoUty.
No education can be complete which leaves us a prey
to either of these kinds of intellectual vice, and does
not accustom us to exercise a balanced, cautious, and

8 IMPOETANCE OF THEOLOGICAL STUDY. [part I.
sober reason upon the highest subjects of human
thought. But if we depart from this highest ground for mak
ing theology an integral part of Uberal culture, we
cannot forget the vast interest attaching to it as a
factor in history. Eegarded in this light, it demands
the serious consideration even of the student who is
most convinced of the hoUowness of its pretensions.
The persistency of reUgious ideas, their dominating in
fluence through long periods of advancing civilisation,
their trumpet-caU to freedom ringing loud and clear
over the waU. of their suUen conservatism, their glori
fication into saintly beauty and heroic self-sacrifice,
their corruption into sanguinary and brutish bigotry, —
these remain amid the great land-marks of history, and
cannot be neglected by any one who would understand
the growth and cohesion of society, or trace back the
circumstances of his own time to their roots in the
distant past. If the quarrels of Greek states and the
poUtical doctrines of Greek thinkers, if the march of
Eoman armies and the binding sway of Eoman law, if
the dissolution of the ancient empire and the rise of
modem nations, be brought under the notice of all
educated men, can we afford to neglect the growth of
monotheistic faith among the Jews, the origin and
development of Christian dogma, the struggle of the
Church with paganism, its partition into Eastern and
Western, the dissolution of the latter, after centuries of
absolute dominion, into the various sects which charac-

SBor. II.] ITS PLACE IN EDUCATION. 9
terise our present world? Whether the Christianity
around us be our glory or our shame, we ought at least
to understand it ; and this we can do only through that
thorough, patient, and sympathetic study which we so
gladly bestow on scientific or classical subjects.
The soundness of these remarks would be generaUy
admitted were it not for the attitude of dogmatic autho
rity which has been for the most part assumed by the
Churches of Christendom. In consequence of this atti
tude it is supposed that reUgious teaching must be
directed mainly to the exposition and maintenance of
the doctrines approved by the parents or guardians of
the youthful learner, and any attempt to give reUgious
instruction from a different point of view is resented
as an infringement of the rights of conscience. This
jealousy of interference with private conviction is a
healthy feeUng, so long as the doctrines from which we
dissent are inculcated dogmaticaUy and in the interests
of a particular Church. We are entitled to protest
when the pUable intelligence of our chUdren is twisted,
by the force of social penalty in this world and threats
of perdition in the next, in the direction of opinions
which we deem superstitious or irrational. The School
or College which is intended for the nation should allow
no privilege to any sect, but content itself with teaching
impartiaUy what aU may without scruple receive. This
legitimate position, however, has led practicaUy to a
conclusion which the friends of lofty and comprehensive
education may weU deplore. Under the banner of reli-

10 IMPOETANCE OF THEOLOGICAL STUDY. [part I.
gious equality the cry is raised for secular education in
public institutions, while theological training is reserved
for the more private efforts of parties or individuals.
Now I am quite aware that secular education may be
imparted from the purest motives and with the most
conscientious devotion to truth, and that a CoUege which
simply ignores in its tutorial capacity the doctrines of
all the sects need not thereby become "godless;" but I
say that a University which was forbidden to deal with
the grandest themes, and probe the deepest questions
of human duty and destiny, would be a mutUated Uni
versity, and no longer deserve its privileges. The
exclusion of theology from our educational curriculum
may act disastrously in two ways. It seems to sanction
the opinion that an education is complete which never
climbs the higher levels of thought or touches the
diviner side of our nature, and thus virtually joins in
the sneer of the shaUow worldUng at aU that belongs to
the ideal realm, and that Ufts whomsoever it has found
to empyrean heights. A youth who has passed through
this unfinished course is stiU unprepared to face the
hard problems of our day, and loses his inteUectual
grasp as soon as he is confronted by the feeblest cham
pion of a pretentious scioUsm. Or if he escape this
danger he may faU into the other evU which I men
tioned. Unable to do without reUgion, he knows it
only in some sectarian form, and, finding it perhaps in
unreconcUed antagonism with his secular knowledge,
he necessarUy blurs the boundaries of the latter, and

SECT. II.] ITS PLACE IN EDUCATION. 11
sacrifices his science to his faith. The University, which
ought with its large wisdom to have Ufted him to the
broad platform of humanity, and co-ordinated the
various branches of study into one harmonious organ
ism, has, under the specious plea of liberaUty, betrayed
its trust, and relegated to the one-sided zeal of contro-
versiaUsts the very subject which ought to be treated
vrith the severest impartiality, the most penetrating
and sympathetic insight, and the lofty comprehensive
ness of a soul which has been raised by communion
with eternal things above the tumults and divisions of
the world.
These remarks apply, with some obvious qualifica
tion, to those Universities in which the theological
faculty is pledged to the inculcation of certain specified
doctrines ; for such a faculty belongs, not to the nation,
but to a party, is obUged in fairness to permit all dis
sentients to refrain from attending its classes, and is
precluded by its very constitution from meeting the
requirements of a large and unsectarian culture. The
remedy lies, not in its abolition, but in its Uberation,
and the appointment of men who shall be pledged only
to faithful research and loyalty to their own convictions,
and who shaU be as free as any teachers of physical
science to lay before their classes the results of the most
recent investigations. In thus humbUng itseK and reUn-
quishing its airs of authority, theology will be exalted,
and regain the inteUigent interest which in our time it
has forfeited for so many cultivated minds, and men will

12 IMPOETANCE OF THEOLOGICAL STUDY. [part i.
render to the modesty of its reason and learning the
homage which they refuse to its imperious and ignorant
demand. Ilaving thus endeavoured to vindicate the general
right of theology to a place in Uberal culture, we may
proceed to make a few remarks on its special importance
to the minister of religion.
Although there is nothing to prevent a layman from
becoming an accompUshed theologian, nevertheless the
clergy and ministers of the various churches are the
acknowledged theologians of the country, and so far as
the ministry is a learned profession theology must
constitute its special department of scholarship. The
advisability of attaining the highest possible culture in
every walk of Ufe need not be here enforced ; and aU
that has been said about the position of theology in a
scheme of Uberal education wUl apply to the training
of ministers. But more than this is true. As reUgion
is the side of human existence with which they have
especiaUy to deal, theology must take a foremost place
in their studies ; and after the completion of their arts
course, in which they obtain a wider survey of the
world of knowledge, the inteUectual aspects of religion
must be selected as the field to which they vriU devote
their most assiduous care. As a surgeon must acquire
a more minute and exact knowledge of bodily structure
than is necessary for the general pubUc, so the profes
sional theologian must foUow his subject into more
abstruse detaUs, and investigate these with greater

sect. II.] ITS VALUE TO THE MINISTEE. 13
scientific accuracy, than can be deemed essential for
those whose speciaUty Ues in a different direction. It
is clear, therefore, that even if we aim at nothing higher
than maintaining the status of the ministry in intel
lectual society, and securing for it the respect which is
due to a learned profession, the most serious use ought
to be made of the few years which can be saved for
studious preparation.
But we may assume that higher views and more
ardent hopes have directed the choice of students for
the ministry, and that they wish to make themselves
felt as a religious power among their fellow-men. How
does this wish stand related to learning ? Eeligious
and phUanthropic enthusiasm is sometimes impatient
of the dry processes of study, and the fresh inspiration
of youth shrinks from the chUUng ways of criticism.
This aversion to the pure, cold Ught of reason, however,
is not to be encouraged. To the highest order of mind
the inteUectual treatment of reUgion is a necessity, and
our occasional desire to escape from it is a sign of
spiritual weakness rather than of the massive strength
of genuine faith. In every class of society the force of a
powerful understanding makes itself felt and respected;
and vrithout an inteUect as weighty and as fuU as dis
cipline and study can render it, the minister must fail
to reach the highest religious influence of which his
nature is capable. Enthusiasm without the control of
cultured reason is like a mountain torrent which, with
its lawless rush of waters, ploughs up roads and destroys

14 IMPOETANCE OF THEOLOGICAL STUDY. [part i.
bridges, and interrupts the orderly traffic of civUised Ufe;
and only when it is curbed by a directing force as mighty
as its own does it resemble a deep and stately river,
which, confined between its solid banks, bears on its
bosom the commerce of the world. The student, then,
who desires hereafter to exercise the purest influence
wiU gladly avail himself of the opportunity which his
years at College afford to lay the foundations of intel
lectual acquisition, that in the future his zeal may be
guided by wisdom, and, safe from the perils of a one
sided and immature nature, he may put forth the power
of a fuU and harmonious manhood.
If for a moment we glance in greater detaU at the
duties of the minister, we shaU arrive at a simUar con
clusion. His most distinctive vocation is that of the
preacher. Now it may be said that as the preacher
ought to exercise a prophetic function, and make it his
supreme aim to elevate the character of his hearers by
appealing to their heart and conscience, no learning can
be required for the fulfilment of his duty, but only a
soul caught up into communion with God, and Ups that
have been touched with the sacred fire. In this position
there is a certain element of truth. The preacher's
characteristic influence is derived from a higher realm
than that of learning, and nowhere is a pedantic display
of book-lore and an indulgence in the ponderous techni-
caUties of scholarship less in place than in the pulpit.
But for this very reason we require genuine scholars
and not smatterers. It is not on the former but the

SECT. II.] ITS VALUE TO THE MINISTEE. 15
latter that learning sits so uneasUy that it is always
dropping off in inappropriate places. The technical
knowledge of the theologian is seldom required in the
pulpit ; but the thorough training of the preacher wUl
be apparent in the easy grasp and luminous exposition
of his subject, and the unaffected way in which he
introduces just the amount of information which is
really necessary. If learning makes but little appear
ance in the finished sermon, it is of the greatest value
in its preparation. One who undertakes to write dis
courses for an audience which may include many culti
vated men, ought to be able to read his text in the
original language and consult the best commentaries,
and ought as far as possible to be abreast of the
advancuig knowledge of the day, that he may not fall
into stupid mistakes, and by exhibiting his subject in
false relations excite the ridicule rather than kindle
the aspiration of the Usteners. If a display of know
ledge is not demanded, stUl less desirable is a display
of ignorance, and that pulpit is desecrated which re
ceives the ministrations of a slovenly and ill -stored
mind. These remarks apply to preaching in the ordinary
exercise of ministerial duty; but we must not forget
that there are occasions when a minister is caUed upon
to defend his faith by an inteUectual statement of his
position, and his congregation are entitled to expect in
him the abiUty to render this service. I need scarcely
remark that such a duty is one of the highest solemnity,

16 IMPOETANCE OF THEOLOGICAL STUDY. [part i.
and cannot be adequately discharged without a mind at
once versed in some of the more abstruse departments
of Uterature and discipUned in the exercise of severe
and exact thought. The vulgar and vapid declamation
with which dogmas are defended in some quarters is
simply blasphemy against the Spirit of truth; and
though the reUgious fire must be ultimately Ughted
from the torch of a Uving faith, the difficulties of the
perplexed inquirer must be met on inteUectual ground,
and not even the purest religious insight can, without
the aid of the understanding, discover that fgrm of truth
in which the restless mind of our age may for a time
find repose and satisfaction.
Another duty which the faithful minister wUl en
deavour to fulfil is that of teacher. This duty devolves
upon him on account of the two-fold social relation of
theology on which we have already touched. An en-
Ughtened view of religion ought not to be confined to a
profession, but to be the common property of educated
men ; and yet theology is a subject sufficiently large
to form a distinct professional interest. The student,
therefore, who makes reUgion his speciality naturaUy
becomes the instructor of a wider circle, and, far more
than in other learned professions, must feel that he
holds his knowledge in trust for the benefit of mankind.
The physician need not read medical lectures to his
patients, nor the lawyer discourse to his clients on the
history and principles of jurisprudence. But one who
stands in the peculiar relation which a minister bears

SECT. II.] ITS VALUE TO THE MINISTEE. 17
to his congregation must find it one of his most con
genial occupations, as well as one of his most imperative
duties, to endeavour to awaken and satisfy among his
younger friends that rational interest in reUgion which
belongs to every pure and generous mind ; nor wUl he
be content, vrithout a struggle, to see them drifting
ignorantly away from the nobler aims of Ufe, and losing
their intellectual, and then their spiritual hold on that
ideal world which alone is real and eternal. Whether
he engage in this task through the Sunday class for
chUdren, or the more elaborate lessons and lectures
designed for older people, or in any other way that
circumstances may suggest, he wiU stUl require the
discriminating tact and judgment, the clear and precise
thought, the special information, and the large outlook
upon the world of knowledge, which characterise the
well-trained scholar.
Lastly, in his visiting the minister will sometimes
encounter doubts and difficulties which it is for him, so
far as he can, to lay to rest. The social air at present
is full of unanswered questionings ; and thrice-blessed
is he who can look calmly upon the mental strife, and,
bearing up the doubter on his own brave and sympa
thising breast, teach him to see the better land beyond.
To the mere dogmatist this path of usefulness is closed.
To him the perplexed mind, with its dim. imaginings of
something nobler than the traditional faith, or its sensi
tive and conscientious reason bowing before facts that
seem too hard and stern for reUgion to surmount, will
c

18 IMPOETANCE OF THEOLOGICAL STUDY. [part i.
never unveil itself; but to the sympathy of true culture
and refinement it wiU unfold its generaUy sUent depths,
and wUl seek the strong guidance of one who has trodden
for himself the perilous way of research, has learned by
experience to take a just measure of inteUectual diffi
culties, and has carved out a faith of his own. He who
would avail himself of these rare opportunities of help
ing some brother soul up the mount of truth, must
prepare himself by thorough and independent study,
and prove by the solidity of his thought and knowledge
that he deserves the confidence of intelligent men whose
minds are in search of a rational and sustaining faith,
but whose means of theological culture have been un
avoidably inferior to his. Thus only may he hope to
bring the needed help, and to wield that highest autho
rity whieh belongs to him who is really versed in the
subject which he undertakes to treat.
These remarks may perhaps encourage you in what
I doubt not is your serious purpose, to devote your best
efforts to mastering the studies which are prescribed in
this CoUege. It is impossible to promise you a path of
continual verdure, and unfaiUng streams of inteUectual
excitement. Sometimes it wiU be necessary to traverse
duU and seemingly barren regions, far away from the
warm and luminous fields where reUgion worships and
seeks her iaspiration. But if you have the proper in
terest in your subject as a whole, it wiU suffice to carry
you over the more desolate portions ; and even where a
higher impulse may faU, you will stUl have the gratifi-

sect. II.] TEUE SCHOLAESHIP. 19
cation of acquiring fresh knowledge and exercising your
critical faculties. You will remember, too, that in a
complicated structure the least inviting parts are essen
tial to the beauty of the whole ; and I shall endeavour
to show farther on that our various topics are united in
a single organism, and that even where they may seem
for a time least connected with one another they are
severally contributing to one large result.
In what has been said above there have been many
allusions to scholarship. Let us distinguish this from
mere acquaintance with books. Scholarship comprises
two elements, trained faculty and exact knowledge, and
of these the former is, to say the least, as important as
the latter. Men immersed in affairs sometimes despise,
not whoUy without reason, those who see the world
only through the medium of books, and there are few
characters less attractive than the pedant's. But the
genuine scholar has a mind of a higher order. His
directing impulse is the unadulterated love of truth.
This, like a central sun, communicates its own ardour
and purity to all his pursuits, and carries with it as its
attendants candour, impartiality, humiUty, independ
ence, a cautious boldness, a comprehensiveness which
knows how to be exact, a precision which never inter
feres with breadth of sympathy or insight into larger
possibilities than have been yet secured. Scholarship
is to intellect what saintliness is to character ; and you
must never forget amid your studies that you have not
only to increase your knowledge, but to- purify your

20 PEINCIPLES OF THEOLOGICAL STUDY. [part i.
¦judgment, to discipUne your thought, to enlarge your
views, and to train your faculty for conducting original
research and drawing independent conclusions. Form
the highest ideal that you can of the scholar's vocation,
and endeavour in your own persons to make that
vocation worthy of respect.

Section III.
Principles of Theological Study.
These remarks lead me to speak more particularly
of the CoUege where, for the present, your studies are
to be carried on, and of the principles on whieh it is
based. We shaU perhaps better apprehend the purpose
of a theological CoUege, and the principles which it
ought to follow, if for a few moments we consider its
relation to that larger institution which seems dedicated
to kindred aims, — I mean the Church.
If we regard the Church simply in its social aspect,
as an agency intended to have a reUgious effect upon
mankind, we may say that its primary aim is to train
the religious life, to quicken the higher affections and
ennoble the conduct, whUe that of the CoUege on the
other hand is to train reUgious thought, and impart
. information in regard to reUgious subjects. Neither of
these aims can, I believe, be carried out independently
of the other ; but the relative order in which they are
placed must seriously affect the practical arrangements

sect, in.] EELATION OF THE COLLEGE TO THE CHUECH. 21
of the two institutions which adopt them. The most
salient feature of the Church consists of the public
services of religion, in which worship is offered, and the
accepted teaching of a spiritual faith and a lofty moraUty
is pressed home to the heart and conscience. Now for
such services to have their due efficacy it is practically
needful that there should be a large amount of intel
lectual agreement in the congregation. Whatever tends
to excite the critical faculty or provoke the repugnance
of unbelief or of different beUef disturbs the calmness
of devotion, and defeats the very object for which the
worshippers assemble. Their object is to surrender
themselves with unbounded veneration and love to God
as contemplated under the form of their highest and
purest ideal, and allow eternal things to come and make
their own solemn impression on the soul; but this
cannot be if all the time they are in a state of intel
lectual revolt against the doctrines which are impUed
or enforced. It is what we believe that operates upon
the character, and he who would deeply move us must
exhibit this in its beauty and power, and press upon
our assenting conscience its application to our daily life.
But notwithstanding this practical necessity, a Church
wliich would nurture the liberty of the children of God
must make provision for advancing knowledge and
changing forms of thought, and will therefore refuse to
bind its members by the terms of an authoritative
creed. The amount of agreement which is requisite for
the attainment of the highest ends of common worship

22 PEINCIPLES OF THEOLOGICAL STUDY. [part i.
need not be defined, but ought to be left to the kindly
hand of nature to determine in each instance. Fealty
to truth demands freedom in the pursuit and the
utterance of truth, and this the Church must loyally
recognise. So far as pledges and obUgatory terms of
communion are concerned, it may be as free as any
scientific or secularistic institute ; and yet for the
realisation of its own specific purpose it wUl draw to
gether, by a kind of spontaneous concurrence, those
who have a very real, though undefined inteUectual
sympathy. In the College this necessity for a general intel
lectual agreement vanishes. Not only do the acquisi
tion of knowledge and the search for truth demand the
most absolute freedom for thefr successful prosecution,
but the very differences which are a disturbance to our
higher moods of devotion and self-surrender, serve to
stimulate the understanding, to clarify the judgment,
and to widen the horizon of our mental view. Nothing
tends so powerfuUy to smooth away our prejudices,
and give us large and tolerant minds, as friendly inter
course with men of the most diverse tendencies of
thought, and frank discussion of conflicting opinions.
Although, therefore, a Church may to a large extent
fulfil its noblest functions notwithstanding the im
position of articles of beUef on its members, a theological
College which submits to a simUar restriction thereby
renounces the very purpose for which it ought to exist.
The moment you are pledged to arrive at certain opinions,

SEOT. III.] EELATION OF THE COLLEGE TO THE CHUECH. 23
it becomes a mockery to speak of investigation; and
you are not really pursuing knowledge if you are
obliged to overlook or explain away every fact which
seems opposed to your foregone conclusion. In every
subject but theology this is so readily admitted as hardly
to require discussion. In physical science, for instance,
you expect the highest results only from those who are
at Uberty to go whithersoever observation and reasoning
may conduct them, and the moment this Uberty is
denied the scientific spirit is cut away at the roots. It
is said, however, that theology is in a very different
position, because it rests on the basis of supernatural
revelation, and therefore it is bound to check the
vagaries which may lead the individual mind beyond
the enclosure of its divinely-sanctioned dogmas. In
answer to this plea it is not necessary to deny that
there may be this sacred finaUty in reUgious knowledge.
To bar by any prohibition your acceptance even of the
dogma of papal infallibiUty, would be to violate the
very principle for which I am contending. But whether
a miraculous communication of truth not otherwise
ascertainable has been really made is one of the subjects
for inquiry, and in an institution where we are to seek
for larger knowledge and sounder views, we must be
free to embrace whichever side of the controversy may
approve itself to our sober judgment. And further,
even if we were already convinced upon rational
grounds that a dogmatic revelation had been given,
nevertheless each article of that revelation would

24 PEINCIPLES OF THEOLOGICAL STUDY. [part i.
continue to be a legitimate subject for research, because
the truth or falsity of that article would be a part of
the evidence by which the whole was either confirmed
or weakened. For example, if we were convinced by
general reasons that the Bible was infalUble, it would
stiU be competent for us to consider whether the
account of creation in the first chapter of Genesis was
scientificaUy correct, or whether the narratives of the
infancy of Jesus in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke
could be reconcUed with one another or with historical
probabiUty, because an unfavourable verdict in these
cases would shake or destroy the opinion to which we
had previously assented. Thus, as students of theology,
we must keep our field of inquiry always open, and
endeavour to address ourselves to each "question as it
arises, with a single desire to learn the truth. Nor let
us fear that in thus acting we shaU outrage any piety.
The lover of truth may make many mistakes, but his
mistakes are better than the sound doctrine of one who
is enamoured only of his own opinions. The one
discerns the spirit of truth, though her form is clouded ;
the other surveys her shape, clearly cut, but robbed of
its heavenly expression. Love of truth is part of our
love of God, aud to those who seek her, Ught shaU at
length arise in their darkness.
We must now enter on a different Une of considera
tion, which may seem at first, but only at first sight, to
quaUfy the perfection of our intellectual freedom. The
student of reUgion ought to bring to his investigations

SECT. III.] SPIEITUAL DISCEENMENT. 25
a reUgious spirit. What ! some one wUl exclaim, come
to our inquiries fuU of superstitious prepossessions, and
virtuaUy prejudge the whole question before we begin !
Is this your freedom indeed, to put your reason under
the direction of prejudices born in the nursery, and
look at the exploded beUefs of mankind through a haze
of inherited fooUshness ? No, no, if you want freedom
you must bring to your theology a mind blank of
religious impression, and lifted into subUme indifference
towards the great problems of duty and destiny, and
then only can you survey the field impartially, and
aiTive at truly objective results. This position has a
show of reason ; but a little reflection may convince us
that it is radicaUy unsound, and that the possession of
a reUgious spirit is simply indispensable for the under
standing of reUgious questions.
Every subject of study requires for its successful
prosecution its own special aptitudes. This is true even
of so purely intellectual and demonstrative a subject as
mathematics. StiU more must it be the case in questions
of probabiUty, where the judgment is called into
exercise. You would not select for a teacher in
physical science one who was deficient in the observing
faculties, destitute of experimental resource, and prone
to hasty and iU-founded generaUsations. The historian
must have the tact to perceive the true concatenation
and dependence of events, imagination to bring vividly
before his mind times far unlike his own, and the power
of entering sympatheticaUy into every kind of human

26 PEINCIPLES OF THEOLOGICAL STUDY. [part I.
passion. Without these gifts you may have a careful
inspector of documents and accumulator of dry material,
but not an historian, one able to reproduce the buried
ages. In matters of art, again, can he be a judge who
has no sesthetic taste ? He may load his mind with all
the scientific facts connected with the production of
musical sounds, and yet if nature has not given him a
musical ear, or wakened her grand harmonies within
his soul, he will be, so far as relates to music, only a
learned fool. He may be versed in the chemistry of
pigments, and know the number of wavelets in each
tint of coloured light, but without a sense of beauty and
ideal vision he will never be a painter. Industry and
its offspring science are admirable servants of the human
spirit ; but the moment they claim an autocracy and
forget their dependence on original endowments, divine
gifts which no industry can impart, they remind the
thoughtful observer that even on that lower plain with
wliich they are chiefly concerned success is " not of hinn
that willeth or of him that runneth."
Eeligion is subject to the same rule. Spiritual
things are spiritually discerned; and from this con
dition there is absolutely no escape. There are, it is
true, a number of questions connected with theology to
which this statement is not appUcable ; but they belong
rather to the accidental retinue of theology than to
theology itself in its stricter sense. Points of textual
criticism, the date and origin of books, the antiquity of
man, and similar topics, are properly Uterary and

SEOT. III.] SPIEITUAL DISCEENMENT. 27
scientific, and not religious problems. They require,
therefore, only those abUities which are adapted to the
investigation of Uterature and natural science, and no
keenness of spiritual insight can contribute to their
solution. But the case is altered as soon as you come to
the inner core of reUgion. You may study this from the
outside for everlasting ages, and you wUl stUl be ignorant
of it. The man who has never worshipped and loved,
who has never felt the sense of sin, the peace of an
assured forgiveness, and the passionate longing for an
ideal righteousness, who has never trembled under the
realisation of his Divine sonship, or Ustened with awe
to a voice which seemed amid his warring impulses
to speak out of the calmness of eternity, such a man, I
say, cannot know these things ; and if with grand airs
of superior wisdom he essays to deride reUgion, his
shafts faU harmlessly on a hideous caricature, which,
like some noxious fog, has steamed up out of the slough
of his own ignorance. He may be profoundly learned
in regard to outward facts, and be a very paragon of
impartiaUty, and yet he wUl be always dealing with false
issues, and accounting for the wrong thing. Nor wUl
aU the science of the present century, or all the
savagery of pristine ages, avaU to cure him ; for the
things of consciousness never can be revealed except
in consciousness. Let us take one or two iUustrations. If you are
criticising, with a view to its rejection, some theological
doctrine which has taken a strong hold of the human

28 PEINCIPLES OF THEOLOGICAL STUDY. [part i.
mind, how can you possibly do so with justice, if you
know nothing of the spiritual roots from which it has
grown ? For anything you can teU, a more profound
religious experience might entirely change your view ;
and not tiU you have felt within yourself the emotions
which the doctrine explains, or the want which it
satisfies, and perceive that a different doctrine affords
a better explanation and a fuller satisfaction, are you
competent to pronounce. Even error often has at its
heart a truth which gives it vitaUty and procures for
it acceptance, and you wUl never rescue the mass of
mankind from what you regard as superstition unless,
while destroying the error, you save the truth. To
effect this you must have not only the destructiveness
of a keen and cultured inteUigence, but the creative
energy of the soul's higher moods and grander aspira
tions. Again, in the interpretation of reUgious books,
although it is perfectly true that you must not suffer
your mind to be deflected from the grammatical meaning
of the text by your wishes or preconceptions, it is
equaUy true that you are seeking to interpret, not
merely a text, but a soul; and if you are out of sympathy
with that soul, and have no participation in its experi
ences, its language will be to you an unknown tongue.
It is possible to sympathise with a writer even where
the intellect cannot accept his conclusions ; and it is
only to sympathy that the more subtle connections,
partly of thought, partly of emotion, are revealed, and
only by a soul which is itself aUve that the dead word

SECT. III.] SPIEITUAL DISCEENMENT. 29
can become clothed with a stUl Uving power. These
remarks apply not only to books which are pressed
upon us by the men among whom we Uve, but also to
those which represent forms of religious sentiment or
phUosophical thought the farthest removed from our own
time and country. These used to be treated by theo
logians with a contempt which could only ridicule or
pity the error of their form, whUe aU that was rare and
ethereal in their substance eluded this coarse and
unloving observation. But it is the duty of the true
interpreter to show us how these beUefs have satisfied
the thirst of the human spirit, or these speculative
systems were born out of the struggle of human
thought ; and he who can discover no beauty or pathos
even in the blind gropings of error or the eager cry of
superstition, is more Ukely to give us a caricature than
an interpretation. If these observations be just, it is obvious that we
must bring to our studies not minds which gaze with
blank indifference upon the various religions of the
world, but rather minds which feel a profound interest
in religion, and have at least the desire to become so
wide in their compass and so deUcate in their discri
mination as to be able to penetrate the secret essence
which Ues at the heart of every reUgious manifestation.
InteUectual freedom in matters of reUgion is not to be
obtained by the massacre of our highest sentiments and
emotions. This would be to substitute for the pre
judice of partial knowledge the prejudice of absolute

30 PEINCIPLES OF THEOLOGICAL STUDY. [part I.
ignorance, a prejudice which is all the more dangerous
because it is tricked out in the sorry counterfeit of
wisdom. Nor is freedom to be found in an attitude
of revolt against received opinions ; for this again is
only to exchange a conservative for a reactionary pre
judice. Such an attitude may be assumed by the
feeblest as well as the strongest understanding; for
every conclusion which rests upon probable evidence is
exposed to objections, and nothing is easier than to
dweU upon the objections tUl they acquire an exag
gerated importance, and to depreciate the positive evi
dence tiU we become quite insensible of its real force.
There are few states of mind more darkened by self-
deception than this ; for, pleased by the sharpness of
its criticism and its apparent superiority to the credulous
vulgar, it is bUnded by the conceit of cleverness and
enlightenment, and is dazzled by the brilliancy of its
own ostentatious candour. Genuine mental freedom
is to be secured only by the supremacy of one pure and
exalted sentiment, the love of truth. It was said long
ago, " my judgment is just, because I seek not mine
own will, but the wUl of the Father who has sent me,"
and I know no other rule for just judgment. This
strips off the disguise of the many pretenders that
usurp the name of freedom, and by removing those
by-ends of self-love, which lead us astray to the right
hand or to the left, enables us to follow with candid
simplicity the holiest light that is vouchsafed to us.
The same rule graduaUy corrects the bias which affects

SECT. III.] SPIEITUAL DISCEENMENT. 31
us all, not only from the nature of our education, but
from the narrowness of our original endowments ; for
such a bias must be removed not by the emptiness, but
by the fulness of the spirit, and the soul which walks
with God, and is animated in its search by the one
desire to see, so far as mortal may, the truth as it is in
Him, wUl enter ever more deeply into the richest ex
periences of humanity, and approach more nearly the
perfect stature of the spiritual man. Thus it is Ufted
above the blinding mists of self and the delusions of
the world; and though even in this upper air the
finite cannot be altogether exempt from error, yet there
wUl always be a holy reasonableness in its thought,
and when it misses the form, it wiU stUl be led by the
Spfrit of Truth.

PAET IL
RELATION OE THEOLOGY TO OTHER STUDIES.
We have already endeavoured to vindicate the claim
of theology to a place in the circle of Uberal studies ;
we must now rapidly survey its relations to some other
branches of learning. In this survey we need not
attempt to construct a classified scheme of the sciences,
and determine the exact position of theology in the
organism of knowledge. It wUl be sufficient at pre
sent to say that, since it conducts us to the highest
questions of ontology, and deals with the profoundest
interests of mankind, it must, in the eyes of aU who
do not reject its title to be heard, assume a pre-eminent
rank, and it presupposes for its successful prosecution
a wide and exact culture. On the principal depart
ments of that culture a few words may be said.
If we exclude philosophy, which, for reasons to he
stated farther on, I prefer treating as an integral part
of theological study, the basis of education for the in
tending theological student must still be found in the
litercB humaniores. The study of the classical languages,
with their rich and precise grammatical forms, and their

PART n.] THE CLASSICAL LANGUAGES. 33
masterpieces in almost every variety of Uterature, fur
nish an unsurpassed discipUne in exactness of thought
and expression, and in exceUence of Uterary structure ;
and the principles of textual and exegetical criticism
may be learned with the greatest advantage upon this
neutral territory. It is another important considera
tion that, though Christianity arose in Palestine, it
struck its deepest roots into the soU of the HeUenic and
Latin worlds, and its doctrine and ecclesiastical govern
ment were shaped by the subtlety of Greek inteUect
and the organising genius of Eome. In order to under
stand the spirit of the ancient civiUsation, to enter
sympatheticaUy into its conflict with Christianity, and
to distinguish the elements which it has contributed to
the present faith of Christendom, we must make per
sonal acquaintance with the literature in which its
spirit is enshrined, and learn to appreciate the nobiUty
of its thought and the splendour of its poetic creations,
which have made it a power for aU time. We must
add the more utilitarian reflection that a knowledge of
Greek and Latin as instruments of research is simply
indispensable. Not only is the New Testament itself
written in Greek, but far the larger part of our know--
ledge of Christianity for several centuries is derived
from Greek and Latin writers, so that aU who desire to
qualify themselves for independent investigation must
first acquire famiUarity with these languages.
Though the first place is assigned to the classical
tongues, not only on account of their special utUity,
D

34 EELATION OF THEOLOGY TO OTHEE STUDIES, [part ii.
but on account of their general connection with Uberal
culture, there are other languages which demand the
attention of one who aspires to be a complete theologian,
even without straying beyond the bounds of Christen
dom. Hebrew, in which the Old Testament is com
posed, we may treat as a purely theological language.
Important Ught is thrown, not only upon the his
tory, but upon the ideas of the Old Testament by
Assyrian and the recently disinterred Accadian, whUe
the Egyptian hieroglyphics have increased our his
torical and geographical information. Chaldee and
Eabbinical Hebrew are necessary for those who would
trace for themselves the connection between Christianity
and Judaism. Syriac contains a copious ecclesiastical
Uterature; and Arabic, .(Ethiopic, and Armenian have
preserved some interesting remains of Christian an
tiquity. Among modern languages French and German
must have the pre-eminence, though Dutch has lately
risen into importance, and other European languages
are not without their contributions to theology. The
Germans, however, have made this field so completely
their own, and have produced such valuable works in
every department of the subject, that a knowledge of
German is absolutely indispensable.
A knowledge of the ancient languages presupposes
some acquaintance with the peoples who spoke them ;
and accordingly every student of the classical tongues
traces the course of Grecian and Eoman history. The
historical reading of the theologian must take a wider

part II.] HISTOEY. 35
range. As preparatory to the study of the Old Testa
ment, he must foUow the fortunes of the great Oriental
monarchies, and become famUiar with the characteristics
of their civiUsation. It is in connection with the early
struggles of Christianity that he must make the largest
demands upon his classical learning, so as to under
stand the preparation for the new reUgion in the diffu
sion of HeUenic influence and the extension of the
Eoman power, and to appreciate the conditions of the
contest in which it was forced to engage. It is cus
tomary to deal with these subjects more or less com
pletely in a theological course ; but a general knowledge
of the history must be taken for granted, and there is
an advantage in surveying these subjects simply from
the point of view of the historian and the statesman
before attempting to penetrate their religious signi
ficance. As we track the course of Christianity through
succeeding centuries we must draw upon the stores of
mediaeval and modern history, and in watching her
missionary activity in distant lands our historical
vision must take a yet wider sweep. Besides this
immediate connection between general and religious
history, two important benefits may accrue to the
theologian from a generous historical culture. He wUl
gain a keener insight into human nature in its same
ness and its variety, and wiU acquire a juster estimate
of its passions, its prejudices, and its aspirations ; and
thus he wiU be enabled to form a truer judgment of
reUgious parties, and of that great struggle between the

36 EELATION OF THEOLOGY TO OTHEE STUDIES, [part ii.
new and the old which has drawn a line of blood and
horror through the ages. He wUl also train his histori
cal sense, that power of estimating the probability of
events, and their mutual dependence and proportions,
which constitutes the basis of sound criticism, and the
want of which leads to such extravagant opinions,
whether on the destructive or the conservative side.
The great rules of criticism which apply to universal
history must preside over the narrower domain of his
torical theology ; and these rules may be best leamed,
and a discriminating tact in their appUcation may be
most advantageously cultivated, in that wider and
more secular region where the problems are freest
from the disturbing influences of feeUng, and appeal
with least entanglement to the pure historical judg
ment. Naturally arising out of our historical inquiries are
questions of social ameUoration, which are now dis
cussed under the name of social science. These cannot
fail to be of interest to the theologian ; for though they
do not affect the theoretical side of his subject, they
have an immediate bearing on its practical applications.
It is particularly undesirable that one who undertakes
to be a teacher of righteousness in a commercial com
munity like ours should be ignorant of the principles
of political economy. These are occasionally said to
be antagonistic to some of the most positive teachings of
Christianity. We ought to be able to judge for our
selves whether this is really so, that we may modify

part II.] VALUE OF THE STUDY OF MAN. 37
any opinions which appear to be erroneous, or may be
saved from injuring, by an ignorant advocacy, a cause
which is reaUy good.
The subjects on which we have hitherto touched are
not only the most requisite for the future theologian,
but, considered as elements of a Uberal education, have
one marked advantage over the physical sciences.
Dealing as they do with the products of human nature,
they have as their object both the inner and the outer
worlds. In treating the phUological aspects of language,
and in translating thoughts from a dead into a Uving
tongue, they demand thoroughness, precision, and care
no less than the exact sciences ; and in concerning
themselves so largely with probabiUties they afford a
better exercise for the judgment. But in addition to
this they create a familiarity with that human nature
which, whether we know it or not, is an inseparable
element of aU our knowledge ; they draw out its hidden
processes into the Ught of self- consciousness, and the
study of the spoken logos reveals that interior logos
which is the fountain of aU the rational movements of
mankind. They thus prepare the way for philosophy,
which, though the physicist may lawfuUy neglect it,
can alone justify the assumptions on which he proceeds,
and lift our empirical conclusions into the rank of en-
Ughtened knowledge. When we further consider their
influence in maturing the tastes and enriching the mind
with noble ideals, we must admit that they are unsur
passed as instruments for the cultivation of both depth

38 EELATION OF THEOLOGY TO OTHEE STUDIES, [part ii.
and width of faculty. Nevertheless the theologian
cannot afford to overlook the natural sciences. As, ac
cording to his conception, the universe is an expres
sion of Divine Eeason, he can hardly avoid a certain
enthusiasm in tracing out the processes of nature ; or,
if his abUities do not lead him in that direction, he
must at least find himself confronted with the problem
whether the world is worthy of so grand an origin, and
must know what those who have most deeply studied
the subject have got to say. Although questions of
ontology must be decided by philosophy and not by the
science of nature, nevertheless the argument of the
materialist and the atheist, which at the present day
assumes that science as its basis, must be considered
with competent knowledge of its supposed grounds; and
it will be impossible to draw a just line between the
wisdom and prejudice of scientific men, to distinguish
their idola from their real knowledge, unless we are first
famiUar both with the methods and with the results
of their studies. In particular directions the modern
theory of evolution, which meets with growing accept
ance, must seriously modify some of the older forms of
theology, and I need hardly remind you that astronomy
and geology have abolished the Hebrew firmament, the
motionless earth, and the recent date and summary pro
cess of creation, and that these facts, combined with others
ofa different description, must profoundly affect our view
of the nature of revelation and inspiration, and of the
character of the Bible. These examples may convince

PART II.] NATUEAL SCIENCE  AET. 39
us that a general knowledge of natural science is indis
pensable to the theologian ; and I may add that in the
present age, which is so given over to mere physical
research on the one hand, and to blind acquiescence
in ecclesiastical authority on the other, he who would
mediate between the rival parties, and bring the contrasted
elements of our nature into harmonious union, must be
prepared by his mental resources to do equal justice
to both sides, and must be famUiar with the facts and
laws of the phenomenal realm while he endeavours to
import into it the eternal realities of the spiritual
sphere. The foregoing remarks may show you that the
various subjects of your arts course have not been
selected without deUberation, and that the several
departments of your study have all a more or less
direct bearing upon your future career. But there is
another class of subjects which has hardly received
sufficient recognition in collegiate discipline, but to
which the theologian cannot be indifferent. We pos
sess not only intellectual but sesthetic faculties; and
not only ought our sense of beauty to be cultivated,
but we ought to know something of the history and
the principles of art. The religious spirit expresses
itself not only through moral rules and doctrinal
formulae, but in artistic creations and elaborate cere
monial. The sunple and untutored outpourmg of
devotion gradually embodies itself in a solemn liturgy,
and the liturgy seeks the aid of architecture, music.

40 EELATION OF THEOLOGY TO OTHEE STUDIES, [part ii.
painting, and sculpture, and filling them with the vivid
breath of religious emotion shapes them to its own
lofty ends. We must understand these things through
the artistic spirit in ourselves, and learn to apprehend
a truth which, disdaining the austere confinement of
logical speech, flings itself forth in the free play of
imagination, and looks at us through the subtle and
changeful forms of beauty. Nor let us forget that
beauty and imagination manifest themselves in lan
guage as well as in shape and colour and music, and
now march in the majestic strains of MUton, now peer
Uke an ethereal and impalpable spirit through the
lyrics of SheUey, and again leave the impress of their
wisdom and purity and insight in the serious Unes of
Wordsworth. Like the true theologian, the poet Uves
in an ideal world; and if you would not lose your
power of flight amid the arid wastes of a theology
which misses realities in its devotion to forms, you will
often refresh your minds by drinking at the fountains
of poetry, and strengthen the wings of holy imagination
by soaring into that upper region from which the things
of earth are seen in a halo of heavenly light.
In conclusion let me remind you that your coUegiate
pursuits can only introduce you to the temple of know
ledge, and that you ought not, as though your general
education were now complete, altogether to abandon
studies for which your faculty is just becoming strong
and your judgment clear. In our own curriculum some
provision is made for maintaining your proficiency in

PART II.] THE CHKISTIAN SCHOLAR. 41
the Greek and Latin languages, and for extending your
acquaintance with classical as well as patristic literature;
but most of the other subjects on which I have touched
must be left to your independent exertions. It is a
frequent complaint that the special learning of our
College days gUdes imperceptibly from the mind, and
amid the active duties of the ministry you wUl find it
difficult to secure time for the pursuits of the scholar.
You may want not only time, but encouragement ; for
the present age seems to have more faith in bodUy
exercise than in mental quality. But make it yours to
teach the age a more excellent way, and to show that
the only real and permanent good springs from the
inner forces of the soul. Even a small amount of time
reUgiously devoted to the acquisition of knowledge wiU
suffice to preserve and extend your highest attainments,
and only by thus faithfuUy foUowing the lofty ideal of
the Christian scholar, as the servant and the herald of
truth, can you hope to win back to your profession the
respect of cultivated men, and link reUgion once more
to the inteUigence of mankind.

PAET IIL
SYNOPTICAL VIEW OF THE VARIOUS BRANCHES
OP THEOLOGY.
INTEODUCTION.
The purpose of that portion of our subject on which we
are now entering is to bring together under a single
view the several departments of theological study, so
that you may see its extent, together with the grouping,
the mutual relations, and the general character of the
various branches into which it is divided This is a topic
which has received a large share of attention in Ger
many under the name of " Theologische Encyklopadie,"
or " Encyklopadie der Theologie," or " der theologischen
Wissenschaften." The Uterature ofthe subject, vrith an
account of its gradual development into its present
shape, wUl be found in the two works which it wiU be
sufficient to recommend here. The " Encyklopadie und
Methodologie der theologischen Wissenschaften," of
Dr. K. E. Hagenbach, theological Professor in Basel,
was first published at Leipzig in 1833, and its soUd
value and usefulness are attested by the fact that it

INTROD.] THEOLOGICAL ENCYCLOP.iEDIA. 43
reached its ninth edition in 1874, while a tenth, revised
by Professor Kautzsch, was issued in 1880.^ In this
work the purely theoretical aspects of theology are
perhaps too much subordinated to its practical aims,
and its arrangement does not appear to me to be logically
perfect; but it contains a large amount of material
which the student wUl find of great service, and the
bibliography under each section is, at least as regards
German books, remarkably full. The foreign literature,
though not altogether excluded, presents a meagre ap
pearance, and the English reader wiU find it of little or
no value as a guide to the theology of his own country.
A sketch is given of the "history and Uterature of
Theological Encyclopaedia," in an appendix to the first
part, after section 33. The other work referred to above
is "Theologik oder Encyklopadie der Theologie," by
I. F. Eabiger, Professor of EvangeUcal Theology in the
University of Breslau, pubUshed at Leipzig in 1880.
Eabiger prefers the name " Theologik " because it is his
purpose not merely to exhibit a formal scheme of theo
logical studies, but to take up into his scheme the
essential contents of theology, and thus furnish, as he
says, "not only a formal, but at the same time a
material sketch of theological science."^ If this plan
has the disadvantage of making the book to some
extent the manifesto of a particular school, it greatly
I My occasional references are to the edition of 1869, which was
beside me as I wrote ; but there will be no difSculty in finding any
required passage in a different edition. '^ Preface, p. iv.

44 THEOLOGICAL ENCYCLOPEDIA. [part iii.
adds to its interest ; and the author's clear and flowing
style and continuous text impart to his work an attrac
tiveness to which Hagenbach's can lay no claim. His
views are avowedly evangeUcal ; but some of his critical
conclusions would make EngUsh evangeUcals shudder.
He is broad in his sympathies, can distinguish between
the letter and the spirit, and has no fear of the most
rigorous scientific method. In one respect his book is
less useful than Hagenbach's ; he has secured the
necessary space for his new material by contracting the
bibliographical portion, and naming only the most im
portant works under each head. The history of his
own subject, however, is particularly fuU and in
structive, and accompanied by appropriate criticisms
of the several writers.^ It does not suit our immediate
plan to follow him into this interesting field; but it
wUl be advantageous to mention two or three of the
principal modes which have been adopted for the dis
tribution of theological material.
Among the Catholics we may notice Staudenmaier,
whose '' Encyklopadie der theologischen Wissenschaften
als System der gesammten Theologie" appeared at
Mainz in 1834.^ He defined theology as "the con
sciousness of God elevated into a science,"^ or more
briefly as " the science of reUgion." Christian theology
' Pp. 2-91.
2 2d ed., 1st vol., in 1840. See Eabiger, p. 89 sq.
' For want of a better term I shall use " science " as equivalent to
tbe German Wissenschaft. The latter covers the whole domain of
reflective and methodical study.

INTROD.] STAUDENMAIEE  SCHLEIEEMACHEE. 45
is " the science of our coUective religious consciousness,
as it is conditioned and shaped historicaUy through the
revelation in Christ," or in fewer words, " the science of
Christian faith." It involves, therefore, both a specu
lative and an historical element, and through its con
nection with the Church is concerned also with practical
questions. Hence arise its three principal divisions.
Speculative Theology begins with a theory of religion
and revelation, and so leads to the Christian revelation
and its source in tradition and Scripture. The use of
Scripture necessitates the introduction of Exegetical
Theology, which thus appears as a subordinate branch
of the Speculative. The treatment of sources is naturaUy
foUowed by Dogmatics and Ethics. Ethics prepares the
way for the second main division. Practical Theology,
which deals with the doctrine of ecclesiastical govern
ment and of church services. And lastly, Historical
Theology embraces the history of dogmas, an account of
the Symbols or Creeds of the Church, Archaeology and
Ecclesiastical History. It is evident that we have here
a careful attempt to lay out the various topics of
theology in a systematic and exhaustive arrangement.
The most striking objection to it is the inclusion of
Exegetical under Speculative Theology, which it may
indeed assist, but of which it is not naturaUy a part.
Schleiermacher takes so pre-eminent a place among
the Protestant theologians of the present century that
we must refer to his " Kurze DarsteUung des theologi
schen Studiums zum Behuf einleitender Vorlesungen

46 THEOLOGICAL ENCYCLOP./EDIA. [part hi.
entworfen," pubUshed at Berlin 1811.^ He confines
his attention to Christian theology, which he regards as
a positive science, whose parts are connected into a
whole by their reference to Christianity, and which as
such has to solve a practical problem. It is not
necessary for Christian faith and piety, and therefore
has regard only to the purposes of the ministry. Ac
cordingly it comprises those branches of knowledge and
rules of practice without which a consistent eccle
siastical government is not possible. This practical
aim dominates Schleiermacher's entire system, and
from it are derived the three grand divisions of theology.
The first requirement is an assurance that the existence
of the Church can be shown to be necessary for the
development of the human mind. This is the business
of religious and ethical phUosophy, which must ascer
tain and estimate the essential idea of Christianity and
of the Church. Hence Philosophical Theology occupies
the foremost place. Out of the active aims of the
ministry arises Practical Theology ; and as this pre
supposes a knowledge of the historical conditions of the
Church, it must be content with the third place, leaving
the second to Historical Theology. The object of PhUo
sophical Theology is to ascertain the essential idea of
Christianity, and estabUsh the truth of the mode of
faith adopted by the Church, and to exclude and refute
whatever deviates from this. Thus are given the two
^ 2d ed. 1830. A translation by "William Farrer, LL.B., was
published by Clark of Edinburgh in 1850.

INTROD.] SCHLEIEEMACHEE. 47
subdivisions. Apologetics and Polemics, each involving
general and particular, or Christian and Protestant
treatment. In regard to Historical Theology the ministry
demands first of aU a knowledge of the present moment,
out of which the future has to be unfolded ; and the
present can be understood only from the historical
course of the past and the earliest conditions of the
Christian Ufe. Hence, following the chronological
order, we obtain, as subordinate branches, Exegetical
Theology, Ecclesiastical History, and the historical know
ledge of the present condition of Christianity, under
the two heads of Dogmatics and what the Germans term
Statistik, an account of the present circumstances of
the Church. Under Practical Theology Schleiermacher
Umits himself to a theory of administration for the
German EvangeUcal Church, and distributes his subject
into two sections, the principles of church service, and
the principles of ecclesiastical government. In this
scheme Schleiermacher has aUowed himself to be ruled
too exclusively by the practical interests of the Church,
and thereby assigns to theology a lower position than
it is entitled to occupy. Eegarded as a science it
carries its own interest with it, and asks to be studied
for its own sake, and not merely with a view to the
administration of a Church. The wrong determination
of the object of theology injuriously affects the dis
tribution of its topics. Apologetics and Polemics may
be very necessary to the professional guardians of the
Church's faith, and may therefore take the leading place

48 THEOLOGICAL ENCYCLOPAEDIA. [part hi.
for practical purposes ; but it is conceded by Schleier
macher himself that this is not the scientific order,
for he says that PhUosophical Theology presupposes a
knowledge of the Historical. If, however, theology is
to vindicate its place as a science, it must be moved by
the simple desire to bring forth its contents into the
light of reflective thought, and arrange them in their
logical order. Eabiger further complains that Schleier
macher makes theology too dependent on philosophy,
and thus impresses upon it throughout the stamp of
subjectivity. With this criticism I cannot so easUy
concur; and we shaU have to consider farther on
whether it is possible for theology to cut itself adrift
from phUosophy, and maintain that position of absolute
independence which Eabiger and others demand.-'
We must take a briefer view of two or three of the
more recent systems. In 1843 A. F. L. Pelt pubUshed
his " Theologische Encyklopadie als System im Zusam-
menhange mit der Geschicht^ der theologischen Wissen
schaft und ihrer einzelnen Zweige entwickelt." The plan
adopted in this work is foUowed substantially, though
not without modifications, in his later article in Herzog's
"Eeal-Encyklopadie,"^ which I here follow. He, like
Schleiermacher, Umits theology to the exposition of the
Christian reUgion, and defines it as " the Church's scien^-
tific self-consciousness of its unfolding through the Holy
Spirit." Hence its first problem is to study the Church
1 See Eabiger's criticisms, pp. 59-62.
2 Vol. XV. 1862, pp. 748-752.

INTROD.] PELT. 49
historicaUy in its origin, development, and present con
dition. Thus Historical Theology stands first, with its
three grand divisions — Biblical Theology in its most
extended sense. Ecclesiastical History, and Statistics —
each with their appropriate subdivisions. The study of
Statistics, in deaUng with the doctrinal and ethical
characteristics of the various sects, prepares the way for
Systematic Theology, which is distributed into three
parts, treating respectively of the fundamental princi
ples of Christianity (Grundlehre or Fundamentaltheo-
logie), of its dogmatical and ethical contents (thetische
Theologie), and of the phUosophy of Christianity. Under
this last head Christianity is exhibited not only as the
highest manifestation of reUgion, but as the fuU realisa
tion of the kingdom of God upon earth, which, with its
developing self-consciousness, successively unfolds itself
up to its final completion. This seU-development of
the Church is, in other words, ecclesiastical practice ;
and we thus reach our third main division, Practical
Theology. Here also we have three principal subdivi
sions. The first deals with fundamental principles,
concluding with the theory of ecclesiastical organisation.
As an organisation impUes rule and subordination, the
second part takes up the subject of canon law and
ecclesiastical government. And lastly, the third part
gives the theory of the various forms of activity by
whieh the Church is maintained or extended : the order
of Divine service, or Liturgies ; preaching, or HomUetics ;
the instruction of the young, or Catechetics ; missions,
E

50 THEOLOGICAL ENCYCLOP.ffiDIA. [part iii.
or Halieutics ; and finaUy, the means of securing com
petent ecclesiastical learning, theological seminaries, the
theological Faculty at Universities, and so forth.
Hagenbach and Eabiger, whUe differing from one
another in some of their subdivisions, concur in separ
ating BibUcal and Historical Theology, and recognising
four grand divisions of their subject — exegetical, histo
rical, systematic, and practical.
These examples may suffice to give you some insight
into the general purpose of Theologische Encyklopadie,
and show you by their variety the difficulty of framing
an altogether satisfactory classification. In the scheme
which is here presented I propose to adopt six great
divisions : — I. PhUosophy ; II. Comparative. EeUgion ;
III. BibUcal Theology ; IV. Ecclesiastical History ;
Y. Systematic Theology ; VI. Practical Theology. The
reasons for this distribution wiU be given as we take up
the several topics one by one ; and I wUl only observe
at present that the second, third, and fourth heads might
legitimately be classed together under the title of Histo
rical Theology, but they are so distinct from one another
and of such prime importance, whUe around the second
and stiU more the third head cluster so many associa
tions and interests which are not strictly historical, that
it seems inappropriate to reduce them to the rank of
subdivisions, and thus place them in a lower position
than we assign to our phUosophical and doctrinal
studies. We may now proceed to consider the several
subjects in their order.

SECT. I.] EELATION OF PHILOSOPHY TO THEOLOGY. 51
Section I.
Philosophy.
It is customary to treat phUosophy, not as a part of'
theology, but as one of the most important preliminary
studies. In adopting it into the theological scheme it
is by no means my intention to call in question its
independent rights, or to maintain that in pursuing it
one is necessarUy joining the ranks of the theologians.
It does not depreciate or subordinate it, but rather
elevates it and gives it a leading position,: to take it out.
of the category of mere preparatory discipline and make
' it an indispensable part of the theologian's equipment.
The philosopher (Uke the historian who foUows- the
fortunes of the Church from a mere humanitarian .in
terest) need not be a theologian, but the theologian is
bound to explore the deepest questions in philosophy.
The philosopher may interest himself in the great
problems of the universe without' entering the domain
of religion ; and as a philosopher he ought to examine
these things with a purely speculative interest, un
biassed by the dicta of ecclesiastics. But the theolo
gian cannot on his side claim an equal independence.
He cannot move a step without first reckoning with
philosophy, hearing what it has to say, and understand
ing the grounds of its decisions ; and therefore his only
resource is to incorporate it and give it the foremost

52 PHILOSOPHY. [part iii.
place among his own studies. This is the position
which we have now to make good.
The importance of phUosophy as a preparation for
theology can hardly be disputed. It is recognised not
only by German rationalists, but by the highest autho
rity in the CathoUc Church. In his Encyclical Letter
" On the Eestoration of Christian Philosophy in Catho
lic Universities, according to the mind of St. Thomas
Aquinas, the angeUc doctor," Pope Leo XIII., among
other recommendations, speaks of the "use of phUo
sophy, both perpetual and manifold, in order that sacred
theology may assume and put on the nature, habit, and
character of true science;"-' and Cardinal Manning says,
" the science of theology presupposes a sound phUosophy
as its preamble and foundation." ^ The latter claim is
made for philosophy on the ground that it infallibly
establishes the truths of natural reUgion, and we might
therefore assume that it is accepted as a constituent
part of theology ; but this term is reserved for the
supernatural teaching of the Church, so that the Ught
of nature and the Ught of faith may be clearly distin
guished from one another, though they both " come from
one and the same Fountain, the Father of Lights."'^
The two statements, of the Pope and the Cardinal,
suggest the two functions which phUosophy fulfils in
theological study. Eegarded as merely preparatory, it
^ P. 10 of the English translation by Dr. Rawes.
^ P. xiii. of the Preface to the same. The Encyclical is dated
August 4, 1879. ' P. X.

SEOT. 1.] EELATION OF PHILOSOPHY TO THEOLOGY. 53
trains the faculty of methodical and exact thought and
the power of introspection, thus enabUng us not only to
arrange our materials into a harmonious system, con
sistent with itself and with other departments of know
ledge, but to observe accurately and interpret truly
those inner experiences which so deeply colour our
theological conclusions. But philosophy does much
more than this. It requires some settled convictions
in regard to its own proper subjects, metaphysics and
ontology, and thus enters, with either affirmation or
denial, the very forecourt of theology itself. If it can
prove that the mind is no permanent entity, but only
beads of consciousness succeeding one another in obedi
ence to physiological law, that conscience has no Divine
authority, that men are not responsible for their volun
tary actions, and that there is either no God, or, if there
be, we have no ground for beUeving in him, then theo
logy as an exposition of permanent reaUty ceases to
exist, and is degraded into a mere history of human
delusions. Theology, therefore, must wait upon phUo
sophy for the estabUshment of its fundamental proposi
tions; and though, as natural science does not wait for
the permission of phUosophy before assuming the exist
ence of matter and force, so theology might assume the
reaUty of the soul and God, stUl it is unable to proceed
with any satisfaction so long as it is haunted by un
answered doubts, and the religious instincts have not
been brought into harmony vrith the speculative reason.
On this ground, then, I conceive that philosophy and

,54 PHILOSOPHY. [part hi.
theology are related to one another, not as touching, but
as intersecting circles, and that the first step in theology
is to estabUsh on a phUosophical basis the reaUty of its
objects. To this conclusion two forms of objection may be
raised. It, may be said that the possession of an
authoritative revelation, whether that revelation be
supposed to ¦ reside ultimately in the Church or in the
Bible, saves us from the uncertainties of speculation,
and renders philosophical research unnecessary. This
might be true in regard to a variety of questions ; but
in regard to those which are fundamental it. cannot be
true. Before you can accept an authoritative revelation
you must be convinced that there is a God from whom
it may have come, and on whose authority it may rest.
A revelation can have no authority unless it be Divine,
and therefore you cannot prove the reality of the Di-vine
by.the authority of the revelation. If you appeal to
miracles, a miracle has no meaning except as the ex
pression of an admitted Divine power. In the absence
of belief' in God we could only treat a miracle, if it
occurred, as an inexpUcable fesws naturae, or as the
result of some hitherto undiscovered law; and I doubt
whether' in any instance the evidence for miracles has
convinced, of the truth of theism one who has been un
moved alike by the order. of the universe, the testimony
of conscience, and the inteUectual demand for a primal
cause. It is in vain, therefore, that you try to escape
from the restless questionings of phUosophy into the

SECT. I.] NEED OF PHILOSOPHY. 55
quiet and sure retreats of revelation. You must first
demonstrate the possibiUty and the reality of revelation,
and you can do this only by phUosophical reasoning,
which goes to the very roots of theological know
ledge. Another plea may be advanced by those who do not
beUeve in a dogmatic revelation, but nevertheless accept
the Christian religion as the basis of their theology. It
may be urged that the Christian consciousness — that is
to say, the form of the reUgious spirit which has been
developed under the influence of Christianity — contains
certain impUcit truths ; and as this spirit carries its own
guarantee to every one who is animated by it, it is the
province of theology simply to draw forth and formulate
these truths. Now none could be farther than myself
from denying that the witness of the Spirit is for each
man a deep and valid ground for religious conviction,
and that a phUosophy which dissolved this witness into
the empty vapours of an ignorant fancy would violate
the unity of our nature, and rend our faculties into ci-ril
conflict. For the practical purposes of life this inward
testimony is sufficient, and the devout Christian may
accept the disclosures of faith as containing their o-wn
authentication. But theology demands something more
than this, and cannot be content to unfold the impUcit
contents of the reUgious element in man tUl it has
settled whether and to what extent that element may
be trusted ; and to do this is the business of phUosophy.
When this first step is neglected, and theology is con-

56 PHILOSOPHY. [part III.
fined to the interpretation of the Christian conscious
ness, it seems to lack a rational basis, and it is not tUl
we reach the subordinate subject of Apologetics, that we
cease to ask whether we are dealing with realities or
with dreams.
For the above reasons it appears to me that the
fundamental truths of theology must be phUosophicaUy
estabUshed before we can advance with any satisfaction
to its ulterior problems.
The phUosophical course is divided into three sec
tions, dealing respectively with Mental, Ethical, and
EeUgious Philosophy.
1. Mental Philosophy. — Mental PhUosophy has an
interest for us in this connection only so far as ,it is
devoted to problems which have a more or less direct
bearing on theology. The most important of these, as
determining whether theology be possible at all, relates
to the conditions of belief and the sphere of knowledge.
Men have been in the habit of supposing that they not
only apprehend a phenomenal world through the senses,
but that by an intellectual intuition they transcend this
world and discover an abiding ground, of which it is
merely the varying expression. The vaUdity of this
judgment has been sharply questioned in our own day,
and the position is maintained that we know nothing
but phenomena. The denial does not, indeed, extend
to the possible existence of something behind pheno
mena, but only to the adequacy of our faculties either

SEOT. I.] MENTAL PHILOSOPHY. 57
to reach or to interpret it. This view may assume
either of two forms. It may be atheistic, and declare
that, if there be a God, his very existence is absolutely
unkno-wn; or it may be agnostic, and maintain that,
though there is au ultimate ground for phenomena,
there is nothing which justifies a predication respecting
the essence or character of this unknown Supreme. It
is, therefore, in both its forms, destructive of reUgion,
though it abstains from negative dogmatism; for reU
gion involves essentiaUy a recognised spiritual relation
between us and God. This serious question must be
settled, not by the off-hand assumptions either of the
theologian, who is accustomed to breathe the rarefied
atmosphere of ontological conceptions, or of the man of
science, whose business it is to rest in the information
of the senses and investigate the relations of pheno
mena, but by a patient and thorough examination of
the laws of thought and of the sources of Imowledge.
If we arrive at the conclusion that we are inexorably
confined within the Umits of the experience afforded by
sensation, we must turn away from the path on which
we have entered, and leave it to be trodden by somnam-
buUsts and dreamers. But if we come to beUeve, no
longer through native instinct, but by a judgment of
reflective thought, that our supersensible ideas are at
least as trustworthy a guarantee of objective reality as
those derived from the senses, and that indeed they are
the prior conditions of aU experiential knowledge, we
shaU then be prepared to go confidently on our way,

58 PHILOSOPHY. [part hi.
and to use the result which we have reached as a
starting-point for further inquiry.
Some other questions are less vital, but, though not
involving the existence of theology, seriously- affect the
character of its doctrines. In regard to the nature of
the mind itself, we have to consider whether it is
material or spiritual ; a mere function of the brain or a
power which uses the brain as its organ of phenomenal
manifestation ; a series of states of consciousness, tossed
up , like spray from the ceaseless undulations of the
physical realm, or an abiding entity which stands over
against the drift of nature with permanent faculties and
laws of its own, and which may therefore reasonably
hope to survive the dissolution of the material frame.
We have also to examine the problem of the wiU.
Have we causal power of our own, and do we exercise
a determining control over our voluntary actions, or are
our movements mere Unks in the endless chain of
natural sequence ? The logical result of the latter
position, and of the phUosophy which it represents, has
been formulated by high scientific authority in the
doctrine that man is an automaton ; that is, that his
bodily activity, though it should be the writing of an
lUad or a Hamlet, proceeds by inevitable physical law,
and is in. no way affected by the superfluous conscious
ness which is either its result or, at most, its independent,
though parallel, accompaniment. It may be a question
whether this doctrine, opposed as it seems to be to the
most elementary facts of consciousness, is not a redu^tio

SEOT. I.] MENTAL PHILOSOPHY. 59
ad dbsurdum of the whole method of thought of which
it is the logical outcome, and whether it is not the
result of a merely scientific, as distinguished from a
genuinely phUosophical, -riew of the universe. At all
events it is not a mark of either wisdom or Uberality
to sneer at the old belief in human freedom and respon-
sibUity as an idle and exploded superstition. We are
aU in danger of adoping false principles, and assigning
to them an axiomatic force, tUl the results which are
successively drawn from them, and are paraded as the
last and highest word of phUosophy, become so grotesque
that the common sense of mankind revolts against them.
The problem of the wUl must be solved, not by dragging
the postulates of physical science into the mental sphere,
but by judiciously consulting and interpreting the oracles
of consciousness. If we can find there no free prefer
ential power, and no mental control over our bodily
activity, we must then contentedly surrender everything
to the domain of physical law. But if we are convinced
that personal spiritual agency is real, then we must
accept the fact, though we are thus introduced to a
whole empire of being which our physical researches
can never touch ; and through biology and mental phy
siology, where the two realms intermingle, we must co
ordinate as best we may this higher knowledge with our
natural science.
The discussion of the wiU naturaUy • suggests the
inquiry whether there is any rule of right and wrong
by which we ought to direct our actions, and for the

60 PHILOSOPHY. [part hi.
due observance of which we are justly responsible.
Although this inquiry stiU involves psychological con
siderations, yet it carries us beyond the enclosure of
our own minds, and demand's an examination not only
of the moral sentiments but of the objects towards
whom, and the conditions under which, our duties must
be fulfilled. It thus transports us beyond the domain
of purely mental philosophy, and assumes for itself a
distinct department, that of Ethics.
2. Ethical Philosophy has to discuss the basis and
character of human duty. In discharging this task,
and attempting to interpret the inner meaning of con
science, it encounters a problem of the profoundest
interest to the theologian. Conscience seems to bring
us into the presence of eternal relations, to speak with
a voice of transcendent authority, and to warn us that
we shaU be held responsible for our conduct. For these
facts various explanations have been proposed which
assign to them a merely earthly origin, and ascribe the
ideal glory which surrounds them to the defective
vision of the mind itself. It is the business of Ethical
Philosophy to test these interpretations, and see whether
they take all the facts into account. If it is satisfied
with any of them, then theology must be content to
relinquish one of its supports. But if it is convinced
that they fail to take all the facts into account, that
moral goodness belongs to the region of eternal realities,
that the authority of conscience is really supra-mun-

SEOT. I.] EELIGIOUS PHILOSOPHY. 61
dane, and that the sense of responsibility cannot be
legitimately got rid of, then we must carry the results
thus obtained into our third department of phUosophi
cal study, in order to bring them into relation with a
larger field of thought, and give them a more complete
interpretation. 3. Religious Philosophy has to inquire into the being,
attributes, and providence of God, and the doctrine of a
future life. In seeking to prove the existence of God
it relies upon intuitions which we have already dis
covered in our previous investigations. From the in
tellectual domain it borrows the causal intuition, and
shows how the existence of a phenomenal world pre
supposes the reality of an eternal WiU, of whose
activity it is the expression. As Will is not a blind
force, but a power consciously working towards pre
determined ends, we are led on to the question of design
in the structure of the universe, and have to weigh the
objections -which are urged against the teleological
view, and examine the hypotheses which endeavour
to explain the universe without resorting to a Divine
purpose. From Ethics we borrow the intuition of duty,
with the sense of transcendent authority which we
have found involved in that intuition ; and hence we
come to recognise the presence of a holy Will in com
munion with the human conscience.
Those who believe (as I do) that they can distin
guish the spiritual from the ethical consciousness allege

62 PHILOSOPHY. [part III.
yet another source of evidence, the reUgious element in
man, which turns towards God as its object and justi
fication. This might fairly be discussed in the present
place, but for two reasons it seems better to postpone
it. Since it affects the whole range of reUgious ex
perience, colouring our thought upon several important
subjects besides the doctrine of the existence of God,
bearing especiaUy on what may be caUed reUgious
anthropology, it wUl be more fitly considered as pre-
Uminary to a systematic course of Doctrinal Theology.
Again, it is evident that the religious consciousness
assumes different forms in different persons and com
munities, and that it has grown with the progress of the
human mind, so that it is richer and more complex now
than in primitive ages. We shaU therefore be better
able to understand it, to trace its universal characters,
and to distinguish its legitimate outgrowths from para
sitic accretions, when we have surveyed its historical
manifestations, and determined its principal Unes of
development and varieties of form. The great his
torical departments of theology, therefore, naturaUy
engage our attention next ; and having now satisfied
ourselves that religion has a Eeal Object, we shall pursue
our way, not as men groping contemptuously amid the
shadows of human weakness and delusion, but as those
who see a light shining in darkness, and in the long
spiritual struggle of savage and Greek, Hebrew and
Christian, recognise a providential order, and the grand
march of humanity towards the highest truth.

sect. II.] STUDY OF COMPAEATIVE EELIGION. 63
Section II.
Comparative Religion.
The study of Comparative EeUgion has in recent
times received an amount of attention which it never
before enjoyed, and which has rendered it necessary to
transform it from a mere introductory chapter of Eccle
siastical History into a distinct and independent branch
of theological research. This change is due partly
to our increased ethnological knowledge, especially our
growing acquaintance with the thoughts and practices
of savage tribes ; partly to the impulse received from
comparative phUology, which has led to the discovery
of such interesting relations among the mythologies of
different peoples; partly to the improved facilities of
access to the sources of the great Oriental reUgions ; but
chiefly, perhaps, to that largeness of religious view
which is able to find members of the family of God
beyond the circle of our own particular creed. It
was formerly supposed by Christian writers that
Christianity stood in no relation towards other modes
of beUef except the relation of the one Divine and true
to the many human and false, and aUen reUgions were
referred to in order to exhibit the hopeless foUy and
imbecUity of the human mind when unillumined by
the rays of a supernatural revelation. A more sympa
thetic study has produced a juster estimate, and we
have learned to recognise the fact that, on the one hand,

64 COMPAEATIVE EELIGION. [part hi.
Christianity, whatever it may be in its ideal aspects,
has not in its historical manifestation escaped the dis
figurement of many an error and superstition ; and, on
the other hand, the reUgions which alone could pretend
to rival it contain, amid their misconceptions, some
grand, if imperfect, truths, and represent the upward
rather than the do-wnward tendency of mankind. In this
way the Christian doctrine of a universal Father, who
never leaves himself without a witness, is passing at last
into the accepted creed of Christendom, and we begin to
perceive that the Divine Spirit sinks do-wn into human
conditions, and Ues hidden Uke leaven in the gross
mass of human ignorance ; and conversely, that the
earthen vessels, which we thought so common and re
pulsive, enclose a Di-vine treasure. We must not be
surprised if this alteration, which reaUy amounts to a
revolution in opinion, sometimes assumes a reactionary
character, and leads to an unsympathetic and therefore
unjust criticism of the Hebrew and Christian reUgions,
and an undue exaltation of every scrap of wisdom that
may be gathered from other sources. But we must
guard ourselves against this reaction, and study all
religions alike with impartiaUty, not the impartiaUty
of indifference or conscious superiority, but of that
broad human love which finds brothers everywhere,
which takes a Uving interest in the vast drama of
history, and not only thriUs responsive to every lofty
sentiment, but feels the pathos of error and sin.
Comparative EeUgion comes appropriately between

SECT. II.] AIM OF COMPAEATIVE EELIGION. 65
our phUosophical and our more exclusively historical
studies ; for its object is to reach philosophical results
through an historical method. It is not content with
the purely historical task of describing the outward
form, the creed and ritual, of the several reUgions, and
tracing the circumstances of their origin, and their
chronological and local changes, but it seeks to gain
through the information thus acquired a fuUer compre
hension of that common nature, both in its strength
and its weakness, of which the historical facts are the
expression. If we endeavour to analyse this purpose,
we may say that it attempts in the first place to dis
cover the principle of unity, whether of thought or of
feeling, which underUes the various reUgions, and makes
it proper to treat them together as varieties of religion ;
in other words, it seeks to determine the ultimate and
permanent form of the religious element, from which,
as their common root, the numerous branches have
sprung into their divergent growth; or, if they should
appear to have had various origins, to portray the later
principle of resemblance which brings them under a
common designation. Secondly, their divergence must
itself be explained and tracked up to its original source
in the different tendencies of speculative thought ; and
again, the connection of the latter with the conditions
of nationaUty and culture must not be left out of con
sideration. Thirdly,' it wUl be observed that reUgions
do not remain in their primitive form, but in the pro
gress of time are subject to both losses and additions ;
F

66 COMPAEATIVE EELIGION. [part hi.
whUe some, Uke the Greek and Eoman, have run their
course, and been vanquished by a more powerful rival.
Hence it is necessary to look for the laws of reUgious
development and decay, and estimate the influence, not
only of the constantly increasing knowledge of outward
things, but stiU more of the gro-wing consciousness of
something higher than the traditional creed can satisfy ;
or, on the contrary, of the gradual lapse into ignorance
and barbarism, and of the craving for a more sensuous
worship, which springs from the inabUity of inferior
minds to stand on the spiritual heights of the pristine
faith. And in the fourth place, as the result of these
inquiries, and in preparation for our further studies, it
ought to be possible to disengage Christianity in its
distinctive features, determine its phUosophical posi
tion, and exhibit it as the most complete expression of
the reUgious sentiment.
For the purposes of exposition we must assume that
these results have been already to some extent attained,
and adopt such a classification of religions as wUl
bring clearly into view the development of the reUgious
sentiment from its lowest into its highest forms. It is,
of course, quite possible to group religions together in
accordance with their external characteristics, or under
the guidance of their national or historical connections,
or even in agreement with the fundamental di-vision of
languages. An arrangement founded upon such con
siderations cannot be altogether neglected, for the lines
of mental resemblanos will naturaUy tend to coincide

SECT. II.] CLASSIFICATION OF EELIGIONS. 67
with national and Unguistic affinities, and the same in
terior causes wUl produce simUar characteristics ; and,
at least in the subdivisions of the subject, it wiU
be sometimes convenient to foUow the historical and
ethnological connections. In order to obtain, however,
a philosophical classification we must start from the
inward principles which govern the movements of
thought. Now we have already seen that our know
ledge of the Divine is derived from two great sources,
nature and man; and these furnish our first main
division of reUgions.
Man's attention is directed first upon the objects
which strike the eye and ear, and affect him with
pleasurable or painful emotions ; and he will therefore
catch his first gUmpses of the Divine in the famUiar
objects around him, in their mysterious movements, their
beneficent or destructive activity, and their subUme
and incomprehensible magnitude. Hence the earUer
and so-called heathen religions are reUgions of nature,
and are distinguished by one prevailing characteristic ;
they conceive God or the gods as immanent in the
universe. So long as there is no science the mind may
discover its gods in the spirits of ancestors who are
supposed to haunt and animate their ancient scenes,
or in other spirits whom the imagination locates in
common and inert objects, where surprise or fear has
detected a magical power. Thus we are introduced to
the religions of Animism and Fetichism. When science
has begun to observe and classify the forces of nature.

68 COMPAEATIVE EELIGION. [part hi.
these latter are elevated into so many separate gods,
and the various forms of Polytheism arise ; and when,
with the progress of intelligence, the conceptions of
unity and order emerge out of the chaos of phenomena,
some approach is made to Monotheism by the creation
of a hierarchy of gods, with one supreme ruler at their
head. When philosophical reflection awakens, and
directs its energies upon this type of faith, the idea
of an eternal nature-spirit is evolved, and the result
is Pantheism.-' Man may, however, be led by the disposing WiU
1 The above account of the origin of polytheism, though it appears
to me both a priori probable and historically justified, may not be
accepted by every one. It is conceivable that it may have arisen from
a union of tribes, each of which in its previous independence was
monotheistic. I think, however, that no genuine monotheism conld
admit of this amalgamation ; for a tribe which had once recognised in
its god the universal cause would hardly have consented to lower him
into the ruler of a single department of nature. On the other hand, a
tribe which, though worshipping only one god of its o-wn, believed
that other tribes had their particular gods, would be already essentially
polytheistic ; and it seems probable that in this case the divinity of
each would be a nature-god, selected in accordance with local sur
roundings — highlanders, for instance, venerating a god of the mouur
tains, dwellers by the sea a marine deity, and so on. When races of
this sort amalgamated, they would naturally adopt one another's
gods, and so change their henotheism into polytheism. But this pro
cess is after all essentially the same as that indicated in the text.
The blending of the gods of different polytheistic nations iu a hospit
able pantheon is, of course, historically known, and ought to be con
sidered as at least one of the modifying influences of polytheism.
There is also another cause for the multiplication of gods which we
ought not to overlook, namely, the tendency in ancient thought to
personify the Divine attributes. It does not, however, belong to our
present purpose to discuss the various theories which, in the absence of
direct e-vidence, may reasonably be adopted, but only to indicate the
general basis on which a classification of religions should be founded.

SEOT. II.] CLASSIFICATION OF EELIGIONS. 69
that guides him to seek the Divine within himself, and
to become conscious of something more awful than he
sees in the fierce brightness of the sun, or hears in the
deep-voiced thunder. It is here that he recognises a
Being who is always the same, who is with him where-
ever he goes, and who speaks to him from a realm
which is above and independent of nature. Eeligions
of which this is the source, therefore, are distinguished
by the doctrine of the transcendence and unity of God,
and are properly monotheistic in distinction from both
Polytheism and Pantheism. Among these religions
themselves there is room for an important subdivision.
We may seek for God in either the conscience or
the spirit. If the former claim the leading place, we
shaU have a legal religion, in which God is chiefly
recognised as holy, and his will is incorporated in an
authoritative Law. Of this form of religion Judaism
is of course the principal representative. But this is
not yet the highest stage; for its legalism cannot
satisfy the profoundest wants of the soul, and in spite
of the extended outlook and piercing insight of some
of its prophets it has remained the reUgion of a single
people. When the -witness of the spirit is admitted
along with that of conscience, God is known as not
only holy but loving, not only the exactor of righteous
ness, but the bestower of grace ; and the Law passes
from a mere rule of duty into a Uving inspiration.
We thus arrive at a purely spiritual reUgion, which
addresses its universal conceptions to man as man.

70 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
In recognising God as the Father of spirits and the
Lord of nature it loses none of the truths which less
developed religions had attempted to express. It stUl
sees the Divine indwelUng in nature ; it stUl hears the
Divine voice in conscience ; while in the immortal com
munion of a son with the Father it has reached the
lUtimate goal of religious development. This is the
position which we assign to Christianity ; and having
determined its place as the highest and most cathoUc
expression of religion, we proceed in the foUo-wing
sections to investigate it more closely, and to consider
it in its origin and development.

Section III.
Biblical Theology.
For this department of our study I prefer the more
comprehensive name of BibUcal to that of Exegetical
Theology, which is adopted not only by Hagenbach, but
by Eabiger, who takes, I think, a juster view of the
object and compass of the inquiry which he thus desig
nates. Hagenbach quite correctly limits Exegetical
Theology to whatever refers to the exposition of the
Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, and
therefore makes it include only exegesis itself and those
aUied studies which prepare us for the work of inter
pretation, whUe he relegates to the department of His
torical Theology the history of Israel, the lives of Christ

SEOT. III.] ITS NAME AND OBJECT. 71
and the Apostles, and the formal statement of Biblical
doctrine. To this arrangement it may be fairly objected
that exegesis is not an end in itself, but only the means
whereby certain results are obtained, and therefore can
not justly claim an independent division of theology,
but must be content with the humbler rank of a sub
sidiary discipline. In accordance with what was said
at the close of the last section, our present object is to
obtain an exact knowledge of primitive Christianity, to
trace its historical genesis, to catch and fix the first
products of its inspiration, and so determine its real
genius, to watch its first struggles with the world, to
bring into systematic arrangement the earUest expres
sions of its doctrine, and mark the first divergent ten
dencies of its thought. This object ought to dominate
the whole of our present section, and prescribe the
necessary subdivisions ; for we are now provided with a
subject which is worthy of study for its own sake, and
has an importance at least as high and independent as
that which belongs to our other principal departments.
It wUl be observed, moreover, that it arises naturally
out of the preceding section, and as naturaUy leads us
to consider in the foUowing section the historical de
velopment of the Christian faith. The name Biblical
Theology may not appear to suggest at once the purpose
which we have in view ; but it is not inappropriate, for
the Bible is the source from which our knowledge
must be mainly drawn, and it wUl be found that every
subdivision is concerned with some branch of Biblical

72 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
study. We must be careful, however, not to confound
it with one of its own subordinate sections which is
engaged in the systematic statement of BibUcal doc
trine, and which is sometimes spoken of as Biblical
Theology. We may distinguish the less comprehensive
inquiry by caUing it the Theology of the Bible, or of
the Old and New Testaments.
Of the two grand portions which together constitute
the Christian Bible the New Testament, of course, most
nearly concerns us. Whatever dogmatic view may be
taken of its origin and authority, it cannot be denied
that it brings us into the closest contact with the
foundations of Christianity, is the ultimate medium
through which the spirit of Christ is revealed, and ex
hibits the characteristic life and thought of his disciples
in their young purity and fervour. It is true that
Christianity is older than the New Testament, and that
therefore it is not one of those religions which rest in
the last resort upon a written code. The great Teacher
himself committed no dogmas or ordinances to parch-
.ment, but delivered his spirit to the receptive hearts of
men; and his Gospel was propagated oraUy, until,
through the growing extent of the Church, absent
teachers found it convenient to address letters to their
distant flocks, and, as the first generation began to pass
away, a desire arose to fix in permanent record the
belief of the primitive community. One book, indeed,
stands apart as a striking exception. The Apocalypse,
which contains the visions of the seer of Patmos, must

sect, hi.] PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 73
have been occasioned less by the exigency of circum
stances than by the creative impulses of the writer's
soul. These writings, lying so near the fountains of
the new reUgion, acquired the character of sacred
scriptures, and, though not superseding the traditional
doctrine, became an authoritative standard of appeal
In process of time they were gathered into one coUec
tion; and after considerable difference of opinion in
regard to certain books the New Testament Canon was
fixed by both the Greek and the Latin Churches in
the latter half of the fourth century. In judging of
Christianity, then, as a religion, and endeavouring to
extract its finest spiritual influences, we ought not to
confine ourselves absolutely to its sacred Scriptures, but
search also for the transmitted fire of living and kindled
souls ; and it might even be maintained that if we were
whoUy cut off from its hereditary power we could not
estimate it truly, for an interior spirit of life coming
down through the generations must take possession of
us before we can know it. But though this is true we
must, as historical inquirers, have recourse to the earUest
documents — documents with which confessedly none
others can compete as exponents of primitive Chris
tianity, and which are accepted by Christians of every
persuasion as an authentic witness of their faith.
Quite apart, then, from the dogmatic position of the
Bible the New Testament must of necessity be the
foremost object of study in the present department of
theology.

74 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
The Old Testament, however, although the principal
parts of its Canon were closed some considerable time
before the Christian era ^ (how long before we must not
here pre-judge), and though it is consequently unable
to give us any direct knowledge of Christianity in its
distinctive features, demands from us a no less exact-
attention. Christianity, whatever original elements it
contained, sprang historically out of Judaism; and
even if it had left Judaism completely behind it, its
primitive position and purposes could not be under
stood without an examination of that background of
ancient faith and practice which throws its principal
figures into such strong relief. But Christianity did
not leave Judaism behind it. On the contrary, it in
corporated its most universal and spiritual elements,
and professed to carry on to its promised fulfilment
the teaching of Moses and the Prophets. Hence both
the language and the thought of the New Testament
are deeply coloured by those of the Old ; and as we
turn over its pages we see Christianity everywhere
not only confronted by, but mingled with, Judaism.
The two religions stand together in their opposition to
heathenism. To the GentUe onlooker they appeared to
be varieties of the same creed. In its conflict with
idolatry and immorality Christianity only carried on
the old warfare ; and it was in antithesis to Judaism
rather than heathenism that it was forced to define its
1 A few books of the Hagiographa were called in question up to
the later years of the first Christian century.

SECT, hi.] OLD TESTAMENT AND APOCEYPHA. 75
position, and disengage its original and characteristic
doctrines into the light of self-conscious thought. The
controversial portions of the New Testament are there
fore largely occupied with determining the relations
between the two religions, and abound in references
and appeals to the ancient Scriptures. We can see,
then, how impossible it would be to foUow intelligently
the narratives of the Gospels and Acts or the arguments
of the Epistles, unless we were previously acquainted
with those writings which were acknowledged as Divine
alike by Eabbi and by Christian. But this is not
aU. The Old Testament was permanently adopted by
Christendom as a part of its own Canon, and has
thrown across the centuries the sublimity of its faith,
the fervour and tenderness of its devotion, the im
petuosity of its zeal ; so that we must study it, not
only as the historical precursor of Christianity, but as
one of its essential and lasting constituents.
There are certain books, besides those recognised as
canonical in Protestant communities, which we cannot
altogether neglect. The apocryphal writings of the Old
Testament are included in the Canon by the Catholic
Church, and were not without their influence upon
ecclesiastical thought. They possess an historical value
in helping to fiU the lacuna between the narratives in
the Hebrew Bible and the Christian era, and some of
them throw an important light upon certain tendencies
of Jewish beUef. We can hardly make so honourable
a claim on behalf of the New Testament apocrypha.

76 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [part Hi.
Several works which might have possessed more in
terest than those that have survived have been lost,
and are known only through the references of ancient
writers. The existing apocryphal gospels can illustrate
only the folly of the men who composed them. It is
necessary, however, in connection with the writings of
the New Testament to notice, if only for the purpose of
dismissal, these and similar would-be rivals. Some
other compositions of a more serious cast, which at one
time were read for edification in the churches, and were
included in some manuscripts of the New Testament,
belong rather to the sources of ecclesiastical history
than to our present subject, though they cannot be left
without notice in a history of the Canon.
It appears, then, that the object of study in this
department of theology is the Bible, together with
certain other writings which from various circumstances
have clustered about it. We may now proceed to the
several subdivisions which this study involves. Some
difference of opinion may exist as to their proper
arrangement; but I shall foUow the order which
appears to me the most suitable, and briefly state the
reasons which guide me, without wasting time in con
troversy upon a matter of such subordinate interest.
1. Biblical languages {Philologia sacra), — A know
ledge of the languages in which the Scriptures were
originally written is presupposed in every Biblical
inquiry. We cannot pass any judgment upon the books

SECT. HI.] BIBLICAL LANGUAGES. 77
which have to come under review until we can read
them; and although we may form some general ac
quaintance with them from translations, it is clear that
we cannot enter with any original power into their
exact criticism or exegesis so long as we are dependent
upon others for the meaning of the text. The study of
the languages, therefore, is not only indispensable, but
must occupy the first place.
In entering the field of Old Testament literature we
are introduced to a famUy of languages widely different
from our o-wn, which were spoken in the south-west of
Asia and in .Ethiopia. These were formerly spoken of
simply as " Oriental languages '' ; but as our knowledge
extended farther east the name ceased to be distinctive,
and they are now generaUy known as Semitic. It has
been reserved for our o"wn century to discover the most
ancient form of that group of Semitic dialects which
existed in Syria, Mesopotamia, and Babylonia, by means
of deciphering the Assyrian and Babylonian inscriptions.
Aramaean, which is closely akin to Assyrian, has been
commonly divided into Eastern and Western, or Chaldee
and Syriac ; but it seems to be more correct to say that
Chaldee is a later name for Aramaean, of which, never
theless, Syriac is a distinct branch. AlUed to Aramaean
were the dialects of Canaan and Phoenicia; and out
of the former most probably was developed Hebrew.
Samaritan is a mixed dialect, standing between Hebrew
and Aramaean. Farther south another division of the
Semitic languages is found in the various dialects of

78 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
Arabia. Of these the speech of the tribe of Koreish
gained the ascendency through Mohammedan influence,
and is the language of literature known as Arabic.
..Ethiopic is an offshoot of the Himyaritic dialect spoken
in the south of Arabia. A complete mastery of any of
these closely alUed languages can be acquired only
through the comparative study of them aU ; but this is
the business of the phUologist rather than the theologian,
and the latter may gratefuUy accept the labours of the
former, and content himself with an adequate knowledge
of the portion of this large range of scholarship which
most nearly affects his special pursuits.
The reading of the Old Testament requires an ac
quaintance with two of the above-named dialects. By
far the larger part is written in Hebrew, the classical
speech of the IsraeUtes ; but a few passages, Jeremiah x.
11 ; Ezra iv. 8 to vi. 18, vu. 12-26 ; Daniel U. 4 to vu. 28,
are composed in Chaldee. It is usual to include the
vocabulary of these passages in Hebrew lexicons, which
are specially intended to facUitate the study of the
Bible. A fuller knowledge of Aramaean than can be
acquired from such brief specimens is desirable, that
the inquirer may be able to consult the Targums or
Chaldee Paraphrases, which contain the traditional ex
planations accepted by the Eabbinical schools.
In passing to the New Testament we may be sur
prised that, though the greater portion of it proceeded
from Jewish authors, it is written, not ui Hebrew, but
in Greek. The change reflects the altered genius of the

SEOT. HI.] BIBLICAL LANGUAGES. 79
highest Israelitish faith, and marks the transition from
a national tp a universal religion. Christianity, with
its broad outlook, and its large human aspirations,
needed for its expression a language which, through the
restless energy of its people and the splendour of its
Uterature, had imprinted itself on the civUised world ;
and aiming, as it did, to control the thoughts of men no
less than to exact their obedience and kindle their
devotion, it required a more perfect inteUectual instru
ment than is afforded by the simple structure of the.
Hebrew tongue. The change, however, was not so
much the result of choice as of circumstances. Even
in Palestine itself Hebrew had ceased to be the ver
nacular language, and had been superseded by Aramaean,
a substitution which we must trace back to the influence
of the Babylonian Captivity. Outside of Palestine the
Jews, who were settled in great numbers in the midst
of Greek communities, naturally adopted the speech of
the GentUes among whom they lived, and learned not
only to express their cwn ideas in the language of the
west, but to import its philosophical conceptions, and
use them as moulds wherein to cast their inherited
faith. In this process the influence of Alexandria was
especially conspicuous. It was there that the Scriptures
were translated into Greek, and that a form of eclectic
phUosophy arose which sought to justify the Jewish
creed before the bar of universal reason, and which
prepared the way for some of the doctrines of Christian
theology. In this way Greek became the natural

80 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
vehicle of communication between Jews and the sur
rounding world, and even among large masses of Jews
themselves ; and when Christianity sent its missionaries
into aU parts of the Eoman empire, appealing both to
Jews and Gentiles, it could not but adopt the language
which had gained this acknowledged ascendency.
Hence the books of the New Testament not only now
exist, but were originaUy written, in Greek, with the
single exception of the Gospel according to St. Matthew,
which, if we may rely on a uniform tradition, was first
pubUshed in Aramaean.
When, however, we begin to read the New Testa
ment, we soon observe that we are not reading the
Greek of Plato or Demosthenes, and that our classical
training needs to be supplemented by a special study.
Greek itself has lost its local pecuUarities, and under
tbe influence of the Macedonian empire has melted
down into the koivt) StaXe/cTo?. Moreover, there is an
evident infusion of foreign elements. The style is often
more Aramaean than Greek ; and both verbal and, to a
less extent, grammatical pecuUarities betray the origin
or associations of the writers. Besides this Jewish
modiflcation of the language there is also a Christian
colouring, which affects the meaning of certain words,
and which sometimes requires the most careful attention
of the interpreter. The presence of these three elements
of deviation from the classical standard with which we
have become famUiar at the University impresses such
a peculiar character on New Testament Greek that it

SEOT. HI.] TEXTUAL CEITICISM. 81
cannot be properly understood without a separate in
vestigation of its mingled sources, and without some
familiarity, not only with the great writers of Greece,
but with the style and idiom of Hebrew, and with the
requirements of Christian thought. This is now generaUy
recognised, though there was a time when the Purists
maintained that the Holy Ghost could not dictate
inferior Greek, and aUowed the authority of a dogma
to over-ride the plainest phUological evidence. Glassius
of Jena, who died in 1656, was the first who attempted,
in his Philologia Sacra, to bring the grammatical
peculiarities of the New Testament into scientific order.
He was succeeded by some other writers of the seven
teenth century ; but after that period Uttle was accom
plished tiU Winer pubUshed in 1822 the work which is
stiU the standard authority on the subject.^
2. Textual Criticism, — Having made ourselves ac
quainted with the languages of the Bible, we must next
procure, so far as it is possible to do so, a correct text.
This is indispensable in order to give security to our
subsequent investigations, which have reference to the
contents of the several books ; for if, in discussing, for
instance, the date of a work or the opinions of its author,
we relied upon a passage or form of expression which
did not belong to the original writer, we might be led
seriously astray. The inquiry into the purity of the
text is one of the branches of Critica Sacra, and is
1 See Winer's "Grammatik," Einleitung, Sec. 3.
G

82 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
treated by both Hagenbach and Eabiger as only a sub
division of "Kritik." The other subdivision which they
assign to criticism includes an investigation of the
genuineness, that is, of the authorship and date of the
Biblical writings. This seems to me to lead to great
confusion; for under the head of Introduction they
would discuss the origin of these writings, and surely
the question of their authorship and date is fundamental
in treating of their origin. On the other hand, this
question has no necessary connection with Textual
Criticism ; for no matter by whom or when a work was
first pubUshed, it must have possessed a certain text ;
and we may criticise the modern representatives of that
text, and endeavour to reproduce it in its purity, without
knowing anything about its author. It must be ob
served, moreover, that the methods of investigation and
the principles of judgment are quite different in the
two cases ; so that a man might be an exceUent textual
critic who was, nevertheless, deficient in the pecuUar
quaUfications needed for the more strictly historical and
Uterary pursuit. This fact does not necessarUy sanction
the distinction into lower and higher criticism (terms
which have also been employed to distinguish external
and internal grounds of judgment) ; but it does justify
our separation of Textual Criticism from questions of
authorship, and our assigning to it a province complete
in itself The necessity for this branch of theological study is
due to the loss of the original documents, which, being

SECT. III.] TEXTUAL CEITICISM. 83
of perishable materials, have been destroyed by the
ravages of time, and are now represented only by tran
scripts of various ages, all de-riating more or less from
one another. From these transcripts an enormous
number of various readings have been collected ; and it
is the business of the textual critic to select from these
in every passage that which is most probably genuine.
Hence his work naturaUy faUs into two parts. He
must, in the first place, treat his subject as a science,
discovering the laws of variation, ascertaining the
character and comparative value of the sources from
which various readings are drawn, and determining the
principles of external and internal e-ridence on which
his judgment must be based in the reconstruction of the
text. In the second place, he must apply the knowledge
thus gained as an art in the formation of a text founded
on the largest avaUable evidence, and selected in accord
ance with the critical principles previously established.
These two distinct processes are combined in the great
critical editions of the New Testament. The first is
exhibited in the Prolegomena or Introduction, whUe the
results of the editor's researches are given in the Greek
text. The authorities are fully cited in the footnotes,
so that the reader can exercise his own judgment in
disputed passages.'^ The principles of Textual Criticism
are, however, often treated separately ; and when this is
done, it is usual to append merely a selection of impor-
1 The edition of Westcott and Hort is an exception to this state
ment.

84 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
tant passages to exempUfy the appUcation of the prin
ciples established in the body of the work.
The general method of inquiry and laws of e-ridence
are very simUar for both the Old and the New Testament.
The detailed information must, of course, vary in regard
to the three great sources from which readings are
dra-wn — namely. Manuscripts, ancient Versions, and
Citations by early writers, though some exception must
be made in favour of the Versions, because several of
them contain the whole Bible, and thus unite both
Testaments in a common literary history. When we
come to the results of criticism, we might expect to
find a Uke fortune attending the two coUections of
Scripture ; but this is far from being the case. While
Griesbach, Lachmann, TregeUes, Tischendorf, and West
cott and Hort, to mention only the most celebrated
names, have pubUshed carefuUy revised texts of the
Greek Testament, no one has ventured to render a
simUar service to the Hebrew; and whUe in regard
to the former our stock of material has been dUigently
augmented by successive editors, the great collection of
various readings made in the last century by Kennicott
(1776-80), and De Eossi (1784-7), stUl remain the
unsurpassed apparatus criticus for the study of the
Hebrew text. .
3. Hermeneutics. — The term Hermeneutics (from
ep/Jirjveveo, to interpret) is employed to denote the
science of literary interpretation. This science has, in

SECT. HI.] HEEMENEUTICS. 85
theology, to consider the universal laws of exegesis in
their special appUcation to the Bible. Two functions
have been assigned to it : first, to formulate rules which
wUl enable us to ascertain and bring into the Ught of
our modern understanding the real contents of the
Bible, neither omitting what is actuaUy there, nor im
porting into it what is merely the product of subjective
suggestion ; secondly, to lay down the theory of exposi
tion, in its three modes of Translation, Paraphrase, and
Commentary. This study must claim our attention next, because
aU the remaining BibUcal inquiries involve questions of
interpretation, even the origin and date of a book being
at least partly determined by the meaning of certain
passages. It might be thought that we must first lay
down a doctrine respecting the nature of the Bible ; for
if it be the infalUble word of God, its various voices
must blend into a grand harmony, and it wiU be the
fundamental rule of interpretation to admit not even
the semblance of contradiction. But, without express-.
ing any opinion upon this dogma, it seems to me that
by assenting to such a plea we should invert the true
order of inquiry. The nature of the Bible must be
ascertained chiefly from the Bible itself; it is there
that our evidence mainly Ues; and not tUl we have
ascertained its contents by an independent and impar
tial exegesis are we in a position to lay down a doctrine
respecting their authority or value. If there are con
tradictions in the Bible, then it is not infallible, and in

86 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
such a case it is obvious that the prior assumption of
the dogma must give rise to strained and evasive inter
pretations; and, on the other hand, if the dogma be
true, then a faithful exegesis wUl exhibit no contradic
tions, and the dogma wUl receive its most startUng,
because unsought, confirmation in the results of a study
committed to no foregone conclusion. The same reason
ing wUl apply to the dogma that the Church is the in
falUble interpreter of Scripture. Even if these dogmas
are true, Hermeneutics must disregard them, and furnish
rules by which, when we -riew the Bible simply as a
Uterature, we may ascertain its real meaning. In say
ing this I do not imply that that meaning, in its deeper
elements, will reveal itself to the merely logical under
standing, which measures it, as it were, by rule and
compass. We must have souls as well, though the
exercise of our spiritual insight must be curbed and
directed by rational methods. But what I do claim is
an independent place for the science of interpretation, a
place anterior to dogmas, and governed by its own laws,
spiritual as weU as inteUectual ; and I cannot but think
that apprehensions of this independence betray a secret
disbeUef in the dogmas which an unfettered procedure
is deemed Ukely to imperil.
But why, it may be asked, should such a science
exist at aU ? Do not writings convey their own mean
ing to every intelUgent mind, and does not language
fail of its essential purpose when we are unable to
understand it as soon as it is addressed to us ? This

sect. HI.] HEEMENEUTICS. 87
would undoubtedly hold good with a composition pre
cisely adapted to our present mental state ; but the case
is completely altered when we have to deal with a series
of works which, however universal in their scope, origin
aUy made their appeal to times and circumstances and
inteUectual habits widely different from our own. There
are certain difficulties connected with the interpretation
of the Bible, partly pecuUar to itself, partly common to
every ancient Uterature, which render a sound theory of
exegesis indispensable to the BibUcal student.
These difficulties are found, first, in the internal char
acter ofthe -writings. Not only must the foreign languages
in which they are composed be mastered with the help of
grammar and dictionary, but, as every language has its
own genius, which reflects the spirit of the people who
use it, we must become sympatheticaUy famiUar with
their style and tone of thought and expression. Their
antiquity also occasions much obscurity to the ordinary
reader ; for they abound in aUusions to a civiUsation
which is gone, or, if its traces stUl Unger in the conser
vative East, is quite aUen to our Western life ; they
deal with dangers which no longer threaten, with hopes
which may gUd the imagination but stir no deep en
thusiasm, with controversies whose eager fires have
sunk into cold ashes ; and even their universal truths
are Ughted with an Oriental glow, and it needs an ex
perienced eye to read off into their logical limitations
the teachings which lurk in gorgeous imagery or seek
to impress themselves through startling hyperbole.

88 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
A second source of difficulty exists in the theological
associations which have clustered around the Bible.
The various sects of Christendom are aU anxious to
read their own tenets in the pages of Scripture, and
they are apt to import into certain passages, and even
into single terms, a fulness of theological meaning which
has been slowly elaborated in the schools. Nor are
those exempt from this tendency who have broken
loose from the authority of Christendom. Still the
old phrases suggest to them the meaning which they
learned in the nursery ; and in their new hostiUty
to what they once beUeved, they are unable to exam
ine the Scriptures in a clear historic Ught. These
evils can be overcome only by a rigorous method of
interpretation, carefully adopted and conscientiously
applied. Another reason which renders Hermeneutics neces
sary is supplied by the fact that various schools of
interpretation have actually existed, and their claims
must be considered, and either aUowed or rejected
upon rational grounds. AUegorical interpretation, which
assumes a profounder meaning in Scripture than that
which its words naturaUy convey, which subUmates
every phrase that seems unworthy of a spiritual faith
into some ethereal doctrine, converts patriarchs into
mental qualities, and detects phUosophical truths in
the commonest historical incidents, was once regarded
as the only key by which the Di-rine oracles could be
unlocked. This mode of exegesis, which reached its

sect. HI.] HEEMENEUTICS. 89
fuUest development among the Alexandrian Jews,
passed from them into the Christian Church, and its
fading vestiges may be traced down to our o-wn time.
AUied to this was the mystical interpretation of the
Middle Ages, which admitted, in addition to the Uteral
sense, the allegorical, wherein dogmas were defined ;
the moral, affecting the principles of conduct ; and the
anagogic, which brought the text into relation with
heavenly things.-^ The most prominent schools in Pro
testant times have been the dogmatic and the rational
istic, which may be classed together, as they both
proceed upon the same fundamental assumption, that
the Bible must be in agreement with certain accepted
tenets, the dogmatist squaring every passage by his
traditional creed, the rationalist admitting nothing
which opposes the principles of reason, as he conceives
them. In opposition to aU these is the grammatico-
historical method, which admits only one sense in
Scripture, namely, that which the grammatical struc
ture fairly yields when interpreted in the light of the
historical circumstances, including the psychological
conditions, of the times when the several books were
written. Among these various systems Hermeneutics
must, as I have said, make a selection justified by
adequate reasons, and then unfold systematicaUy the
principles of the chosen method, and follow them down
into the requisite detaU, in thefr appUcation, generaUy,
to the Bible as a whole, and, speciaUy, to the particular
1 See Eabiger, p. 223. Reuss, " Gesch. d. heil. Schr. N.T.," Sec. 525.

90 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
groups into which the Biblical writings may for this
purpose be distributed.
4. Introduction, or History of the origin and collection
of the Biilical writings. — In deference to established
usage I retain the vague word Introduction to designate
the study which demands our attention next. The
term is first found in Adrian, a writer probably of the
fifth century, who pubUshed a little hermeneutical
work under the title of ^la-a/ytoyTj et? ra? 6ela<;
ypa^di}. After the Eeformation it graduaUy became
prevalent, first in its Greek, then in its Latin form,^
from which it has passed into EngUsh, whUe the Ger
mans have adopted their vernacular word, " Einleitung."
The more suggestive appeUation of " Histofre critique "
was employed in the seventeenth century by E. Simon,
and his example has been partly foUowed in the present
century by Eeuss, who has called his Introduction to
the New Testament " Die Geschichte der heiUgen Schrif-
ten Neuen Testaments," and has more recently applied a
simUar title to a work on the Old Testament.
The indefinite character of the term Introduction
appeared for a long time to be one of its recommenda
tions ; for the study which it denoted was equaUy
indefinite. It included aU those matters which it was
desirable to know before entering on a careful perusal
of the Scriptures, and the only connection which gave
unity to its multifarious topics was their common refer-
^ See Hahn, in Herzog's Eeal-FhwyJclqpddie, 1st ed. iii. pp. 727-8.

SECT. HI.] INTEODUCTION TO THE SCEIPTUEES. 91
ence to the Bible. It was then customary to divide the
subject into General and Special, including under the
former a variety of matters relating to the Scriptures as
a whole, such as the original languages, the history of
the Canon, translations, and textual criticism, and under
the latter whatever concerned the books individuaUy,
their authorship, date, and so forth. This medley pos
sessed for the student the same advantage as a diction
ary, bringing under one cover the various points on
which he was Ukely to require information ; but it also
resembled a dictionary in the lack of internal unity,
and with the growing insight into theological method
its want of scientific character has been increasingly
felt. Every subject which claims to be an integral
portion of the theological system ought to be formed
into a whole by an organic principle which determines
its compass and the bearing of its several parts. It was
with a view to the estabUshment of such a principle
that Eeuss, in his weU-known work referred to above,
treated Introduction as a purely historical study. Under
the guidance of this principle, however, he advances far
beyond the limits which seem naturaUy marked by an
investigation into primitive Christianity, or even by the
requfrements of exegesis, to which he himself regards
his work as subsidiary.^ In addition to the origin ot
the books and the history of the Canon, he discusses the
history of the text, of translations, and of exegesis.
Here, as in the old Introductions, we must acknowledge
1 Sec. 4.

92 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
the practical value of this compendious survey of so
many topics ; but when we attempt to fit them into the
system which we are constructing, we find that some of
them have already come under Textual Criticism, whUe
others must wait tiU we reach Ecclesiastical History.
What we really require to know at the precise point at
which we have arrived is the value of the New Testa
ment writings as sources of our knowledge of primitive
Christianity, and this depends upon their origin and
their acceptance by the Church. These, then, are the
two subjects which I would include in an Introduction
to the New Testament. It is obvious that the origin
of the several books must come under discussion, for a
late and spurious work cannot be put upon the same
level as an early and genuine one, and the importance
of a document rises, other things being equal, in propor
tion to its proximity to the events which it records.
Thus, in considering the movements of thought in the
Apostolic age it is necessary to determine, according to
the best of our judgment, whether the Fourth Gospel
belongs to the close of the first or the middle of the
second century, and whether a letter ascribed to Paul
is reaUy his or only a figment of one of his disciples.
The need of including the history of the Canon, instead
of reserving it for Ecclesiastical History, is less evident.
But whatever else was meant by the formation of the
Canon, it expressed the judgment of the early Church
upon the primitive documents of Christianity. The
New Testament was accepted as the one faithful literary

sect, hi.] INTEODUCTION TO THE SCEIPTUEES. 93
witness of the mind of Christ ; and it is therefore in
cumbent upon us to ascertain the worth of the Church's
judgment, to know when and how it was exercised, and
to learn the degrees of certainty and uncertainty with
which the different books were received. But besides
their logical inclusion in our immediate purpose, it is
clear that the two Unes of inquiry here indicated stand
in such close mutual relation that it would be incon
venient to separate them from one another. To a large
extent they traverse the same evidence and deal with
the same results; and for the most part the history
of the Canon can only exhibit in a single survey the
historical testimonies which we examine in detaU
and without connection in treating of the several
books. The Old Testament stands upon a somewhat dif
ferent footing. In regard to Christianity it is not a
source of our knowledge, but rather one of the sources
of the religion itself. Christianity found and adopted
it as its own earliest Canon, and from this point of
view it is necessary to make acquaintance with its
previous Uterary history. There is, however, another
aspect under wliich it demands consideration. It bears
the same relation to Judaism that the New Testament
does to Christianity, and we have already seen how
essential it is to study the two reUgions in combination.
As a source, then, of our knowledge of Judaism it needs
the same two lines of inquiry which we have marked
out in regard to the New Testament.

94 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
It wUl now be seen that, according to the view here
unfolded, Introduction is a purely historical study, resting
on a thoroush criticism of the evidences on which our
results are based ; and its compass is determined by
the necessity of ascertaining the Uterary character of
the sources from which we derive our knowledge of
primitive Christianity, and of the origin and develop
ment of that prior Hebrew religion out of which
Christianity sprang.
In the treatment of this subject it is the usual,
though not invariable practice, to make a broad separa
tion between the Old and New Testaments, and to
discuss them in independent works. If, with Eabiger,-*-
we regarded Introduction simply as a history of Hebrew
literature to the downfall of the Jewish nationality, we
could hardly justify this separation, notwithstanding
its practical convenience. But, with the view of our
subject which has been here given, the division is a
natural one ; for the two inqufries, however closely
they are related to one another, and however desirable
it may be to notice their connection, nevertheless sub
serve perfectly distinct ends. In the further distribu
tion of our subject the same principles may be observed
in each department. In each we have to consider the
origin of the books individuaUy, and to trace the his
tory of their collection into a Canon ; and we must first
decide which of these subjects is to take precedence.
On this point the practice of different writers varies, —
1 P. 269, sqq.

SECT. HI.] INTEODUCTION TO THE SCEIPTUEES. 95
Bleek, for instance, preferring the second place for the
history of the Canon, while HUgenfeld chooses the first.
For my own part I think there are good reasons for
following the order adopted by Bleek. It is, in the
first place, the historical order, the formation of a Canon
being necessarUy subsequent to the publication of the
books which it includes. In the second place, almost
every step of our way through the first two centuries
bristles with criticism, and whUe our attention is con
stantly engrossed -with minutiae it is impossible to
obtain that clear historical picture which we desire in
surveying the fortunes of the Canon. It seems best,
therefore, to get through our critical labours in the dis
cussion of the individual books, where this objection
does not apply ; and then, when we come to the his
tory of the Canon, we shall be able to touch the subject
-with a Ughter hand, and weave our afready sifted
materials into a connected narrative.
When we have determined the order in which these
two divisions shaU be taken, an important question
arises as to the method to be adopted in the discussion
of the separate writings. ShaU we follow some classi
fication founded on their Uterary or other characteristics,
or shaU we, as in a history of literature, pursue a
chronological arrangement? It is a serious objection
to the latter method that so many questions are stUl
su^ judice, and, whatever arrangement we adopted, we
should inevitably prejudge the object of our inquiry.
Nevertheless, the advantages of the synthetical method

96 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
are so great, in bringing before the mind's eye the broad
results of critical investigation and the course of literary
development, that an Introduction hardly seems com
plete which entirely dispenses with it. I would ac
cordingly propose to break up this part into two
subdivisions. In the first we must attend to the
books without regard to thefr chronological order, and
inquire critically into their origin, that is, into their
integrity, their authorship, the cfrcumstances under
which they arose, and the time and place of their com
position. In doing so we may group them in any way
that seems most convenient. Thus, in the Old Testa
ment we may adopt the ancient distribution into the
Law, the Prophets, and the Hagiographa, or prefer a
more modem one, into historical, prophetical, and
poetical books. In either case the Apocrypha, as
being written in a different language, had better be
treated separately. In the New Testament we may
divide the books into historical, including the Gospels
and Acts ; epistolary, comprising the Pauline Epistles,
Hebrews, and the CathoUc Epistles; and, finally, al
legorical, represented in the Canon only by the Apo
calypse. In connection with each of these classes the
apocryphal works of the same kind must be brought
under review. Having completed our tedious critical
labours, we must now proceed, in the second sub
division, to coUect our results into their chronological
order, and give a consecutive history, uninterrupted by
critical discussion, of the origin and growth of the

SECT. HI.] AECH.«;OLOGY. 97
literature which we have hitherto viewed only in its
isolated fragments.
We have thus finished the investigations which con
cern the general Uterary character of the Bible, and we
are now prepared to make a nearer acquaintance with
its contents ; or, in technical language, we pass from
formal to material studies.
5. ArchcBology. — In entering on the exact study of
the contents of the Bible we experience some difficulty
in settUng the proper order in which to conduct our
investigations. At first sight it might seem as if every
thing else must depend on a prior exegesis of the various
books ; but a few moment's reflection wUl convince us
that a sound exegesis, conformable to the historical
conditions under which the books were written, must
depend on a prior knowledge of the history and an
tiquities of the Hebrew people. The warnings and
denunciations, the hopes and encouragements of the
Prophets, for instance, can be fuUy understood only in
connection with the circumstances of the times ; and
the great principles which underUe the Pauline Epistles
are unfolded in thefr appUcation to local and temporary
controversies, a knowledge of which is indispensable to
the' interpreter. So, again, the innumerable allusions
to manners and customs, places and scenery, are lost
upon those who are unacquainted with the natural and
social conditions amid which the Hebrew literature
H

98 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
arose. We thus seem to be involved in a circle from
which there is no escape, history presupposing exegesis,
and exegesis presupposing history. The two studies
are undoubtedly mutuaUy helpful, and neither can be
brought to its perfection without the other. Yet in a
scheme of orderly exposition I think history must take
the precedence ; for it does not involve a detailed inter
pretation of the whole Bible, and as we have already
mastered the laws of Hermeneutics, we are prepared to
deal separately with the passages which are required by
the purpose of the historian.
A somewhat similar difficulty arises in fixing the
relation of history and archaeology. Some of the sub
jects which come under the latter head, such as the
physical conditions among which the Hebrews Uved,
form a natural preparation for the study of the history ;
but, on the other hand, an account of the civil and
reUgious institutions of the Jews may seem to belong
to the history itself, or, if raised into the dignity of a
separate discipUne, to be its sequel rather than its pre
cursor. Nevertheless if we assume, as we are fairly
entitled to do, a general, though not a critical, acquaint
ance with the historical narratives of the Bible, no
harm can result from placing first the whole of the
subjects which are treated under Archaeology. This
science, though closely related to history, is distinct
from it. History traces the succession and mutual
dependence of events ; Archaeology investigates the
conditions of a particular time, which, although they

SECT. III.] AECHjEOLOGY. 99
must receive notice in a general history, are yet of
sufficient importance to demand a separate treatise for
their complete discussion.
The name of Biblical Archaeology, Uke that of Intro
duction, suffers from an unfortunate vagueness, which
makes it possible to assign different Umits to the study.
We may, however, accept the definition of Gesenius,
according to which it is the science which makes us ac
quainted with the physical and social condition of those
peoples among whom the BibUcal writings arose, and to
whom they refer.^ From this definition we may readUy
deduce the divisions of the subject ; and, as these are
given very lucidly by Hagenbach,^ I wiU foUow in the
main his classification.
(a) Biblical Geography. — It is e-rident that our first
requirement is familiarity with the places which were
the scene of the events recorded in the Bible. Not tiU
we know where the Israelites dwelt, and where were
situated their towns and vUlages, their mountains, rivers
and lakes, desert and sea, can we bring their exploits
vividly before the historical imagination. Palestine
accordingly must occupy the largest share of attention.
But as the Israelites were, through a variety of circum
stances, brought into connection with several other
nations, we must give our survey a wider sweep. We
must make acquaintance with Egypt, from which
the enslaved race broke forth into the freedom of
the desert. We must explore the Peninsula of
1 Quoted by Hagenbach, p. 137, n. 1. ^ Pp. 138-140.

100 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
Sinai, which has left the impress of its stern and sub
Ume features upon the Jewish legislation. We must
foUow the captive people into Assyria and Babylonia,
and learn something of Persia, with whose empire they
were afterwards incorporated. When we come to the
period of the New Testament we must extend our •ri.ew
westwards over Asia Minor, Macedonia, Greece, and
Italy. In connection with some of the more important
places, especiaUy Jerusalem, we must pass on to the
more minute study, known as topography, without
which [it is impossible to foUow some of the leading
events both in earUer or later times.
(6.) BiJ>lical Physiography {Physica sacra). — Having
acquired the necessary information respecting the
superficial aspects and poUtical di-risions of the BibUcal
lands, we must next learn something of thefr physi
cal characteristics. The geological formation and the
cUmate, by which the scenery of a country is shaped,
inevitably affect not only the bodily frame, but the
thought and feeling of a people ; and although we
are in the habit of supposing that the ancients had
little appreciation of the beauties of nature, the Bible
abounds in imagery drawn from natural phenomena.
We must know the character of the hills and valleys,
the mountain torrent and the parched gully, the glaring
expanse of the desert, and the tropical verdure of the
river bed. Nor must we forget the mineral treasures,
or the plants from the cedar of Lebanon to the Uly of
the field, or the beasts and birds and ravaging locusts.

SECT. III.] AECH^OLOGY. 101
AU these have adorned the language of Psalmist and
Prophet, or supplied the great Teacher with a meta
phorical dress in which to clothe his lessons of wisdom.
(c.) Social Antiquities of the Bible. — Having viewed
the surroundings amid which the people Uved, we pass
on to consider their mode of Ufe. We must notice,
first, the action of man upon nature — his pastoral habits,
agriculture, hunting, fishing, mining; and, in connec
tion with this, his use of natural materials in the
construction of dweUings, the manufacture of clothing
and ornaments, and the preparation of food. Under
each of these heads we must treat also of the necessary
implements. We may next consider the relation of
men to one another — marriage and domestic life, educa
tion, slavery, social intercourse, and commerce. Under
the last head must be included means of conveyance
• by land and sea, measures, weights, and money.
Finally, we must study the sadder elements of social
existence, the treatment of diseases, death, funerals,
sepulchres, and mourning.
(d) Political Antiquities of the Bible. — These com
prise the mode of government, judicial proceedings,
and military affairs ; and as poUtical institutions are
seriously modified with the lapse of time, they must be
considered in connection with certain periods distin
guished by strongly marked characteristics, the Common
wealth, the Monarchy, the state of subjection to a foreign
power. The last subdi-rision necessarUy includes some
notice of the poUtical arrangements of the conquerors.

102 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [PART HI.
(e.) Sacred Antiquities of the Bible. — This subject is
conveniently divided into four principal parts. The
first treats of sacred places, — the tabernacle, the temple,
the synagogues. The second refers to sacred seasons, —
the sabbath, the sabbatical year and year of jubUee, the
new moons, and the festivals. The third relates to
sacred persons, — judges, prophets, priests, Levites,
scribes, and officers of the synagogue. The fourth deals
-with sacred things, — circumcision, sacrifices, dedica
tions, vows and oaths, purifications, pubUc worship.
The idolatrous reUgions -with which the IsraeUtes were
brought so frequently into contact, and with which, in
the earUer periods, they were so much infected, are re
viewed under the head of Comparative EeUgion, and
must be noticed here only so far as they serve by their
resemblances and contrasts to iUustrate the pecuUarities
of the Hebrew ceremonial.
(/.) Arts and Sciences of the Hebrews. — The artistic
faculty of the Israelites was displayed in poetry, music,
and architecture. Their scientific knowledge was, of
course, of an elementary kind, and the sources of our
information are far from complete ; but we must con
sider thefr history and chronology, their arithmetic and
astronomy, with the resulting divisions of time, survey
ing, geography, medicine, and natural history.
This copious variety of subject does not consist of
unrelated details, but, when viewed collectively, gives
us a picture of ancient Hebrew Ufe, and introduces us
to a civilisation so unUke our own that it requfres, for

SECT. HI.] HISTOEY OF THE ISEAELITES. 103
its effective study, the sober accuracy of critical re
search to be supplemented by the constructive energy
of a rich imagination. He who can never rid his mind
of nineteenth century standards can do little justice to
the past; and BibUcal Archaeology will have accom
pUshed its purpose when it transports us from the pre
sent age of cold and inquisitive reason, and so steeps us,
as it were, in warm Oriental emotions and in old world
ideas and practices, that we shall be able to estimate
aright the pristine power of monotheistic faith, and
measure its grandeur not only when it cries aloud
against the sins of the people, but when, mingling with
a conscience not yet fully enlightened, it expresses
itself through the narrowness and barbarity of human
passion. Only through an intimate knowledge of the
heart and Ufe of a nation can we appreciate the Divine
idea which wrought amid the struggling mass of error
and sin, and slowly evolved itself into some high, per
haps, as in the case of the Jews, some supreme and
culminating manifestation.
6. History of the Israelites doivn to the destruction of
the Jewish nationality hy the Romans. — Having obtained
the necessary knowledge of the natural surroundings
and the mode of life of the Hebrew people, we must
follow their eventful history, which had such a remark
able influence on the form of their literature and on the
development of their faith. In doing so we must be
guided simply by the rules of historical criticism, and

104 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [part HI.
not aUow our judgment to be swayed either by the
presumed infallibility of the BibUcal records or by a
reactionary desfre to prove that they are merely human
compositions. With these questions the historian as
such has nothing to do. We are stUl engaged in laying
the foundation on which to erect a true doctrine of the
Bible ; and the results of impartial historical investiga
tion must largely affect our ultimate decision. If, for
instance, we find that paraUel accounts of the same
event are mutuaUy independent, and nevertheless in
exact agreement with one another, and that at the
same time they bear the marks of unerring accuracy,
that will be a point in favour of the dogma that the
Bible is the unmixed product of miraculous inspiration.
But if we find' that some paraUel accounts are not
strictly reconcUable, or if, in the exercise of our best
judgment, we see reason to beUeve that some narratives
are legendary, — that is, clothing the naked historical
fact in the poetical or other accessories of popular
tradition, — or mythical, — that is, expressive of an idea
through an assumed historical form, — we shaU be fur
nished with an argument which must be duly estimated
in favour of modifying the traditional dogma. We
must, then, for the very sake of our future doctrine,
discard from the present study aU doctrinal considera
tions ; and we may perhaps venture to assert that he
would be the best quaUfied for the task who knew
nothing of theological controversies, but came to it as
to a fresh field of history, equipped only vrith large

SEOT. III.] HISTOEY OF THE ISEAELITES. 105
human sympathies, keen historical insight, and weU
disciplined judgment.
In making these remarks, I assume that the Bible is
the grand source from which the history must be dra-wn.
It is so for a very considerable period ; but for the time
subsequent to the buUding of the second temple we are
mainly dependent upon other authorities, and even
-within the Biblical Umits we are not without extraneous
information upon several interesting points. Foremost
among these authorities may be mentioned the inscrip
tions of the Egyptian, Assyrian, and Babylonian monu
ments. We must consult also some of the Greek
and Eoman writers, and the extracts which have been
preserved (chiefly by Josephus and Eusebius) of the
work of the Egyptian Manetho (about 280 B.C.) Among
the Apocryphal -writings the Ffrst Book of Maccabees
is especiaUy valuable. The works of Josephus ought to
be made use of throughout ; but they are of the highest
importance for the history of his own time and the time
immediately preceding. PhUo affords us some vivid
gUmpses into the condition of the Alexandrian Jews.
And finaUy, the Eabbinical writings must not be
neglected. In the arrangement of the subject four great events,
each constituting a crisis in the history of the people,
naturally mark off four distinct periods. The first em
braces the primeval history, from Abraham to the
Exodus. In the second the struggle to obtain a
position of national independence and unity culminates

106 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
in the estabUshment of the monarchy. In the third we
notice the climax of Israel's prosperity and power under
a single sceptre, and then the gradual decline of the
divided kingdoms, tUl one vanishes from history in
irretrievable defeat, and the other is carried away into
a captivity equally hopeless, except to the prophetic
eye of faith. The fourth carries us through the fuU
development of legal Judaism, and the subjection of the
people under foreign domination, except during the
brief glories o-f the Maccabees, to the time when the
nation was finaUy broken and dispersed by the legions
of Eome. For our immediate purpose we may regard
this event as having occurred when Jerusalem was
destroyed by Titus, 70 a.d. ; but the historian can hardly
help extending his survey to the fierce revolts under
Trajan and Hadrian, when the last hopes of national
independence were ruthlessly extinguished, 135 A.D.
It might seem only reasonable to include within
this history the Uves of Christ and the Apostles ; but
these, though of world-wide significance, made no visible
impression upon the political history of Judaism, and
their adequate treatment would accordingly occupy a
space out of aU proportion to their apparent influence
upon contemporary events. It seems best, therefore,
while the general historian contents himself with
marking their place amid the social forces of the time,
to reserve a separate department for their detaUed and
critical investigation. This is a matter, however, which
in actual practice must be left to the discretion of each

SECT. HI.] HISTOEY OF THE ISEAELITES. 107
writer; and Ewald (to pass over less distinguished
names) has incorporated his account of Christ and the
Apostles in his great History of the people of Israel.
The history of that portion of our fourth period in
which Christianity arose has recently been treated by
German theologians under the name of "Neutesta-
mentUche Zeitgeschichte," History of New Testament
times. This title was first adopted by Schneckenburger,
whose lectures on the subject were published in 1862,
after the author's death. It was his intention to supply
the needed historical framework for the narratives of
the New Testament, and he describes in successive
parts the condition of the Gentile and the Jewish
worlds.^ The purpose of Hausrath is somewhat different.
He -wishes to describe the time in its relation to the
great reUgious facts of the New Testament,^ and there
fore includes these facts themselves within the range of
his narrative. Schlirer, in his excellent handbook,
foUows a more Umited plan. He confines his attention
to Jewish history, and in doing so seeks only to unfold
the historical conditions amid which Christianity arose,
¦without entering the domain of the reUgion itself He
not only relates the poUtical history of the Jews from
the time of the Maccabees to the reign of Hadrian, but
describes in a second part the inner Ufe of the people,
and thus brings before the attention of the reader several
of th'e more important topics touched upon under the
1 See Schiirer, "Lehrbuch der Neutest. Zeitgesch.," 1874, p. 1.
^ See the Pref. p. -viii. 2d ed.

108 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
head of Archaeology. So conceived, the History of the
New Testament period is in admirable agreement with
the plan which we have sketched, and forms a suitable
introduction to the study of the history which the New
Testament itself contains.
7. Exegesis. — We are at last prepared to take up the
BibUcal writings one by one, and proceed to the
systematic study of thefr contents. In the actual
exercise of the art of interpretation it is customary to
bring together under a single view the varied informa
tion which has been acqmred in other fields of study,
so far as it can throw light upon the book under exami
nation. Not only are historical and archaeological
allusions explained in the course of the exegesis itself,
but the whole commentary is preceded by an introduc
tion, in which questions affecting the origin of the work
are discussed ; and, when the nature of the composition
requires it, its general purport is considered, and its
contents unfolded in a brief, but carefuUy articulated
synopsis. In the commentary we have to apply the
rules of Hermeneutics to the text, and move cautiously
from verse to verse, often from word to word, in order
to ascertain the precise connection of thought and the
exact force of individual expressions. This process is
necessarUy tedious, and is apt to become dull, and may
serve to explain that dryness which so frequently mars
the work of the interpreter. A learned pedantry which
gives us only the dissected corpse of our author, instead

SECT. HI.] EXEGESIS. 109
of Ufting his words out of the dust of ages and making
them tremulous once more with Uving fire, fails in the
leading object of exegesis. It is necessary, therefore,
to do something more than wield our grammar and
dictionary, and adhere to the laws of interpretation.
These laws are a useful check upon the judgment, and
help to guard us from thrusting alien ideas into the
work which we expound, but they cannot by themselves
introduce us into the spirit of ancient writings, and
draw aside the veil from the soul of Prophets and
Apostles. In order to accompUsh this the commentator
must not only have learning, caution, and impartiaUty,
but must add to these the gifts of spiritual insight, his
torical imagination, and literary skiU, so as to inter
weave with the duUer texture of his exposition some
vivid colouring which wiU make the past Uve before
the mind of the reader, and ancient aspfrations and
ideas glow with something of thefr original splendour.
A distinction is drawn in Germany between Exposi-
tion&'D.A. Explanationi^^ Schriftauslegung" and " Schrifter-
klarung "), which are both included in Exegesis. In the
former we strictly confine ourselves to an objective
statement of the author's meaning ; but in the latter we
exercise our judgment upon the facts which are related
and the sentiments which are expressed ; we endeavour
to exhibit the grounds and connections of the thought,
and to seize the abstract and universal principle which
is presented only in one of its concrete appUcations;
and we may even iUustrate many points by analogies

110 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
existing among ourselves. From this enlargement of the
writer's meaning, however, which we adopt for the
purpose of gaining a clearer insight into his mental
position, we must carefuUy distinguish the practical
appUcation of Scripture, which belongs to HomUetics
rather than Exegesis.
A shorter form of interpretation than the com
mentary is furnished by the Paraphrase. This cannot
be successfuUy prepared till the commentator has com
pleted his work; for the results of the latter are
assumed as the basis on which it rests. It aims simply
at such an expansion of the original text as wiU bring
out the meaning of aU dubious words, and exhibit
clearly all difficult connections of thought. It may
perhaps be described as a condensed commentary,
relieved of the arguments by which its conclusions are
estabUshed. Finally, a Ti-anslation is the briefest kind of inter
pretation. This, too, reposes on the labours of the
commentator; but, unlike the Paraphrase, it does not
bring these labours prominently into view. It is its
business faithfully to reproduce the original work,
giving its full and exact force to every word, but not
removing any ambiguities or obscurities that are reaUy
there. It must as far as possible retain the style of the
various writers ; but, whUe aiming at literal accuracy,
and preserving the flavour of an ancient and Oriental
literature, it must not violate the idiom of its own
language, or descend into the uncouth and barbarous.

sect. III.] EELIGION OF THE ISEAELITES. Ill
A translation cannot supersede a study of Hebrew and
Greek, or be rendered available for critical purposes ;
and the attempts which are sometimes made at a
slavish exactness, so as to delude the EngUsh reader
into the conceit that he is on a level with the scholar,
sacrifice the soul to the body, and destroy the literary
and spiritual aroma of the Bible.
8. History of religious ideas among the Israelites down
to the time of Christ, — The subject on wliich we now
enter might, more conformably to usage, be described
as the Theology of the Old Testament ; but I prefer the
more comprehensive name, because it is essential to
our purpose to know the exact point of development
which reUgion had reached when Christianity appeared ;
and, although the Old Testament is our most important
source, yet in the latest period we are obliged to have
recourse to other authorities as well. It is the object
of the present study to exhibit in a systematic form the
religious ideas which prevailed among the people, or
were maintained by any distinguished teacher, in the
successive periods of Hebrew history. By the term re
Ugious ideas must be understood not only the beUef
entertained respecting the nature and character of God,
but the whole conception of the relations between God
and man; so that ethical ideas, which among the
Israelites rested on the sanction of an acknowledged
Divine Law, must be included. The material for this
study has, so far as the Old Testament is concerned.

112 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
been accumulated by our Exegesis ; but there the topics
which we have to treat Ue confusedly mixed with other
subjects, and in the order in which they happen to
occur in the Uterature, not in that which is demanded
by logical thought. We have now to classify them, to
disengage them from irrelevant surroundings, and to
frame them into a connected scheme of doctrine, so that
their mutual relations and organic union may be easUy
apprehended by the mind. In the fulfilment of this
task we might content ourselves with taking up the
books one by one, in the order in which they occur in
the Canon, and arranging thefr theological doctrines in
accordance with a preconceived plan. This might more
than satisfy the old theologia topica, which, taking the
accepted dogmatics as its clue, merely brought together
loci classici or dicta prdbantia to establish the several
dogmas by Scriptural authority. But it is evident that
the requfrements of a history cannot be thus met, or the
development of reUgious conceptions brought into view.
We must, therefore, in the first place, assume the
results of our Introduction, and arrange the books in
thefr proper chronological order ; and then, in dealing
with each writer, we must not distribute his thoughts
into an unvarying series of dogmatic compartments, but
must endeavour to grasp his great determining ideas,
and, assigning to these the foremost place, range his
coUateral thoughts in due subordination. In this way,
instead of degrading the author into a mere demon
strator of our own -riews, we shall, with truer reverence

SECT. III.] EELIGION OF THE ISEAELITES. 113
and docUity, obtain a picture of his Uving mind, and
organising faith, and gain some insight into those grand
processes of thought or inspfration which are so much
more interesting than the bald results. To facUitate
this method it is convenient to divide our history into
periods, marked by certain prevaUing characteristics.
Since the time of De Wette two great periods have
been distinguished, those of Hebraism and of Judaism,
marked off from one another by the Captivity. The
estabUshment of the monarchy, foUowed as it was by
the erection of the Temple and the greater centraUsa-
tion of the national worship, offers a favourable point
for dividing the first of these periods. In each division
the historian must depict the saUent features of Israel's-
aspiration, and trace the connection between the outer
and the inner history of the people, noticing the effects
of hope and fear, of hostiUty and of friendship towards
surrounding nations, of victorious freedom and the
baffled grief of servitude, and not only foUo-wing the ex
alted flight of the prophet, but scanning that dulness of
heart which so often refused to hear. As a result of the
whole treatment we ought to understand how the chUd-
Uke faith of Abraham developed into that vast and com
pUcated system of legal enactments and ceremonial usage
which everywhere confronted the freer movements of
the Christian spirit, and strove, vrith the national pride
of a dignified or fanatical conservatism, to prevent the
rise and spread of those universal ideas which were reaUy.
the genuine outgrovrth of its own profoundest faith.
I

114 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [part in.
9. lAfe of Christ. — We are at last prepared to take
up the great problem which has furnished the determin
ing principle of this whole department of theology, to
view Christianity in its origin, to penetrate its essential
genius, and to analyse and dispose in thefr logical re
lations the earliest expressions of its faith. In the pro
secution of this task the Ufe of Christ demands our
first attention. It is there that we must seek for the
germinating and organising spirit to which the religion
owes its permanent -ritaUty, and which is stUl stri-ving
amid human darkness to unfold and reaUse its impUcit
ideas. It might be thought that this would be a study
of absorbing and exalting interest, bringing us into
closer contact with the greatest soul in history, and
filling us with divine and quickening thoughts. But
although this may be the final result of our labours, it
is far from being felt in our first approaches, and there
is no subject where the opposition between the critical
and the reUgious spirit is so keenly expressed. This is
not merely due to the extreme opinions which, owing
partly to the comparative novelty of the investigation,
partly to reaction against ecclesiastical dogmatism, have
been advanced in some quarters; but the difficulty
resides in the very nature of the subject itself. Love,
and especially reUgious love, is not analytical It
receives the whole impression, and contentedly abandons
itself to the transforming power ; and when it is asked
to justify itseK, and told that love is blind and pre
judiced, it would be satisfied with saying, " Whereas I

SECT. III.] LIFE OF CHEIST. 115
was blind, now I see." It shrinks from dissecting the
dear, famiUar narratives, and testing their credibUity by
the sharp methods of historical criticism ; and when, as
has sometimes happened under the lofty assumption of
impartiaUty, aspersions are cast oh the character of
Christ, it feels the reproach with far more than the pain
of personal insult. Yet, were it only because theology
has afready entered upon this task, it would be necessary
for the theologian stUl to attempt it. The life of Christ
has been a prominent theme for discussion during the
present century, and this discussion has contributed not
a Uttle to the marked change which is stealing over
theological thought. It is, therefore, no longer possible
for the cultivated theologian to take the Gospels simply
as they stand, and accept, or think that he accepts,
every word unquestioned as he reads. Whatever may
be his final conclusions, he. must reach them by the path
of research and criticism, and be able to justify them
before the bar of scientffic history.
The permanent necessity for this study, however, is
grounded, not on the circumstances of our time, but on
the nature of the sources from which our information
must be drawn. The four Gospels were written, at the
earUest, almost a generation after the date of the cruci
fixion, so that there was time for recoUection to become
confused or for popular misapprehension to add some
legendary elements to the narratives. In regard to two
of the Gospels, the claim has never been made that they
were -written by eye-witnesses of the events which they

116 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [part III.
relate ; and the traditional beUef in regard to the other
two has been vigorously assaUed in recent times. Again,
the Johannine representation of Christ differs consider
ably from the . synoptical ; and among the synoptics
themselves, whUe there is a general agreement and often
a close paraUelism, there is also considerable variation
of detaU. We must add that aU four Gospels ascribe to
Christ a number of mfracles, such as in other histories
are generaUy regarded with more than suspicion. All
these cfrcumstances render it necessary to test the credi
bUity of our sources ; to form a judgment whether, and
to what extent, and under what conditions, accounts of
miraculous occurrences may be trusted ; to arrange the
events in their proper chronological order, and to criticise
each as it comes before us.
In following out this attempt we must be guided by
a strictly historical method. Historical investigation
has its own laws, and its o-wn independent title to be
heard ; and to assume at starting any particular dogma
in regard to the nature or office of Christ is simply to
brow -beat our witnesses, and prejudge the question.
The principle which has been afready enunciated in
other connections is appUcable here. Each item of
evidence must be estimated according to its own intrinsic
merits, and not interpreted in the light ofthe conclusion
which we desire to reach. Our doctrine respecting
Christ must largely depend on an examination of his
Ufe and teaching, and for this very reason the examina
tion itself must be conducted vrithout a^y ulterior view.

SEOT. HI.] LIFE OF CHEIST. 117
But in saying this I do not for a moment suppose that
we can solve our problem by a mere criticism of detaUs.
We want to penetrate the inmost recesses of a soul, and
discover what was reaUy there, what was the spring of
its spiritual being, what was its purpose, what were the
sources of its power ; and if we confine ourselves to a
shrewd analysis of isolated events, we may succeed at
last only in laying the dead body in the tomb, whUe the
immortal spirit passes utterly beyond our ken. A soul
can be understood only by a soul and he who has no
sympathy with the ideal of life presented by the Gospels
cannot interpret for us their subUme portrait. Though
we may not bring to our inquiry a preconceived dogma,
as little may we come with dry and meagre hearts, and
hope by ever so much turning of our logical key to open
the central treasure-house of the world's history. We
must have some knowledge of moral causation, so as not
to ascribe magnificent effects to trumpery causes ; we
must have reaUsed in ourselves the awfulness of that
religious power which Christ has exercised over man
kind ; and we are bound to bring to the interpretation
of detaUs that unique impression which is produced by
his Ufe as a whole. There is no pursuit in which we
need so rich a combination of varied quaUties, none
where the acquisitions and faculties of cold and intrepid
reason must blend so completely with the admiration,
reverence, and love of a lofty and expansive soul If
these quaUties be present in thefr due proportions, and
if we have at aU apprehended the meaning of a reUgibn

118 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [part HI.
"not of the letter, but of the spfrit," we shaU not be
greatly troubled by any destructive conclusions which
our aUegiance to truth may require us to accept ; and
we shall see in time that the destruction of error is only
the negative aspect of spiritual creation, and that the
divine reaUty always transcends the human conception.
For him who has this faith it is possible to engage in
the severest investigations of modern criticism, and yet
to look hopefuUy for the day when the import of Christ's
life shall be understood as never before, and when his
spirit shaU take possession of the hearts of men with a
depth, and power, and reality, of which the Church
hitherto has hardly dared to dream.
10. Lives of the Apostles, or History of the Apostolic
age. — This subject is e-ridently necessary to complete our
picture of primitive Christianity ; for it was under the
infiuence of the Apostles that the various churches were
founded which became the first organised representatives
of the new reUgion throughout the Eoman empfre. This
period, however, cannot be omitted from ecclesiastical
history, and it might therefore seem proper to reserve it
for future treatment. This would be the case were it
not that its great importance renders it insufficient to
consider it in a subordinate section of a general history,
and demands that thorough and exhaustive investiga
tion which can be attempted only in a separate work ;
and, as soon as it is detached and placed in a department
of its own, it clearly belongs to that division of theology

SEOT. HI.] THEOLOGY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 119
which inqufres into the origines of Christianity. It thus
forms the connecting link between BibUcal theology
and ecclesiastical history. The subject, though on a
lower level, is simUar in character and scope to the Ufe
of Christ, and the general principles which were laid
down in the last section need not be repeated.
Our main sources are the book of Acts and the
Epistles, and these must be compared with one another
and criticised. Some information may be gleaned from
later tradition, and from the state of parties and opinions
which we find when the post-ApostoUc age first emerges
from obscurity, and becomes an object of distinct know
ledge. From these incomplete materials we have to
construct as best we may the edffice of our history, and
describe the movements and fortunes of the principal
actors, the estabUshment and constitution of churches,
the influence of the new doctrine and life, the relation
of the Church to the world, the appearance of divergent
tendencies within the Church itself, the rivalry of parties
and conflict of opinions, the solution of difficulties and
the underlying unity of faith. Thus, witnessing the
earUest operations of the Christian spirit, we gain a
clearer apprehension of its nature, and become better
quaUfied to strip off its accidental and temporary accom
paniments from its permanent and unalterable essence.
11. Theology qf the New Testament. — ^We are now
able to accompUsh the final purpose of our BibUcal
labours, and gather together into one systematic treatise

120 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. [part in.
the thoughts of primitive Christianity. This study of
the New Testament is so precisely similar to the corre
sponding study of the Old, that I need only refer back
to sub-section 8 for an exposition of its object and mode
of treatment. Here too, although the period under con
sideration is so much shorter, we can notice a develop
ment of thought, and distinguish different aspects under
which Christianity was regarded, so that we may con
veniently adopt the order of time for the arrangement
of the main di-risions of our subject. First comes the
doctrine of Christ according to the oldest tradition,
represented in the synoptical Gospels. Owing to the
marked influence of Paul "w^e next have three phases of
doctrine grouped around his name. The fitrst is the
primitive- ApostoUc doctrine in the pre-PauUne period.
Then PauUnism itself is brought under review. And
thfrdly the primitive-ApostoUc doctrine in the post-
PauUne period demands our attention. Last of aU we
must consider a theology as pecuUar, and as influential
as that of Paul himself, the Johannine.^ It is evident
that these divisions, and especiaUy the first, thfrd, and
fifth, are so important that each might form the subject
of a separate treatise. Works of this kind are of extreme
value, especiaUy to those who have afready taken at
least a cursory view of the whole field ; but the object
of this department of theology is not accompUshed tiU
the results obtained by these separate labours are brought
^ This is the order followed by Weiss in his " Lehrbuch der Bibli-
schen Theologie des Neuen Testaments."

SEOT. III.] CONCLUSION. 121
together under one comprehensive survey, and the doc
trines of primitive Christianity are presented in the
order of thefr genesis and in their mutual relations.
Thus only can we gain a view of early Christian theology
as a whole, and see it not only in the depth and intensity
of individual expression, but in aU the breadth and
richness of its complex manifestation.
In concluding our notice of BibUcal theology, we
must observe that many of the departments which we
have treated separately and consecutively are in actual
practice frequently blended with one another. A Ufe
of Christ, for instance, is apt to trespass on the provinces
of introduction, archaeology, history, and exegesis. It
does so, however, only to give completeness to a distinct
work, which cannot safely presuppose the requisite
knowledge in its readers. But if a whole system of
BibUcal theology were constructed upon the foregoing
plan, this blending of departments would be unneces
sary, for at each successive step we might assume the
results afready gained. Though, owing to the ine-rit-
able distribution of so vast a field among specialists, this
is not done, stUl it is advantageous to have an outUne
of BibUcal science as a whole, so that we may under
stand the correlation of its parts, and assign to its due
place any particular Une of study which we may think
proper to adopt.

122 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY. [part hi.
Section IV.
Ecclesiastical History.
Ha-ring made ourselves acquainted with Christianity
in its original form, and traced its connection vrith the
past out of which it sprang and -with the surroimding
world into which it was bom, we must endeavour to
complete our knowledge of it by regarding it in its
progressive action upon manldnd, and in its internal
development. Were it merely a system of thought,
conceived and elaborated by a single mind, and then
left to take its chance among studious men, we might
be content to know it in its isolated completeness, and
feel only a languid interest in the story of its accept
ance. But since it has always expressed itself through
an organised body of beUevers, and has made it a
dominant aim to ameUorate society and estabUsh the
kingdom of God upon earth, we naturaUy ask how it
has realised its ideal, and can estimate it as a spiritual
and regenerating force only through a study of its
history. Again, whatever view we may take of the
relation between the teaching of Christ and the Chris
tianity of the present day, it is admitted that the
expUcit forms of the two are not identical, but, to
adopt the most favourable opinion, the impUcit germs
of doctrine in the prUnitive revelation have unfolded
themselves, through a trae process of development, into

sect. IV.] place and ADVANTAGE OF THE STUDY. 123
the present dogmatic and ceremonial system. In say
ing this we seem to assume the unity of Christendom ;
but in reality Christendom is split up into a number
of sects, each giving a different interpretation of the
Gospel and thus proving that the development has, in
some directions, been morbid. This power of divergent
growth in Christianity can be understood only from its
continuous history. These two forces, then, which are
found in Christianity, — the force which impresses it
upon the surrounding world, and the force which ex
pands it from within into richer and more varied
expression, — ^render the study of its history imperative
upon him who would fully apprehend its meaning and
its value. The department of theology, therefore, which
treats of this subject completes the purpose which we
had in view when we engaged in Biblical research, and
must properly occupy the next place. It also prepares
the way for subsequent pursuits by pressing on our
attention the results of Christian experience and pre
senting a great mass of material ready to our hands.
No vrise man would attempt to construct a body of
theological doctrine in total ignorance of what had been
already done. By foUowing the course of theological
thought, by mingling in the warfare of ancient contro
versies, by plunging into the problems of successive
ages and seeing how they were solved by the master
minds of Christendom, we enlarge and strengthen our
faculties of refiection, and perceive more clearly the
spiritual roots from which different forms of beUef have

124 ECCLESIiSTICAL HISTOEY. [part hi.
grown ; we become keener in detecting the germs of
error in ourselves, and juster in our estimate of opinions
opposed to our own; and we thus acquire that power
of spiritual criticism (using the word in its highest
sense) which results only from a combination of rich
religious experience vrith extensive knowledge and
inteUectual clearness, and which is essential to the
constructive theologian of the present day. SimUar
considerations wiU apply to the theory of ecclesiastical
life. In practical affafrs experience is confessedly of
the first importance, and we must know the methods of
action which have been adopted in the past, and inqufre
into the causes of their success or faUure, if we would
lay down a system of judicious rules for the practice of
the future. We must add in this connection that, if
we want to act beneficiaUy upon the Christendom
around us, we must first of aU endeavour to understand
it; and we can understand it only when we know whence
and how it came, and have patiently disentangled the
lines which imite it to a far distant past. These re
marks may suffice to estabUsh the position of ecclesias
tical history in the cfrcle of theological studies.
We must now seek to define more precisely the
scope and method of a history of the Church. We can
imagine a kind of Christianity existing and acting upon
the world without any ecclesiastical embodiment. As
a special form of spiritual Ufe it might spread by its
native energy from soul to soul and gradually leaven
the whole mass of society, without counting its adher-

SEOT. IV.] .ITS SCOPE AND METHOD. 125
ents or marshaUing them into a great host under an
acknowledged system of government. But, as we have
afready remarked, a different plan was foUowed, and ,
the establishment of the di-rine kingdom was not eur
trusted to the uncertain efforts of scattered indi-riduals.
Without discussing whether Christ formaUy constituted
the Church or not, we may safely say that, in any case,
it sprang out of the profound necessities of the Chris
tian spirit, and was shaped by its creative and organis
ing power. Not only were the believers drawn to one
another by their mutual sympathy, thefr desfre for com
mon worship, and thefr need of the strength which is
derived from association, but, finding themselves a smaU
band in the midst of a hostUe world, they were com-
peUed to close thefr ranks, to trust their leaders, and
present a united front to the enemy. In doing this
they inevitably adopted a constitution and a ritual, and
brought the ecstatic visions of faith down into the Ught
of reflective thought; in other words, they became a
Church, which was the public organ of Christianity, and
stood over against the State as the representative of a
new authority in the affafrs of men. We may, then,
without trenching on any disputed dogma, regard the
Church as ideaUy the coUective, organised, and self-
conscious expression of the Christian Ufe.
It foUows from these remarks that Ecclesiastical
History may be spoken of in a broader and a narrower
sense. In its more restricted meaning it would confine
itself to the organism known distinctively as the Chiirch,

126 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY. [part III.
and would relate only what issued from or directly con
cerned its corporate existence. But in its wider bearings
it must include in addition aU that portion of the moral
and reUgious life of Christians which Ues outside of the
ecclesiastical boundary. The history which is to serve
our purpose, and describe the Christian reUgion in all
the fulness of its activity, must accept this larger scope.
Christianity, so far as it can present itself to the eye of
the historian, is an expression (more or less imperfect)
of the Christ-Ufe in humanity; and wheresoever and
howsoever that Ufe may put forth a genuine manifesta
tion, whether in formal connection with the Church or
not, pro-vided always that it be of sufficient importance
to attract pubUc attention, a history which desfres to
exhibit the reUgion in aU the extent and variety of its
power must take it into account. For instance, the
labours of a phUanthxopist who, uncommissioned by
any church, acted out of the Christian enthusiasm of
his own heart, ought not to be omitted. We may even
go further, and say that the Church may conceivably
betray its true fimction and act in an unchristian spirit,
whUe the State, Ukewise composed of Christian men,
but under the influence of a less artificial conscience,
becomes for the time the real representative of Christ.
Thus a statesman who from a sense of justice and a
beUef in the impartial rule of God, which have been
quickened and exalted by his faith in Christ, passes
some great measure of social reform, is more like the
Saviour than the ecclesiastics who in the olden time

SECT. IV.] ITS SCOPE AND METHOD. 127
hunted their feUow-men to death. If, then, we confined
our history to the Church in its corporate capacity,
although we should witness some of the grandest scenes
in the Christian drama, we should nevertheless obtain a
one-sided and imperfect view; but by enlarging it so as
to embrace the moral and religious Ufe of the members
of the Church, acting not as churchmen, but simply as
Christians, we obtain gUmpses into the freer and more
spontaneous movements of Christianity, which are often
its most sincere expression. By foUowing this plan we
shaU save ourselves from two serious errors : we shaU
neither ascribe to Christianity every evU which we
detect in the Church nor refuse to Christianity all the
good that may exist independently or in spite of the
Church. To take the most obvious example : when in
a Christian nation the Church, through its authorised
representatives, opposes a wise and merciful reform
which the parUament sanctions, the latter reflects the
prevailing Christian consciousness of the time. In
such a case it would be most unjust to say that Chris
tianity was adverse to the reform, when in reaUty it
was the free force of the Christian spirit that rent the
trammels of ecclesiasticism and embodied in law its
own conceptions of social order. In these remarks I
do not wish to prejudge any doctrine respecting the
Church's authority, but would simply point out what
appears to be the proper method for the historian, who,
disregarding dogmas, must foUow the rules of his own
science, and by a complete and impartial review of

128 ECCLESLA.STICAL HISTOEY. [part III.
facts provide the material for our future doctrinal
fabric. The considerations which induce us to make our
history more comprehensive Ukewise determine our
general mode of treatment. In a subject which is so
apt to be regarded from a sectarian point of view,' the
demand for impartiaUty is advanced with pecuUar
justice, and we may be tempted to secure this virtue
by placing ourselves disdainfuUy above the strife of
parties, and noting merely the outer facts -without
caring to penetrate their deeper springs. But in this
way impartiality is purchased at too great a price.
What we wish to see is the inner soul of Christianity
as it breaks into manifestation through the words and
deeds of distinguished men, and frames for itself a
continuity of expression over different lands and through
successive ages ; and if we have nothing but a record
of events and dates, the speU of Ufe is dissolved, and
Christian history sinks into a barren heap of unmeaning
and disconnected phenomena. It is the business of the
historian not only to estimate criticaUy the value of his
authorities, and to state conscientiously every signifi^
cant fact, but to exercise that far higher judgment
which probes the secrets of the human heart, and dis
cerns the spfritual and material forces which have
directed the current of affafrs. It is for him to pour
Ufe and reality into the transactions of the. past, to
convert the puppets of the chronicler into men vrith
flesh and blood, and to weave the bewUdering mass of

KEOT. IV.] PEEPAEATOEY STUDIES. 129
detaUs into a connected and inteUigible story. He
must, then, seek for impartiality not by a sublime in
difference, a cold imagination, or a contemptuous reason,
which can know nothing of the tragic magnificence of
human passion, but by the largeness of his sympathies,
by an imaginative apprehension of thoughts and feeUngs
and tendencies the most unUke his, own, in a word,
by a human (or shall I rather say a divine ?) love to
which every expression of our common nature is fas
cinating, which can admire while it dissents, and pity
whUe it condemns. To disapprove is not necessarUy to
be unjust, though those of whom we disapprove may
naturaUy ascribe our judgment to prejudice or maUce.
We need not heed such taunts so long as we sincerely
endeavour to base" our judgment upon sound principles.
Through inevitable imperfections our views may be often
contracted or erroneous ; but if we study history in the
spirit which I have indicated, we shaU, in spite of errors,
learn its noblest lessons ; and among these not the least
precious is a "wise and patient tolerance, which honours
aU that is hoUest and best in every sect, and waits
hopefuUy for the dropping off of the carnal veil that
dims it, and the coming of that unity of the Spirit in
which our differences shaU at length be merged.
Besides the possession of well-trained spiritual and
mental gifts, the student of Ecclesiastical History who
aspires to be an original investigator requfres an ac
quaintance with some other branches of knowledge,
which can be obtained only by sedulous labour. Some
K

130 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY. [part hi.
of these have been referred to in a general way in
speaking of the relation of theology to other leamed
pursuits, but it wUl be advantageous to give a brief
summary of them here. In the foremost rank we must
place the poUtical history of the countries where
Christianity has estabUshed itself; for the Church and
the State have always affected one another. The Church
itself graduaUy became a great poUtical power, and
through considerable periods the two rival authorities
are so closely interwoven that their respective histories
occupy a large territory in common. The history of
the religions with which Christianity was brought into
coUision, and by which it was more or less influenced,
and especially that of its formidable mediaeval rival,
Mohammedanism, is necessary to explain some of the
most remarkable features and movements of the Church.
The history of philosophy and science throws an indis
pensable light upon the early formulation and the
subsequent changes of theological thought; and the
history of art illustrates the structure and embellish
ment of places of worship as weU as the sesthetic side
of the ritual. Chronology is the handmaid of history,
and the different modes of reckoning time, and the
various eras adopted by different writers, must be
famiUar to one who would draw his information from
original sources. Ecclesiastical geography has received
a separate treatment from political and follows the
divisions of creed rather than of government, distinguish
ing the Christian from the non-Christian, and the various

SEOT. IV.] PEEPAEATOEY STUDIES. 131
Churches of Christendom from one another, and, finally,
giving the subordinate ecclesiastical divisions of each
communion. As a preparation for the study of docu
ments, the first requisite is knowledge of the languages
in which they are written. The name of Ecclesiastical
PhUology has been given speciaUy to the study of
ecclesiastical Greek and Latin, in which so large a
proportion of historical and other documents are com
posed ; but a wide acquaintance with the vernacular
speech of the various Christian nations must obviously
be added by the original investigator. This circle of
auxiUary studies is closed by Diplomatics, a science
which includes the deciphering and interpretation of
ancient writings (such as diplomas, patents, charters,
monuments), and the , criteria for determining their
date, genuineness, and credibUity. Numismatics and
Sphragistics may be regarded as subordinate branches
of Diplomatics. It is obvious that this vast range of learning cannot
be acquired by every theological student, and even one
who devotes his Ufe to the study of ecclesiastical history
will often have to accept on trust the results of other
men's researches. To a large extent the materials must
be collected and sifted by speciaUsts, who will bring
their favourite documents, and the grounds of thefr
judgment upon them, before the leamed world ; and
then these materials may be appropriated by the
historian in conformity with his own judgment, and
through his combining and constructive power buUt up

132 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY. [part hi.
into a colossal fabric, in which every part wUl be seen
in its due proportion and in its bearing on the strength
and beauty of the whole. But though few of us can
draw our knowledge of ecclesiastical history to any
great extent from the original sources, and stUl fewer
have the artistic power without which there may be a
statement of facts but not a history, nevertheless, every
dUigent student may investigate some particular incident
for himself, and endeavour to present his results in an
attractive narrative ; and it is most desirable that in this
way he should cultivate his power of resorting to the
ultimate authorities, and exercising his independent
judgment upon them, and then reproducing his im
pressions in a form which wUl make them serviceable
to others. He wiU thus acqufre some practical ac
quaintance with the methods of the historian, and wUl
consequently be less at the mercy of partial or Ul-
informed writers, and wUl regard with keener admfra-
tion and respect the varied quaUties which have
produced the great masterpieces of historical Uterature.
Ecclesiastical History, like Biblical Theology, faUs
into several divisions, though these divisions are deter
mined by a very different principle from that which we
appUed in the last section. There the subjects formed
a series of successive steps, by means of which every
part of the field was progressively surveyed, and the
aim with which we started was finaUy reached. Here,
however, the entfre subject is first reviewed in all its
comprehensiveness, and then certain portions are selected

SEOT. IV.] DIVISION OF THE SUBJECT. 133
and detached for more minute consideration in a series,
not of successive, but of co-ordinate treatises. Eccle
siastical history, according to our general use of that
term, deals with the Church as a whole. It regards the
manifold activities of the Christian life as the expres
sions of one interior principle, and the various aspects
under which it is possible to group these activities as
representing only different functions of the same un
divided organism.^ According to this conception it
must not only describe the working of these functions
in their isolation, depicting thefr growth to maturity,
and judging how far they have realised their ideal or
have faUen short of it through the imperfection of
human instrumentaUty or the influence of aUen forces,
but it must -view them in their mutual connection and
interaction, blend thefr separate stories into a combined
narrative, and thus exhibit, not the disjointed limbs of
an anatomical specimen, but the harmonised beauty of
a Uving body, expressing through every part the man
dates of a hidden soul.
This requirement was certainly not satisfied by the
old division into centuries, in which the material in
each century was parcelled out under a number of
formal headings. By such an artificial arrangement we
may accumulate stores of knowledge, but cannot produce
a history. The division into periods, indeed, possesses
great advantages, because different times are marked by
^ See Eothe, " Theol. Encyclopadie aus seinem Nachlasse heraus-
gegeben von Hermann Ruppelius," Wittenberg, 1880, p. 77.

134 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY. [part HI.
prevaUing characteristics which ought to be observed
and explained, and because there are always some phases
of reUgious life which require separate treatment;
and it is necessary in these instances for the historian
to retum upon his steps, and place these omitted
portions in thefr due relation to the circumstances
of the age. But the periods should be determined,
not by the number of years, but by some great event
which marks an epoch in the history of Christianity.
These epochs may be somewhat differently selected
according to the judgment or the object of different
-writers ; but there are a few which stand out so pro
minently that no historian can refuse them a place in
his scheme ; and, passing over minor divisions, we can
hardly be -wrong in defining by these fruitful occur
rences the larger cycles of ecclesiastical history. First,
there is the long period extending to the re-establish
ment of the Western Empire under Charlemagne (a.d.
800), during which Christianity developed itself under
the influence of Graeco-Eoman civiUsation. For nearly
three hundred years of this period it was engaged in a
struggle for existence, and had to encounter not only
the spirit of the world, but the power of the State.
This conflict was terminated by the successes of Con
stantine (a.d. 312), and Christianity became the reUgion
of the Eoman Empire. In the succeeding centuries the
Church, having conquered the world, was exposed to
more subtle evUs from its friendship than it had ever
experienced from its hostUity ; and in re-action against

SEOT. IV.] DIVISION INTO PEEIODS. 135
its seductions the ascetic ideal of vfrtue, which had
already made its appearance, was quickly developed,
and multitudes fled from the ordinary ways of men into
the regulated life of the monastery. The removal of
the imperial court to Constantinople began that division
between East and West which enabled the Latin Church
to unfold its independent life, and made it possible for
the bishops of Eome graduaUy to assume poUtical
functions, and become the dominant power in Western
Christendom. Coincident with this decline of Greek
influence was the rise of another power which was
destined to become a most important factor in the
history of Europe. The vigorous and unspoUed life of
Germany dashed in pieces the tottering edifice of the
old Eoman system, but yielded to the spell of Chris
tianity, and finaUy submitted to the authority of the
Papal chafr. The great changes which had thus been
slowly prepared were in effect, though not in aU their
extent, consummated when Charlemagne received the
imperial crown from the hands of Leo III. The dis
ruption of the empire was foUowed by the completion
of that schism which had long been growing between
the Eastern and Western Churches (a.d. 1054). Thence
forth Greek Christianity went upon its separate way,
and, whUe the historian must not forget that it claims
the allegiance of a considerable part of Christendom,
his attention is more powerfuUy attracted by its ener
getic and aggressive rival. In the West the period
extending from Charlemagne to the Eeformation may

136 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY. [part iii.
be described as that of Eomano-German Catholicism.
This name is suggestive of the conflict which permeated
the Middle Ages, and led ultimately to the great revolt
inaugurated by Luther. To a certain extent this
conflict represents the difference between the Latin
and Teutonic races. It displayed itself, not only in the
antagonism between Papal and Imperial, or Papal and
National authority, but in an opposition between an
external and legal system, which asserted its power
over the individual conscience and thought, and the
freer movements of an interior Ufe, which chafed against
restrictions not sanctioned by private faith ; or, in other
words, between ecclesiastical and spiritual Ufe, which,
though by no means mutually exclusive, are the ex
pression of widely divergent tendencies. For a long
time the Papal or ecclesiastical conception of Chris
tianity gained an ever-increasing ascendency, and held
aloft the idea of a divine order and authority amid the
fierce agitations of a semi-barbarous age. This tendency
culminated in Innocent III. (ad. 1198-1216). For a
time the spell of his commanding spirit seemed unbroken,
and the Papacy stood at the height of its power. But
irresponsible power contains within itself the causes of
decline, and at last the corruptions of the Papal admini
stration caUed forth loud cries for a reform of the Church
in its head and in its members. MeanwhUe the sense
of national dignity and independence had been growing ;
humanistic culture began to create fresh standards of
judgment and a craving for freer exercise of the rational

SEOT. IV.] DIVISION INTO PEEIODS. 137
powers; and religious experiences arose which would
not fit into the ecclesiastical mould, but contained
vrithin them the germs of a new theology. Thus the
time was ripe for great changes when Luther made his
appeal from the Church to the Bible. From that
moment western Christendom has been divided into
two great parties, CathoUc and Protestant. CathoUcism
has entrenched itseK more firmly than ever in a system
of dogmas and ordinances, and in the unity of a strong
and coherent organisation. Protestantism has broken
up into a number of sects, especiaUy among EngUsh-
speaking nations, and has been slowly working out
the logical results of the original movement, namely, the
combination of spfritual intensity with inteUectual
freedom, and the maintenance of an ecclesiastical
system which shaU serve the highest purposes of
reUgion without trenching on national or individual
rights. This period may be subdi-rided for Conti
nental Christianity by the peace of Westphalia (a.d.
1648), which terminated the Thfrty Years' War, and
secured to Protestantism a permanent poUtical recog
nition. In England we should rather select the
accession of WilUam IIL, as closing the long conflict
with CathoUcism for supremacy in the counsels of
the State. These, then, are the periods, this the
vast movement, which Ecclesiastical History has to
describe, so combining the multipUcity of its mate
rials that we shaU apprehend them in thefr unity,
and witness the various phases of the Christian

138 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY. [part Hi.
spirit in their bearing on the collective life of Chris
tendom. Having thus viewed the history of the Church in
its complex unity, we find it desirable to disengage the
more important phases or functions of the Christian
Ufe for separate examination, not only in order to
secure for them a more detaUed treatment than suits
the purpose of a general history, but that we may see
them in thefr continuous exercise and development,
and understand more clearly their intrinsic character
and laws. With this object we may select the six
following expressions of the Christian spfrit: — 1. Its
expression as an organising principle, drawing men
together into a unity which is governed by its own
rules, and stands in defined relations towards other
communities. This subject is treated in the Constitu
tional History of the Church. 2. Its expression as a
power which impels the soul to worship, and to seek
the satisfaction of its reUgious needs in a pubUc cere
monial. This is illustrated in the History of the Eitual.
3. Its expression as a faith, which contains certain
inteUectual conceptions, and is therefore capable of
being analysed and formulated into sharply -defined
dogmas. We thus reach the History of Doctrines, under
which must be included, as subordinate branches,
SymboUcs and Patristics. 4. Its expression as an ideal
law of righteousness, yielding the History of Morals.
5. Its Uterary expression. 6. Its artistic expression.
On each of these divisions we must make a few remarks.

SEOT. IV.] HISTOEY OF THE CONSTITUTION. 139
1. History of the Constitution qf the Church. — It is
the business of this branch of history to exhibit in their
proper consecution the usages and laws which affect the
organisation of the Church. It must, in the first place,
investigate the historical origin of the Church as a dis
tinct community. In considering, next, the regulations
by which this community was governed, it may begin
with the congregation as the unit in the ecclesiastical
system, and notice the division into clergy and laity,
and the functions of the several officers. In this con
nection it must discuss the question whether sacerdotal
power was originaUy ascribed to the clergy. In sending
its glance further afield, and noticing the union among
congregations of the same district, it wUl be brought
into the presence of Episcopacy, and it must then trace
the rise and progress of that institution tUl it reaches
the MetropoUtan, the Patriarch, and finaUy the Pope.
In due course it must describe the arrangements of the
Papal court, and the appointment and duties of Legates
and Cardinals. It must, further, give an account of the
deUberative and legislative action of the Church as
exercised through Synods and Councils. This introduces
the subject of canon-law, which must be treated in con
nection -with political laws affecting the power of the
Church. After the Eeformation the Protestant Churches
faUed to estabUsh any uniform system, and various
constitutions were adopted under the influence of
national or theological preferences. These may be
considered under the heads of Episcopal, Consis-

140 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY. [part iii.
torial Presbyterian, Eepresentative, and Congrega
tional. 2. History ofthe Ritual, — This subject is often treated
under the name of Christian Antiquities or Archaeology
— a designation which is objectionable for two reasons.
It is vague, and naturaUy includes much more than the
ritual ; and it is accordingly made more or less compre
hensive by different writers. Again, it is arbitrarily
conflned to the remote past, and, having there no natural
limit, it is extended or contracted at pleasure. It gener
ally embraces the first six centuries, sometimes stretches
as far as the Eeformation, whUe the editors of the
" Dictionary of Christian Antiquities " have chosen the
reign of Charlemagne as their boundary. The subject
itself, however, reaches to the present time ; for, to urge
only one consideration, all the Protestant Churches have
departed from the Eoman ritual, and we cannot neglect
their varying forms of service if we wish to obtain a
complete picture of Christian devotion. Although it
may be convenient, then, to devote a separate treatise
to the first few centuries or to any other period, yet such
a treatise can only be accepted as part of a more com
prehensive plan, and cannot be aUowed a distinct place
in our scheme of theological study.
The history of the ritual classifies its material under
three heads. First, it considers sacred ^feces, the oratory,
the church, the cathedral, their structure and embelUsh-
ment, and the various apparatus which they contain for

sect. IV.] HISTOEY OF DOCTEINES. 141
the conduct of pubUc worship. As many of these objects
must again engage our attention in the history of
Christian art, we must here dwell rather on their eccle
siastical uses than on their artistic beauty and expres
siveness. Secondly, it treats of sacred seasons, including
not only Sundays, but all the di-risions of the eccle
siastical year. Lastly, it takes up the services of the
Church — the mode of celebrating public worship, reading
of the Scriptures, singing, prayer, preaching, the ad
ministration of the sacraments. These three branches
of the subject are so closely connected that it is desirable
to group them in periods, so that at each stage of the
Church's growth we may obtain a fuU representation of
its devotional Ufe. The periods must be the same as
those adopted by general ecclesiastical history ; for the
development and changes of the ritual are largely de
pendent on the current of affairs, and do not provide us
with epochs different from those which affect so deeply
the external fortunes of the Church.
3. History of Doctrines. — Our object in this study is
to comprehend historically the expression of Christian
faith in forms of the understanding, and this object
must determine the Umits and method of our pursuit.
Had a complete system of theology been given to the
Church once for all, and remained unaltered ever since,
there would be no history of doctrines, but our quest
would be satisfied by the perusal of the New Testament.
In reality, however, theology arose out of the exercise of

142 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY. [part lii.
the inteUect upon the contents of that spiritual faith
which it was possible for simple minds to hold without
analysing its meaning or seeking for the rational grounds
on which it might be made to rest. The several doc
trines of the Church, accordingly, were formulated only
by degrees; and not tUl this work was accompUshed
was it possible to examine them in their mutual rela
tions and arrange them in their proper order of depend
ence, and thus combine them at last into a finished
system. During this process the Church was not only
brought into colUsion with extraneous modes of thought,
but had to encounter within its own borders varieties of
opinion which it overruled as either altogether aUen to
Christian faith or as extreme and one-sided manifesta
tions of one of its genuine tendencies. At the time of
the Eeformation the decisions of the Church itself were
challenged on such an extensive scale that the various
Protestant communions arose, each resting on a dogmatic
basis which claimed to be the most correct embodiment
of the primitive revelation. NaturaUy these less authori
tative statements have not remained unquestioned. In
our own day they are under a keen scrutiny ; and by
many who stUl desire to remain true to the Christian
foundation the position has been reached that doctrine,
since it derives its substance from spiritual apprehension
and its form from inteUectual elaboration, must neces
sarUy vary with the ripening Christian experience and
the expanding knowledge of successive ages, and that it
is only through the acknowledgment of this law that it

SEOT. IV.] HISTOEY OF DOCTEINES. 143
can maintain the Uving and kindUng power of truth.
Such, then, is the great cycle of thought which the
history of doctrines has to describe. • It must not confine
itself to CathoUc dogma or to the Confessions of the
Protestant sects, but must explore the recesses of heresy,
and notice even non-Christian systems so far as their
antagonism or their suggestiveness has affected the
development of Christian doctrine ; and it must discuss
not only the growth and modifications of isolated
dogmas, but the formation and decay of theological
systems. In the prosecution of this task it is not sufficient
to give a bald statement of opinions, and mention the
date when they were fixed in their ecclesiastical form.
Thought grows by its o-wn organic laws, and often re
quires centuries for the full unfolding of its tendencies ;
and though it always exercises a selective power among
the materials presented to it, yet, Uke a tree exposed to
suiLshine or storm, it is modified by the influences
around it. We must therefore endeavour to trace every
opinion up to its seminal principle, to watch its logical
self-evolution, and to view it in connection with the
knowledge and circumstances of the time in which it
prevaUed. Only thus can we penetrate the secrets of
the human mind, and convert what else might seem like
barren speculations into revealing utterances of the pro
found faith, the eager aspiration, the force and subtlety
of inteUect, by which, not one or two individuals, but
successive generations were swayed. We have not

144 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY. [part hi.
attained our object tiU we have reached the heart of
every dogma, and understand why it was shaped so and
not otherwise, and, forsaking our own centre, can dwell
with loving and appreciative interest upon modes of
beUef, and inteUectual and spiritual tendencies, the most
remote from those which characterise ourselves. Pursued
in this manner, the study affords us revelations of the
deep things in man, which are denied to the empty
sneer of superior enUghtenment. It not only provides
us with valuable information and materials of thought,
but widens the compass of our minds and our hearts,
and brings us into the nearer presence of those per
manent reaUties of the Spirit which abide the same
beneath the shifting forms of knowledge.
These remarks wUl show the propriety of the division
which is usuaUy observed into General and Special
History of Doctrines. It is the province of a general
history to review the prevaiUng characteristics of tbe
time, to estimate its inteUectual and religious position,
to mark off the interests which most urgently claimed
attention and the problems which pressed for solution,
and to refer to the principal writers on theological sub
jects. These are all matters which affect every doctrine
aUke; and vrithout this preUminary knowledge it is
impossible to group the individual doctrines in thefr
true subordination, and to understand them as members
of the living organism of thought. The special history
takes up the doctrines one by one, and follows their
isolated development. In doing so it must arrange them

SECT. IV.] HISTOEY OF DOCTEINES. 145
in a proper order, and this order ought to be historical
rather than logical. If this study were to be merely
subservient to dogmatics, we might adopt the divisions
of a modern treatise on systematic theology ; but as it
is our primary object to view the doctrines in thefr
historical relations, it wUl be best to place in the fore
most rank that doctrine or coUection of doctrines which,
as it were, dominated each age, and to dispose the
rest, as far as possible, in accordance with the nearness
or the remoteness of their connection with this master-
thought. For it will be found that the theological
colour, so to speak, of any particular time depends not
only on the presence or absence of certain doctrines, but
on the mutual proportions of those that are present, and
changes whUe now one and now another emerges into
prominence. For instance, at one time ecclesiastical
interest is concentrated on the person of Christ, at
another on the nature of the Holy Spirit, again on
anthropology, or, once more, on the authority of the
Church ; and such great questions rearrange the lines
of controversy, and alter, if not the dogmatic forms
which have been accepted on other subjects, at least the
effect which they exercise on the mind. Thus, in each
period, the general history must prepare the way for
and determine the distribution of topics in the special.
I have here assumed that a division into periods
must be observed, and it is evident that without such a
division the principles of treatment which I have
sketched could not be carried out. We must, however,
L

146 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY. [part III.
no longer assume the periods which we have chosen in
the more general treatment of ecclesiastical history ;
for there we were guided by those great crises of affairs
which, though leaving no part of the Church's life un
touched, affected most obviously its external relations ;
but here we take as our clue those events which mark
an epoch in the changes of thought, and we characterise
our periods by the tendencies prevailingly manifest in
the construction or defence of doctrines. A different
class of men now demands our attention ; Constantine
retreats before Athanasius ; the metaphysics of Anselm
and the dialectics of Ab^lard attract us more than the
lofty pretensions of Innocent III. It is only in the
Eeformation that the two modes of aUotting our periods
completely coincide ; and they do so there because that
great revolution, which clove the Church asunder and
affected so deeply the policy of nations, sprang ulti
mately from changes of reUgious conception, which were
brought to a focus in the commanding soul of Luther.
FoUowing, then, the clue which is thus afforded, we
extend our first period to the time of Gregory the Great,
the close of the sixth century. During this period
Christianity was animated by the creative energy of
youth, and found expression for the new reUgious con
sciousness, first in single doctrines and brief summaries
of the most essential points of beUef, and at last in the
complete system of ecclesiastical dogma which ruled
with its inviolable authority the mind of the Middle
Ages. We may divide this long period by the CouncU

SEOT. IV.] HISTOEY OF DOCTEINES. 147
of Nicaea, which made the first attempt to enunciate the
contents of the Christian faith by the coUective voice of
the entfre Church, and thus define -with an unimpeach
able sanction what Christians were bound to beUeve.
The first of these minor periods we may caU the Apolo
getic, because the theological activity of the Church was
principaUy engaged in a defence against the attacks of
Judaism, heathenism, and heresy. The second is the
Systematic-polemic period (so called by Neander), during
which Christianity shaped amid internal controversies
the system of mediaeval theology. A period of com
parative stagnation naturally foUowed. The authority
of the Church was now paramount in the domain of
thought, and her energies were chiefly directed to the
conversion of nations and the assertion of her own
supremacy in everything which affected the social
welfare. This period of transition lasted tUl the time
of Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury, with whom
Scholasticism properly began. It was the aim of
Scholasticism, accepting with unquestioning faith the
dogmatic decisions of the Church, to exhibit the harmony
between these and the fundamental facts of man's in
teUectual and spiritual nature. In this attempt it failed
to give universal satisfaction, and thus helped to prepare
the way for the rejection of those dogmas the truth of
which it had assumed as the very basis of its reasoning.
The scholastic period, therefore, though it stUl continues
in the CathoUc Church, was succeeded by the Protestant
period, which was ushered in by the Eeformation, and

148 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY. [part III.
has lasted to our owm time. Protestantism, obliged to
define its position and entrench itself against CathoUcism,
fell into a dogmatic orthodoxy as rigid and exclusive as
that of the older Church, and we may place by itself the
not very clearly defined period during which this spirit
was paramount. In the eighteenth century the principle
of religious Uberty, which was involved in the Protestant
movement, began to assert itself with greater distinct
ness, and, refusing to be identified with the Deistical
revolt against Christianity, claimed its place within the
bosom of the Church itself The straggle of this prin
ciple of freedom marks the last period of the history of
doctrines, in the midst of which we ourselves Uve.
There are two subjects which necessarily enter into a
history of doctrines, but which cannot receive in a work
of such large scope that completeness and continuity of
treatment to which thefr importance entitles them.
Hence arise two branches of study which, though they
must be classed under our present head, command a
separate investigation, namely, SymboUcs and Patristics.
(a,) Symbolics, — The word crvfi^oXa properly denoted
the two halves of a bone or a ring which were broken
off from one another, and kept as vouchers by two con
tracting parties. Hence it easUy passed to the signifi
cation of a pledge or voucher generaUy, and was appUed
to the watchword by which the soldiers of the same
army or the members of any other association were
recognised by their feUows. It was only a slight exten
sion of this last meaning when it was used to denote the

SEOT. IV.] SYMBOLICS. 149
formula of belief by the acceptance of which Christians
were separated from the non-Christian world, or, within
the Church itself, the members of different parties were
distinguished from one another.
The necessity for some confession of faith must have
arisen as soon as converts began to be received, through
the rite of baptism, into the fellowship of the Church.
At first this confession was, as we learn from Acts, of
the simplest kind ; but it was graduaUy enlarged by the
addition of successive clauses till it assumed the form
which is known as the Symbolum ApostoUcum. The
great Trinitarian controversy caUed for a further and
more precise definition of the CathoUc faith, and this
was provided by the CouncUs of Nicaea (A.D. 325) and
of Constantinople (a.d. 381) in what is usuaUy termed
the Nicene Creed. A yet more stringent definition of
the doctrine of the Trinity was subsequently given in
the Symbolum Quicunque vult, wrongly ascribed to
Athanasius. These three creeds, being acknowledged
by several, though not by all, parties in Christendom,
are distinguished as the (Ecumenical Symbols.
The opinions against which the Nicene and Atha-
nasian Creeds were directed failed to make any deep
impression on the future history of the Church. Arianism,
though for a time a formidable rival of orthodoxy, died
away, and its Symbol has only an antiquarian interest.
Other heretical views which arose in the progress of the
controversy retreated to the East, where they stiU
maintain a feeble existence in the sects of Nestorians

150 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY. [part III.
or Dyophysites, Jacobites or Monophysites, and Maro-
nites or MonotheUtes. A difference of opinion regard
ing the doctrine of the Trinity, however, contributed its
share to the great di-rision between the Eastern and
Western Churches, the former refusing to adopt Filioque
in the clause of the Nicene Creed relating to the pro
cession of the Holy Ghost. The Greek Church is thus
doctrinaUy separated from the Eoman, and it has of
course never adopted the more recent Symbols of the
latter. Its own theology is summarised in two Con
fessions which are generaUy regarded as authoritative :
'OpBoSo^o<; ofioXoyia ri)? Ka6o'KiKri<; Koi atroa'To'KiKri'i
eKK\ri(7ia's ttj? avaToXiKrj';, composed by Peter MogUas
(MetropoUtan of Kiev in the south of Eussia) in 1642,
approved by the Church at Constantinople, and sub
scribed by its Patriarch, as weU as the Patriarchs of
Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, in 1643, and again
ratified by a Synod at Jerusalem in 1672 ; and GennadU
Confessio, 'OfiiXia irepl tjj? opO'fj'; Kal aXrj0ov<; TrtcrTeo)?
tSiv Xpia-Tiavwv, which was prepared for the Sultan
Mohammed IL, after the capture of Constantinople by
the Turks, A.D. 1453. The Longer Catechism, of 1839,
has the approval of " the most holy governing Synod ; "
and a few other minor authorities may be consulted.-'
The disruption of Western Christendom which took
1 They are enumerated in Winer's "Comparative DarsteUung des
Lehrbegriffs der verschiedenen christlichen Kirchenpartheien, nebst
voUstandigen Belegen aus den symbolisohen Schriften derselben in der
Ursprache." Leipzig, 1824; 2d ed. 1837; 3d, by Preuss, 1866; 4th,
by Dr. Paul Ewald, 1882. See also Dr. Schaff's "History of the
Creeds of Christendom."

.SEOT. IV.] SYMBOLICS. 151
place at the Eeformation compelled the Eoman Church
to define its position anew in relation to the tenets of
Protestantism. It did so in the Council of Trent (a.d.
1545-1563), and the Canones et Decreta ConcUU Triden-
tini are stUl the standard of Eoman CathoUc theology,
though we must now add to these the definitions of the
Vatican CouncU of 1870 and statements of doctrine
issued with the requisite Papal authority. The Pro-
fessio fidei Tridentinae of 1564 and the Catechismus
Eomanus published in 1566 Ukewise received Papal
sanction ; but the authority of the latter has been some
times disputed by CathoUc theologians. The Eeformers
were forced at a still earlier time to draw up a pubUc
declaration of their belief Among the followers of
Luther this task was entrusted to Melanchthon, and
the Augsburg Confession and Apology (a.d. 1530) be
came the accepted Symbols of the Lutheran Church.
At a later time the Articles of Schmalkald (1537) and
the Formula of Concord (1577-9) were added. Luther's
Larger and SmaUer Catechisms (1529) also have dog
matic authority. These various creeds, together with
the Ecumenical Symbols, were incorporated in the
Concordienbuch, which was published in German at
Dresden in 1580, and became, as Hase says,-' the Magna
Charta of German Lutheranism. The Eeformed or
Calvinistic Church never succeeded in attaining the
same unity as the Lutheran ; and it has consequently
no Symbol of universal obUgation. Instead of this it
^ "Kirchengeschiohte," Sec. 343.

152 ECCLESLiSTICAL HISTOEY. [part III.
presents a large number of Confessions, which never
enjoyed more than a local authority. It wUl be sufficient
here to indicate their variety by naming the more im
portant. The earliest are the Confessio Tetrapolitana
(agreed upon by the Eeformers of Strasburg, Constance,
Memmingen, and Lindau), and ZwingU's Fidei Eatio,
presented to the Diet at Augsburg in 1530. These
were succeeded by the Confessio BasUeensis (1534),
Confessio Helvetica I. (1536) and IL (1566), Con
fessio Gallicana (1559), Confessio Belgica (1562, re-
¦rised and ratified by the Synod of Dort, 1619), the
Catechismus Heidelbergensis (1563, translated into many
languages, and sanctioned by the Synod of Dort in
1619), and finally the decisions of the Synod of Dort
on the five points of doctrine which were the subject of
controversy between the Calvinists and Arminians oi
Eemonstrants. In our own country the fullest expres
sion of Calvinistic theology is given in the Westminster
Confession, drawn up by the Assembly of Divines which
was summoned by ParUament to meet at Westminster,
and held its first session in December 1643. The Con
fession was approved by the General Assembly of the
Church of Scotland in 1647, and ratified by Acts of
Parliament in 1649 and 1690. The Larger and Shorter
Catechisms, prepared under the same auspices, have
likewise symbolical authority, ha-ring been approved by
the General Assembly in 1648. The theology of the
Church of England, as expressed in the Thirty-nine
Articles (ratified in 1571), belongs essentially to the

SECT. IV.] SYMBOLICS. 153
same school though it is less rigorously defined. We
need not dweU upon the minor or later sects, some of
which do not even possess a Symbol but leave thefr
theology to be gathered from more or less representative
-writings. Enough has been said to show in a general
way how symboUcal Uterature has arisen, and how rich
and varied is the material which awaits us in this de
partment of study.
The purpose of Symbolics is to bring together aU the
needful information respecting the origin and contents
of the Symbols recognised by the various parties in the
Christian Church. The study arose in the first instance
out of a twofold necessity. On the one hand, an his
torical introduction to the Symbols and an exposition of
their contents were required by those who acknow
ledged thefr authority; and, on the other hand, they
had to be defended against the assaults of those who
professed a different creed, and taken as a starting-point
for conducting an attack upon the enemy's territory.
In a scientific theology the polemical spirit must yield
to the historical and sympathetic, and confessions of
faith from which we most dissent must be treated with
justice, and the underlying principles which made them
acceptable to thoughtful and reUgious men must be
exhibited in thefr most favourable Ught, and thefr defects
criticised with candour and gentleness.
Our subject faUs into four divisions. Ffrst must
come an historical introduction, giving an account of the
origin of the different Symbols and of their acceptance

154 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY. [PART III.
by the Church or any of its sects. The second division
is exegetical dealing with the text of the Symbols, and
accompanying it with a commentary to explain and
Ulustrate it. The order in which this work is conducted
may be decided partly on chronological grounds, and
partly by the relative importance ofthe several Churches
and Symbols. We next proceed to the systematic
portion of our task, which, when any Church has a
pluraUty of Symbols, combines these into one theological
system. And lastly, we treat the subject comparatively,
and draw forth into distinct expression the points of
agreement and difference between the various parties,
both in thefr comprehensive principles and in their
separate dogmas. We thus obtain a complete -riew of
the established and authoritative theology of Christen
dom. But we must remember that this view is strictly
historical. The Symbols could not stop for ever the
progress of human thought, and in scarcely any Church,
if even in one, is the spiritual complexion of men's minds
precisely what it was in the age when its dogmas were
formulated ; so that to know the living theology in the
midst of which we dweU we must repafr to other sources
of information than those venerable and partly worn-
out creeds to which the Churches still professedly
adhere. (&.) Patristics. — The name of Fathers {patres ecclesice)
has been given to those men who, in the earUer ages of
the Church, had the most conspicuous influence on its
development, and whose writings contributed most to

SEOT. IV.] PATEISTICS. 155
the estabUshment of the ecclesiastical system of doc
trine. Those who were beUeved to have been associated
with the Apostles, namely Barnabas, Clemens Eomanus,
Hermas, Ignatius, Polycarp, and Papias, are distinguished
as Apostolical Fathers. The honourable title of Fathers
is confined by the Church to writers of unimpeachable
orthodoxy, whUe men, Uke the noble Origen, who ren
dered the greatest services to Christianity, but were
suspected of heterodox opinions, receive the lower name
of Scriptores ecclesiastici. The testimony of the earUest
writers is necessarUy of great value in an inquiry into
the primitive forms of Christian beUef, and the men
who at a later time secured the triumph of the accepted
dogmas are naturaUy looked up to as the spokesmen of
the Church itself, so that it is not wonderful that a
dogmatic authority came to be attached to the consensus
patrum. This cfrcumstance ine-ritably led to a diver
gence of opinion between CathoUcs and Protestants as
to the limits of the patristic period. The CathoUc theo
logians bring it down to the thirteenth century, though
they distinguish the scholastic writers by the inferior,
if stUl exalted, name of Doctores ecclesiae. The Pro
testants, who rejected the mediaeval development of
theology as Papal corruption, stopped short with Gregory
the Great at the close of the sixth century. To the
freer thought of a later time, however, both these Umita-
tions appear equally arbitrary. There is no reason why
we should ascribe authority to a writer in the sixth or
the thfrteenth century, and refuse it to a writer of equal

156 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY. [part III.
devoutness and ability in the seventh or the fourteenth ;
and the study which has become famiUar under the
name of Patristics extends itself, when logically con
ceived, so as to embrace the leading theological thinkers
of every age. Whether we accept this enlarged range
or prefer either of the narrower limits, the object of our
inquiry, in regard to particular authors, remains the
same : we wish to become acquainted with the minds
which have forged the successive links in the vast chain
of Christian thought, to survey them in their indivi
duality, to watch the stages of their growth, to learn the
characteristics of their influence, the Uterary flavour of
their -writings, and the distinguishing features of their
system of beUef The preponderance might be given to
any of these various sides of our subject, and the interest
made to centre in biography (a treatment which is
sometimes distinguished as Patrology) or in literature,
as weU as in thought ; but the last, if worthUy handled,
receives most valuable Ught from the others, and dis
plays theological ideas in the process of formation amid
the ardours of religious sensibiUty and experience, and
as -wrung from the inmost Ufe of original and powerful
minds. We find here the chief attraction of this study ;
and it is for this reason that we class it under the
history of doctrines, to whose colder and more abstract
page it imparts the glow of human passion and as
piration. 4. History of Morals. — Christianity, as a principle of

SEOT. IT.] HISTOEY OF MORALS. 157
spiritual Ufe, necessarUy constructed a code of morals
founded upon reUgious conceptions. Whenever it took
possession of a soul, it asked not only for newness of
beUef, but for a change in the outward habits; and
when it was embraced by communities and nations, its
ethical force found expression in customs and in laws.
These facts constitute the basis of a history of Christian
morals, of which it is consequently the object to exhibit
the ethical influence of Christianity in the various
phases of human life.
In the accomplishment of this object there is a source
of difficulty and error which requfres vigUance and dis
cernment on the part ofthe historian. It is not sufficieift
to describe the morals of Christendom, but we must
always discriminate the Christian from the non-Christian
element. We know that at the present day multitudes
of professing Christians never attempt to make the law
of Christ the standard of thefr lives, and never think of
obeying it when it transcends the worldly average. We
know, too, how men who are sincere and earnest in
their profession are often bUnded by prejudice and habit,
and extort from the pages of the New Testament a
sanction for practices which are opposed to the whole
spfrit of the Gospel. And so it has always been. The
ideal morals of Christianity were thrown as leaven into
the dull mass of human selfishness and passion, and
were oppressed by the -n'eight of inherited habits, and
by national manners and laws which had the support
of immemorial usage ; and what we want to trace is the

158 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY. [part ill.
influence of Christianity, not only in fotmding new
institutions, but in modifying and bringing into nearer
conformity with its own ideal the ancient practices of
mankind. To take an example: Christianity is not
responsible for the existence of war, for this has existed
all over the world from pre-Christian times; but the
presence of loving women in the military hospital, the
more humane treatment of prisoners, the growing respect
for private property, the comparative safety of women
and children in the neighbourhood of a hostUe army,
and other improvements by which the barbarity of war
is molUfied, may be fairly ascribed to that great sacrifice
of love which is the type of aU genuine Christian ethics.
So, again, Christianity was not the inventor of slavery ;
and whatever may have been the prevaUing action of
the Church, we recognise the real spirit of the reUgion,
not in riveting the manacles of the slave, but in opening
men's eyes from stupor, and casting off at length this
deadly incubus. Thus the history of Christian morals
has a twofold task : it must first deUneate the moral
condition of Christendom, and then it must distinguish
the share which justly belongs to Christianity as one of
the many infiuences by which this condition was pro
duced. In pursuing this subject we may conveniently adopt
the same division into periods as in ecclesiastical his
tory ; for ethical epochs naturaUy coincide with those
which affect the general Ufe of the Church. In each
division we should consider first the prevalent ethical

SEOT. IV.] HISTOEY OF LITEEATUEE. 159
colouring of the period, and the conditions under which
Christian moraUty had to display itself Proceeding
thence to details, we may notice, first, the influence of
Christianity on individual character, in regard, for in
stance, to purity, temperance, self-denial, courage, gen
tleness, truthfulness. We may then take up social
ethics, and deal with such topics as marriage and
family Ufe, education, social intercourse, public amuse
ments, trade and manufactures, government and legis
lation. We must, lastly, take a wider outlook over
international relations, war, treaties, commerce. There
is here a vast field for interesting and fruitful inqufry,
an inquiry which would present to us with a new
vividness the secret springs of Christian life, and the
tendencies in human nature which resist its ameliorat
ing power.
5. History of Literature. — When Christianity first
sought for Uterary expression in the classical languages
of Greece and Eome, these languages had already
passed the flower of their age, and even reUgious en
thusiasm could not restore thefr vitaUty, and make
them speak once more in their lost purity and grace.
Indeed, the new reUgion, by the very energy of its
creative force, requfring fresh terms or using old terms
in unaccustomed meanings, rather tended to corrupt
them ; and for a long period men were too intent upon
the thought itself to care much for the perfection of its
form. Hence for many centuries Christianity produced

160 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY. [part HI.
no work which has Uved by the mere power of its liter
ary merit. StUl, even whUe Greek and Latin continued
to be its principal vehicles of expression, it created
many new kinds of Uterature, not only the unique
writings of the New Testament and at a later time
thefr spurious counterparts, but apologies and contro
versial works, expositions of the Christian faith, and
commentaries on the Scriptures, sermons, hymns, acts
of martyrs, lives of the saints. History and poetry also
claimed attention, though they had to wait long before
they could take their place beside the immortal pro
ductions of ancient genius. But at last Latin died
away, to rise in the young vigour of new-bom lan
guages, and the Teutonic dialects became conscious of
thefr old and native strength. The adoption of the
vernacular speech for the embodiment of reUgious ideas
and emotions affected the whole future of Western
Christendom, and enabled Christianity at last to clothe
its lofty conceptions in the finest literary forms. In
this process the translations of the Scriptures into
modern languages had no unimportant share. This
brief statement wUl show that there is room for a his
tory of Christian literature as distinguished from a
general history of the literature of Christendom, and
that without it we must faU to appreciate one of the
most interesting aspects of Christianity. This history
must not only describe with critical art the representa
tives of the various kinds of Uterature which come
under its view, but it must estimate the influence of

SEOT. IV.] HISTOEY OF AET. 161
Christianity in determining their literary quality ; and
in regard to the immense stores of Uterature which, in
the later centuries, lie outside its range, it must con
sider whether the Christian spirit has not exercised an
indirect influence, and imposed rules even where it has
not furnished the inspiration.
In the arrangement of our materials we may as well
foUow the periods of ecclesiastical history, except that
in the Middle Ages we must substitute Dante (1265-
1321) for Innocent IIL; for the "Divina Commedia,"
which appeared after his death, marks a literary epoch,
not only on account of the grandeur of its poetry, but
because it is the first supreme work in a modern lan
guage. Under each period we must dispose the various
kinds of literature in the order of their importance,
giving the preference to those which are most charac
teristic, religiously considered, of the times in which
they were produced.
6. History of Art, — In art, as in Uterature, Chris
tianity stepped into the inheritance of a decaying
civUisation, and for a long period could aim at nothing
more original than the adaptations of ancient models to
her own purposes. The necessity for a separate buUd
ing in which to celebrate the public offices of religion
must have been soon felt ; and as Christianity extended
her empire, churches and cathedrals arose in every part
of Europe, and became the most conspicuous monu
ments of her artistic skiU. It was in connection with
M

162 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY. [part HI.
the sacred edifices, where all the devotion of the people
found its congenial home, that the other arts — sculpture,
painting, and music — were, at least in the early and
middle ages, most sedulously cultivated, so that, though
there is no precise coincidence in the advances made by
the several arts, we may select architecture to define
by its changes the periods into which our history must
be divided. These are entirely different from any
which we have hitherto adopted, and not always cap
able of very exact boundaries. Ffrst comes the Eoman
period, in which the oblong form of the Basilica, or in
the case of sepulchres and memorial churches the cir
cular form of the Eoman tomb, was adopted as the
model. This lasted tiU the reign of Justinian (accession
527, death 565). The magnificent church of St. Sophia,
built in the earlier part of this reign, and restored after
injury by an earthquake towards its close, inaugurated
the Byzantine architecture, distinguished by its ap
proach to the square or octagonal shape and its central
dome. This became the type of Oriental churches, and
was not without influence in the West. About the
same time Eoman architecture began to experience that
modification of style which is known as Eomanesque,
distinguished by the abundant use of the arch, for the
purposes not only of support but of ornament. The
Eomanesque, with its principal branches, Lombard and
Norman, prevaUed untU Christianity created for itself a
new style, and in the latter part of the twelfth century
Gothic architecture, with its endless appUcation of the

SECT. IV.] STATISTICS. 163
pointed arch, sprang into a sudden grandeur. The im
pulse which induced the architects to cast off the tram
mels of ancient tradition affected in the next century
the painters of Italy ; and, if we except the remarkable
developments of music in more recent times, we must
regard this great awakening of independent genius as
the last epoch in the history of Christian art.
Such, then, are the various phases of the Christian
life which the historian of the Church has to describe.
We have stUl to notice one other subject, which is not
so much a department of ecclesiastical history as an
appendix. It is that which is known under the name
of Statistics. Ecclesiastical Statistics. — This branch of theological
study was introduced by Schleiermacher,-' and has for
its object to describe the present condition of Christen
dom. Its method may, indeed, be applied at any point
in the history of the Church, and it is useful for the
historian to furnish, in connection with the several
epochs, a rSsumd of ecclesiastical affairs, so as to render
succeeding events more easily intelUgible ; but its aim
is to give the student a knowledge of his own time, and
thereby place him in a better position for dealing with
the questions of practical theology. In the present
divided state of Christendom it must take up the
various churches and sects one by one, as has already
' See Eabiger, p. 443.

164 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY. [PART HI.
been done in SymboUcs. This division into so many
antagonistic parties is itself a fundamental fact of large
significance, and one which ought to be brought out
into clear light in connection with the characteristics of
different countries and races, and with the dominant
spirit of ecclesiastical government. In regard to each
Church, information must be given on such points as its
geographical extension and the numbers of its adher
ents; its constitution, and relation to the State; the
education, social position, and power of its clergy or
ministers, and the obUgations which rest upon them ;
the mode of worship ; the general condition of morals
and culture ; missionary activity at home and abroad.
After this detaUed survey a picture must be drawn of
Christendom as a whole. The various parts of the world
where Christianity is to be found must be enumerated,
and Christian nations compared with the non- Christian.
Those features of the religion which acknowledge no
sectarian limits must be selected for notice, and con
trasted tendencies of thought or of sentiment whieh
appear -within the confines of the same Church, and
require another mode of classification than that fur
nished by the creeds, must be observed, and their
relative force at the present time carefuUy estimated.
Through such a study, coming as the close of aU our
historical pursuits, we shall know the Christendom in
which our lot is cast, and be the better prepared to
take up the duties which devolve on the theologian
as a teacher of men.

SECT, v.] SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. 165
Section V.
Systematic Theology.
We have now completed our historical inquiries, and
surveyed the action of the reUgious principle — first as
manifested in the various reUgions of mankind, and
then, with greater detail, in the forms of Jewish and
Christian faith. Before entering upon this subject we
satisfied ourselves that there is an eternal Eeality upon
whom the veneration of men may fitly rest, and that
therefore beneath aU the varieties of religion there is an
underlying truth which they endeavour to express. We
had not, however, proceeded far upon our way before we
became aware that the representations of this truth were
not always accordant, and the worship which at first
seemed to arise universaUy from the human heart, and
to be the pledge of continual advancement towards an
ideal goal, was disturbed by the fierce din of controversy,
and often served chiefly to add intensity to brutal and
unholy passions. Hence it is evident that most reU
gions have a large commingUng of error, and that we
must subject both the beUef and the practice of religion
to a thorough investigation before we can acquiesce
in any of the forms which it has hitherto assumed.
Towards this procedure, at once critical and construc
tive, aU our previous studies have been leading us ; and
our next attempt must be to frame a theory of religious

166 SYSTEMATIC theology. [part hi.
faith and practice which wiU at the same time express
the highest spiritual experiences of our race and satisfy
the intellectual and scientific demands of the present
day. This is the task of Systematic Theology.
The object, then, of the present branch of theology
may, I conceive, be thus defined : it is to ascertain reli
gious truth, and present it in a properly arranged and
harmonious system, rationally estabUshed as a whole
and in its parts.
As this definition differs from that which is usually
given, a few words must be said in its explanation and
defence. It is generally assumed that the doctrines of
Systematic Theology have not to be ascertained, but are
already given, substantiaUy, if not formaUy, in the
Christian religion, and that nothing remains but to
draw forth the contents of the Church's faith, clothe
them with precision of statement, and frame them into
a logically articulated system. Thus Hagenbach defines
our present study as the methodical and connected
exposition of Christian doctrine.^ Some would even
restrict it to the dogmas of the particular Church to
which the theologian may happen to belong, whUe
those who take the broadest view admit only such
modffications of sectarian dogmas as may arise from an
outlook over the entire field of Christian faith. Now
this is a Umitation which, as it seems to me, is not in
volved in the nature of the subject itself, and which we
^ " Die wissenschaftliohe zusammenhangende DarsteUung der
christlichen Lehre," Sec. 79.

sect, v.] EELATION TO HISTOEICAL THEOLOGY. 167
have therefore no right to assume at starting. What
we want is the possession of reUgious truth, a strong
mental grasp of realities, on which we can trustfully
rest, and which we can loyaUy accept as the guide of
our lives ; and it is only on the presumption that the
dogmas of our sect represent such reaUties that we can
adopt them as the basis of our system. If we do not
beUeve them, the whole process becomes an empty
logical game, in which we trick out with spurious
garments of truth the exploded ideas of the past. If
we do believe them, we value them on account of their
truth, and it is only as a statement of truth that we
ought to be anxious to set forth our theological code.
It is apparent, then, that our ultimate aim is reUgious
truth; and even if in the course of our inquiry we
should be con-rinced that our inherited dogmas and
religious truth absolutely coincide, if with the CathoUc
we should be satisfied that what the Church has once
pronounced is Divine and infalUble, yet we must not
lay do-wn as a basis that which has to be established by
argument. To do so can only leave upon the impartial
mind a feeling of unreaUty, and a haunting fear that
the foundations of the seemingly Di-vine temple will
not bear to be examined.
The above determination of our object at once broadly
distinguishes Systematic from Historical Theology.
This distinction is not so clearly exhibited by the more
generaUy received definition. If it be our object to
set forth Christian doctrine, the words in themselves

168 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. [part hi.
suggest nothing but an historical problem ; and even if,
as I believe, a true theology will be also a Christian
theology, the word Christian does not imply this coin
cidence, and it brings to mind rather the current of
world-wide events and developments than the present
relations of exact thought. It is not as Christian, but
as true, that the doctrines of Systematic Theology
demand our attention. It was from a faUure to observe
this distinction, that Eothe (foUowing Schleiermacher)
was led to classify Systematic, or, as he preferred to
caU it, " Positive " Theology, under the head of historical
studies. He was supported in this view by the etymo
logical meaning of Dogmatics, a word which properly
denotes the science of dogmas — ^that is, of ecclesiastically
authorised propositions. The object of the science,
accordingly, is, he contends, one which has an historical
origin and is empiricaUy prescribed, and can therefore
be treated only under the historical division of theology.^
Those who feel that this is unsatisfactory, and that
there is really something which widely separates the
historical from the systematic studies, appear to me to
be perfectly correct in thefr instinctive thought ; but I
do not see how they can escape from the logical force
of Eothe's argument so long as they Umit the scope
of their doctrinal investigations by a narrow definition.
As soon, however, as we aim simply at the estabUsh
ment of a true system of doctrine, whether that system
1 " Theologische Ethik," 2d ed. 1869, 'p. 62; " Theolog. Encyclop. '¦
p. 100 sq.

SEOT. v.] EELATION TO HISTOEICAL THEOLOGY. 169
should ultimately coincide or not with the dogmas of
any particular Church, we quit the historical ground
just as certainly as when we pass from the history of
any physical science to the examination of its subject
matter. In both instances history wUl supply us with
information, and many a truth wUl be associated with
some distinguished name ; but our object nevertheless
wiU be, not to bind into organic unity the isolated parts
of some complex historical phenomenon, but to ascertain
and exhibit in thefr rational connection the real facts
of the universe.
The weakness of Eothe's position is conspicuous in
the distinction which he draws between Dogmatics and
SymboUcs, which he co-ordinates as two of the inde
pendent branches of Positive Theology : in Dogmatics
you set forth the dogmas of your own Church ; in
SymboUcs or Comparative Dogmatics, you compare with
these the dogmas of other Churches. This is a perfectly
arbitrary distinction, and has no existence in the eye' of
abstract thought. It assumes that aU the theological
truth which is worth knowing is deposited in the
historical formulae of some particular Church, and does
not even propose, as the initial stage of the science, to
discover this true Church by a genuine process of
inquiry, but deliberately leaves its selection to the
accidents of birth and education. If you happen to
belong to the wrong Church, you will have little chance
of ever deserting it ; for most men find their own type
of piety essentially represented by the Church which

170 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. [part hi.
has shaped and nurtured that piety, and thus the very
prejudices which the Church itself has fostered become
the criteria of its truth. Nor does Eothe escape from
this strange position by placing SpeciUative Theology in
the forefront of his entire system ; for, though he per
ceives that Speculative Theology must start from the
individual reUgious consciousness, yet he contends that
it necessarily presupposes an individual consciousness in
which the common religious consciousness of the Church
for the time being is definitely reflected, so that it
finaUy results in agreement with the general conviction
of the religious society to which it belongs.^ The fact
that the process of thought actuaUy follows for the most
part the line which is here laid doven does not justify
it as a theory of theological procedure ; for it is the
aim of science, not to intensify, but to discharge our
misleading subjective impressions, and to conduct us
towards objective truth. If theology can do nothing
to rectify the partialities of our thought and experience,
but can only cast the glamour of a spurious science
over the creed which we chance to have inherited,
it hardly deserves the attention of serious and truth-
loving men.
This defective mode of classification, then, which is
worked out by Eothe with such marked abiUty and
consistency, appears to me, though it is not generaUy
accepted, to flow consequentiaUy from the definition of
Systematic Theology which is usuaUy given. The form
1 "TheoL Eneyc." pp. 22-23.

SEOT. v.] IMPOETANCE OF ITS DEFINITION. 171
of the definition might seem to be a matter of merely
verbal importance ; but it reaUy affects the whole spirit
and method of our inquiry. If it be our avowed and
deUberate aim to produce an orderly exposition of
Christian doctrine, whether in a broader or a narrower
sense, we shaU be biassed throughout our entire course,
and shaU be swayed by Biblical or ecclesiastical formulae
before these have estabUshed either the right or the
manner of their control ; and the probabUity is that,
thus placing ourselves under an authority accepted
prior to investigation, we shall be timid in our search,
and, faUing to apprehend the loftiness and breadth of
our declared aim, we shaU fall far below the universaUty
and fulness of the Christian spirit, and represent only
one of its partial and distorted manifestations. In any
case the outside world can never accept our statements
as the pure result of independent thought. On the
other hand, if our only aim be truth, the highest word
which history or mankind around us or the Spirit in
our own souls has to say to us wUl be open to our ex
amination and acceptance ; we shaU bring to our task
hearts which are ever waiting for something larger,
deeper, hoUer, than they have yet attained, and intel
lects which with chaste severity and calm critical
power will decide according to the real weight of
evidence; and if, as a result of our labours, we embrace
a spiritual Christianity which, whUe moulding the
highest Ufe of man, is itself plastic to the changing
forms of an advancing culture, we shaU not address it

172 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. [part HI.
to an unheeding world, for that which, however old, is
freshly born out of the struggles of a soul with single
eye and love too deep and rich for party limits, wiU
never cease to fascinate.
The objection may be made that in this way each
thinker is thrown back solely upon his own resources,
which can never be so fuU and trustworthy as the
authorised manifesto of a Church. But unless we lay
down the doctrine that every one is to beUeve for ever
the dogmas of the sect in which he was born — a doctrine
which would be tantamount to a total despair of theo
logical truth — ^we must acquiesce in this apparent dis
advantage, and at least in the initial stage of our
inquiry rely upon our own judgment alone. Even if
there be some infallible standard of theology, yet we
can accept this standard only by an act of purely
personal conviction, and the momentoue step by which
we silence for ever the voice of our individual judgment
in questions henceforth admitted to Ue beyond its
jurisdiction must itself be taken solely in deference to
a prior decision of the individual judgment. But if,
with most Protestants, we conclude that the formulae
of beUef are not infaUible, we cannot rationaUy suspend
the free exercise of our private judgment, but are
bound to apply it to every question as it comes before
us. Nor wiU this course land us ultimately in the
mere vagaries of individual incompetence. Wherever
liberty prevaUs, incompetence wUl very probably make
a few noisy demonstrations ; but here, as elsewhere,

SECT, v.] PLACE OF PEIVATE JUDGMENT. 173
when it loses the artificial importance which it derives
from attempts to suppress it, it wiU soon be measured
and dismissed. On the other hand, men with the
requisite powers of spirit and of thought would exercise
their legitimate influence, and place theology in its
just relation to the ever changing needs and attain
ments of society. The individual mind is not neces
sarily below the level of sectarian faith. The invisible
and ideal Church of God is indeed larger than any
man; but parties are apt to contract the sympathies,
to bias the understanding, and to clip the wings of
aspiration. Every wise man, when he starts upon his
solitary track, wiU gather to himself an unseen com
munion of saints, and nourish his soul with mighty
thoughts and devout meditations and prayers, which
have been breathed from holy Ups ; yet, with humblest
reverence, he wUl seek within him the verdict of the
spirit and of reason, for it is there that God speaks to-
him his nearest word, and he dare not be guUty of high
treason against the majesty of these supreme gifts to
man. Thus, although upon a higher plain. Systematic
Theology stands upon essentiaUy the same basis of in
dividual judgment as all other sciences. Its votary
gratefuUy bows before minds more competent than his
own, and freely appropriates truths which are part of
the world's inheritance ; and yet he regards the whole
subject as theoreticaUy open to revision, and applies to
each doctrine the ripest judgment and the largest know
ledge at his command. The future must declare whether-

174 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. [part HI.
the converging thoughts of independent minds wiU
ultimately lead to a grander consensus than the old
methods of authority and repression, which have resulted
chiefly in animosity and schism.
Is Systematic Theology, then, merely a scheme of
speculative phUosophy? The -riew which we have
taken undoubtedly admits the possibiUty of this ; but
it does not necessitate it. The statement in our deflni-
tion, that the system must be rationally estabUshed as
a whole and in its parts, does not imply that reason is
everywhere the sole and immediate source of religious
conviction, but only that the use of every source which
is adopted must be rationaUy justified ; and that each
doctrine, from whatever source it is derived, and how
ever it may in itself transcend the unaided powers of
the human mind, must be proved to rest in the last
resort upon something which can be rationaUy accepted,
and must be brought into its due relation with the
results of experience and the laws of reason. In other
words, Systematic Theology is throughout an exercise of
thought upon the subjects of faith. But whether it be
simply a scheme of speculative philosophy must depend
upon the attitude assumed by each thinker. It wiU be
so for every one who supposes that there is no ground
for religious belief except in the speculative reason ; but
it will not be so for the much larger number who find
the main sources of religious beUef elsewhere. If any
one is convinced that there is an infalUble dogmatic
standard, which has sprung, not from reason, but from

SECT, v.] EELATION TO SPECULATIVE PHILOSOPHY. 175
divine inspiration, his process of proof wiU be completed
as soon as he has estabUshed the reality of the standard.
His proof, if partly phUosophical wiU be partly his
torical ; and thenceforth he will abandon the path of
speculation, except so far as he may find it necessary to
rebut phUosophical objections, and to show the con
sistency of dogmas with one another and with knowledge
derived from other sources. Again, some thinker may
hold that in the human mind itself the ground of
reUgious faith lies, at least in part, outside of the
speculative reason, and is found in a spiritual element
which belongs to our being as essentiaUy as reason
itself If so, he must phUosophicaUy justify this
position, and endeavour to ascertain the laws of the
reUgious spfrit; but having done so, he wUl interpret
the reUgious consciousness as developed and illuminated
by the experience of mankind, and thus bring in history
to control and guide the course of speculation. This
wUl be the case to a yet larger extent if he believes
that a revelation in any special sense, even though not
dogmaticaUy infaUible, has been given, for instance that
the eternal Ught has shone forth with unexampled
splendour in Christ, so that his spfrit is a criterion of
spfritual truth. Systematic Theology wiU then, whUe
keeping its eyes open to all past and present facts, be
chiefly occupied with the exposition and justification of
an historical religion, and, using dogmas not as fetters,
but as clues, search the deep things of God through the
illuminating medium of a spirit whose richness and

176 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. [PART lU.
beauty theology has never yet exhausted. Which of
these several dfrections shaU be taken must be decided,
not by accidental preference, but by serious inquiry.
These remarks suggest the proper division for our
subject. We must inquire first into the sources of
theological doctrine, and then proceed, in the second
place, to construct our doctrinal system. The latter
faUs naturally into two branches. In the first. Doctrinal
Theology or Dogmatics, we endeavour to present a scheme
of religious truth ; in the second. Theological Ethics, we
build up a moral scheme on the basis of the truth
estabUshed under the previous head. These, although
they admit to a considerable extent of separate treat
ment, must be regarded as three successive parts of one
coherent subject, for each succeeding step is absolutely
dependent on that which has gone before. On each of
them we shall presently make the necessary remarks ;
but meanwhUe we must point out that this division is
exhaustive. Apologetics, Polemics, and Efrenics are
indeed included under our present subject ; but instead
of forming distinct stages in its progress they are only
parts which may be found under every heading, but
which for convenience are detached, and grouped under
common names. Thus Apologetics, in the widest sense,
embraces every argument in support of the system, and
consequently runs through the whole discussion. It is,
however, generally limited to the defence of the divine
origin and authority of Christianity, and in this aspect
its topics would be considered principally under our first

SECT, v.] DIVISION OF THE SUBJECT. 177
division, the sources of doctrine. Polemics is the
name given to the attack on what we conceive to
be erroneous dogmas. This must obviously distribute
itself along the whole Une of our investigation; for in
constructing any doctrine we shall naturaUy put it
into stronger reUef by criticising the more important
"riews with which it may be brought into comparison.
It is as weU, however, to dismiss names which are sug
gestive of party warfare. We must indeed give reasons
for the faith that is in us ; but an apologetic or polemical
interest is not favourable to the calm investigation of
truth, and is apt to display the wrath of man rather
than the righteousness of God. Efrenics comes with
more benign aspect, and seeks to promote peace by
pointing td a deeper unity amid the discordant cries of
the theologians ; but it does not so much constitute a
distinct branch of theological science as mark that
largeness of sympathy and spfritual penetration which
ought to characterise every reUgious inquiry.
Eabiger, Uke ourselves, adopts a threefold division
of the subject. The second and thfrd are the same as
those laid down above, but for the first he prefers " the
theory of religion." Theology, he says, has to answer
the question whether the historical phenomenon of re
Ugion is merely accidental, whether reUgion is perhaps
only a dark shadow that fell upon the life of nations,
and must vanish with better illumination, and is conse
quently a mere transient manifestation, or a necessary
element in the historical life of mankind. This question
N

178 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. [part HI.
must be answered by the theory of religion, which has
to point out, first, the essence of reUgion, and secondly,
its historical development.^ This is perfectly true, and
no theological system can afford to neglect the important
question which is here raised ; but it wiU be found that it
is included under our first head, except so far as it has been
afready treated in connection vrith Comparative EeUgion.
We may now proceed to make the necessary observa
tions on the three leading divisions of Systematic Theology.
1. Sources of Doctrine, — There are three sources which
we have to consider — the reUgious element in man, the
Bible, and the Church. It is not meant that these are
necessarUy co-ordinate or equal, or that every inqufrer
wiU recognise them aU; but aU must be taken into
consideration in order that their Umits and mutual
relations may be justly determined.
(a.) The Religious Element in Man. — ^Whether or not
we ultimately adopt some other source as supreme, it
seems clear that we must first of aU reckon with the
reUgious constitution of the human mind itseK. Ee
Ugion is, speaking generaUy, a world-wide phenomenon,
and must therefore have grown up quite independently
of any particular external authority which may now
claim to control it. This phenomenon, if we may
interpret it through our own consciousness, is the ex
pression of some profound fact within the nature of
man. Again, if we observe the present manifestations
1 Pp. 454-5.

SEOT. v.] SOUECES OF DOCTEINE. 179
of the reUgious element, we are driven to the conclusion
that it is not uniform, but assumes different types in
different individuals ; for not only do we notice varying
tones of piety, but we perceive that men -with equal
opportunities of culture, with precisely the same argu
ments before them, and with equal love of truth, entertain
the most conflicting opinions, and that in each instance
the doctrinal system has a certain conespondence with
the complexion of the spfritual character. There appears,
then, to be a force in man which impels him to religious
beUef, and which enters as a factor into the formation
of every theological system. This force ought not to be
left to work Uke a bUnd giant, of unknown origin and
doubtful methods, but taken under the guidance of
reflection and observation, and compeUed to deliver up
its secrets. We must endeavour to determine whether
it is an essential part df human nature, and, if so, what
is the significance of this fact ; whether it points to any
ulterior truths, or fairly satisfies our curiosity when we
have surveyed it as a mere subjective phenomenon. If
we think that it legitimately carries us beyond itself,
and contains intimations of spiritual truths which may
be expressed as doctrines, we must then examine its
nature more closely, attempt to classify its varieties and
set forth its laws, and search for a method by which its
interior witness may be made to speak in the fullest
harmony of tones and to deUver its most catholic mes
sage. An examination of this kind wiU either clear out
of our way the false pretentions of a discredited faculty

180 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. [part hi.
or furnish us with a source of light to guide us through
the tangled thicket of theological controversy, and with
an indispensable criterion by which to estimate the value
of other sources of doctrine, and to ascertain the relation
in which they ought to stand to the mind of the thinker.
(b.) The Bible, — It may seem to be a violation of that
attitude of scientific impartiality which we have en
deavoured to preserve to select the Bible from among
all the sacred books of the world. Eegarded merely
from an historical point of view, they aU occupy a some
what simUar position; and if our theologian were a
Mohammedan writing in Turkey, the Bible would be
replaced by the Koran. But we have afready seen
reasons which, apart from any particular dogmatic con
clusions, justify us in bestowing our chief attention
upon Christianity ; and, although the ihembers of other
reUgious persuasions would of course dissent from our
view, we may fafrly assume, as the result of our com
parative studies, that Christianity stands at the head of
the great historical religions, and holds before the world
in its Scriptures the loftiest incorporated ideal of faith
and practice. Those who in Christian countries reject
Christianity do not embrace any other of the ancient
religions, and those who deny authority to the Bible do
not accord it to the Vedas or Zendavesta. On the
other hand the most momentous claims are seriously
advanced on behaU of the Bible, and these we are bound
to estimate, and either accept or reject upon well-con
sidered grounds. This, I think, expresses the practical

SEOT. v.] SOUECES OF DOCTEINE. 181
necessities of the case. AU scientific exposition must
be based on the existing state of the science which is
under treatment, and on the personal belief of him who
expounds it; and this is done without prejudice to our
acceptance of its successive propositions solely on the
ground of the evidence by which they are sustained.
SimUarly, in proposing a framework for Systematic
Theology, we must have regard to the needs of students
in a Christian country, to the problems which are
actuaUy agitated around us, and to the beUef which we
already, not without investigation, entertain; but this
procedure does not commit us to the dogmas of any
particular sect, or place before us any aim but truth in
our examination of the several problems which are
brought under discussion.
What we have now to determine in regard to the
Bible is its position as a source of religious truth. We
naturally start with a consideration of the view which
has been most distinctly formulated, that the Bible is an
infalUble rule of faith and practice. If this be true, and
if we add, with many Protestant theologians, that it is
the only rule, our constructive work has been sub
stantially done afready in buUding up the theology of
the Old and New Testaments, and it only remains for
us to throw the various doctrines into a fresh grouping,
and indicate their relation to our modem knowledge.
But if we find that this dogma is untenable, the value
of the Bible as a mere external authority will be gone,
because it contains nothing within itself which, inde-

182 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. [part hi.
pendently of any faculty of discernment in our own
minds, guarantees the value of one part above another.
We must, in this case, inquire into the cause of its un
questioned spiritual power, and ascertain whether it
stands in any such relation to our faculties as to become
avaUable, directly or indfrectly, as a source of trust
worthy theological doctrine. If there be such a relation,
we must investigate its character, its limits, and its laws,
so that in our further progress we may exercise a wise
discrimination, and disengage the etemal word from its
temporary adjuncts.
(c.) The Church, — In regard to the Church a problem
presents itself very simUar to that which we have to
discuss in connection with the Bible. It is maintained
by an important section of Christendom that the dogmas
of the Church are guaranteed by a supernatural sanction,
and in our own time it has been laid down that the seat
of infaUibiUty is the Pope, when speaking under certain
defined conditions. This doctrine must be carefuUy
considered, for the most momentous consequences depend
on our decision. If we beUeve it to be true, we must
thenceforth renounce our private judgment, and work
under the control of CathoUc authority. Where the
Church has pronounced through its accredited organ we
may coUect the detached dogmas into a system, and
exhibit their mutual relations and thefr position in the
world of thought, but we may not question or modify
them; for their declarations contain our most certain
knowledge, and are expressed with the most absolute

SECT, v.] SOUECES OF DOCTEINE. 183
precision of form. But if we see reason to disbeUeve
this doctrine, it does not foUow that ever afterwards the
Church has nothing to say to us. We can admit the
faUibility of all human judgment and expression, even
when acting under the highest infiuences, without sup
posing that the long spiritual and inteUectual toU, which
has slowly piled up the grand fabric of dogma in the
Catholic and other Churches, was utterly futUe, and
reared only a temple of error upon the shifting sands of
delusion. Nothing can be more depressing than this
cynical estimate of human endeavour, and it is at least
as probable that the solemn decisions of Christendom
upon questions of faith and morals, even if they are
open to rerision under the growing experience of man
kind, yet shed an indispensable Ught upon eternal
reaUties without and the secrets of the heart within;
and he who paid no attention to them in the construc
tion of his theology would be Uke one who attempted
to work out a physical science de novo, without any
regard to the labours of his predecessors. If this
be the conclusion at which we arrive, we shaU have to
ascertain and describe the way in which the experi
ence of the Church may be utUised for spfritual Ulu-
mination and inteUectual guidance, whUe leaving the
mind free from the bonds of a merely external control
and the heart open to the highest inspirations of our time.
In laying down these three sources of doctrine, I
have not forgotten that the moral and inteUectual
faculties of man have also to be consulted ; but these

184 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. [part hi.
have been referred to under the head of phUosophy, and
it wiU be remembered that the reUgious element was
speciaUy reserved for treatment in the present connec
tion. In a treatise on Systematic Theology, completely
detached from our general plan of theological study,
some of the philosophical questions which we have
placed at the beginning of our inqufries would neces
sarUy come under review; but at present we assume
that the phUosophical courses have been afready mas
tered, and the inteUectual and moral intuitions duly
established and interpreted. We now pass on to our
second di-rision.
2. Doctrinal Theology, — The general principles to be
observed in the construction of a doctrinal system have
been sufficiently explained in speaking of Systematic
Theology as a whole. Our aim is reUgious truth, and
for this reason I prefer the name Doctrinal Theology to
Dogmatics, because the latter seems to imply that it is
our purpose to unfold the dogmas of some particular
Church. We profess to inqufre as free men, in the
enjoyment of that Uberty which is justly regarded as
indispensable in every other subject of human thought,
and to speak only that which after conscientious study
and reflection approves itself to our best judgment.
In laying out the subjects for discussion, however, it is
impossible not to be guided by our present beUef. It
is it alone that gives us any interest in the entire field
of research, which without some antecedent faith we

SECT, v.] DOCTRINAL THEOLOGY. 185
should view -with indifference or distaste ; it is it that
suggests the several topics, and assigns to them certain
relative proportions. If this is a defect, it is one which
theology shares, as we have said before, "with every
exposition of science : the present belief, whUe leaving
the future unpledged, disposes the materials, and is the
starting-point for further investigations. We must only
be careful to make the arrangement as flexible as cir
cumstances "wiU aUow, so as not to commit the student
beforehand to any sectarian view.
In the older treatises on this subject (foUowed by
some of more recent date) it was customary to adopt
what has been called the local or topical method of
arrangement. AU the dogmas being ready to hand,
it was only necessary to combine them in a corpus
dogmaticum, wherein each should occupy its appro
priate place (locus, totto?). For this purpose the
several articles of beUef (articuli fidei, apOpa t^?
irla-Teoi';) were distributed under certain heads (capita
or partes fidei), foUowing a kind of loose logical order,
but not always exhibiting very successfuUy the con
catenation of thought. The heads usually adopted
were four — Theology (in its narrower sense as the doctrine
of God), Anthropology, Soteriology, and Eschatology.
To these Dr. Hodge adds Ecclesiology, which, however,
may be included "with Christology under Soteriology,
where indeed he places the Word and the Sacraments.^
This order, though it affords a convenient framework
1 "Outlines of Theology," by Archibald Alex. Hodge, D.D., Pro-

186 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. [part iii.
for a system of doctrine, has been by no means in
variably adopted, especiaUy in modern times, when
there has been a growing desfre to trace the inner
connection of dogmas, and to group them in accordance
with a phUosophical conception of the spfritual prin
ciples from which they spring. Calvin, in his great
work, " The Institution of the Christian Eeligion," foUows
the clauses of the Apostles' Creed, and distributes his
material into four books, which treat respectively of
the knowledge of God the Creator ; of the knowledge
of God the Eedeemer in Christ, which was first dis
closed to the fathers under the Law, and then to us in
the Gospel ; of the manner of receiving the grace of
Christ, and what fruits came to us from thence, and
what effects foUow — that is, of God the Sanctifier, or the
effects of the Holy Spfrit; and lastly, of the external
means or aids by which God invites us into the
communion of Christ, and retains us in it — that is,
of the Holy CathoUc Church and the communion
of saints. This is substantially an arrangement
according to the persons of the Trinity — a division
which lends itself sufficiently weU to the consecutive
unfolding of the subject, and has been employed in
some more recent works. In the seventeenth century
Coccejus and Witsius of the Eeformed Church intro
duced the so-caUed methodus foederalis, in which the
fessor of Systematic Theology, Princeton, N. J. New edition, re-written
and enlarged, p. 23. London, 1879. He places Christian Ethics in
the midst of the doctrinal system, ^between Soteriology and Eschatology,
which does not seem a very suitable arrangement.

SEOT. v.] DOCTEINAL THEOLOGY. 187
various covenants between God and man became the basis
of classification, and the fcedus naturae et operum, and
'Ha.e fcedus gratice, with its three economies — ante legem, sub
lege, and post legem — passed successively under re"riew.
This method did not obtain any considerable support.-'
Schleiermacher, with his profound and original genius,
departed entirely from the ancient paths, and attempted
a more phUosophical arrangement. Taking the Christian
consciousness as the basis of his dogmatic system he
founds the main division of his subject upon the anti
thesis which is there observed between sin and grace.
In the first part he neglects this antithesis, and considers
the unfolding of the reUgious consciousness as it is pre
supposed and included in every Christian awakening
of the mind. This introduces a discussion of the general
relations between God and the world, and the attributes
therein involved. In the second part he deals with the
facts of the reUgious consciousness as they are deter
mined through the antithesis. This naturally opens
vrith the doctrine of sin, of the nature of the world in
relation to it, and of the attributes of God referring to
it, and then proceeds to the doctrine of grace, of Christ,
of the effects of grace in the individual, and of the
Church. The consummation of the Church leads to
Eschatology ; and not tUl aU these questions have been
discussed are we asked to reflect upon the di"rine attri
butes relating to redemption, namely love and wisdom.
The doctrine of the Trinity forms the conclusion of
1 See "Hagenbach," p. 310.

188 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. [part III.
the whole treatise.-' Hagenbach seeks, to some extent,
to combine the old local method with the phUosophical
arrangement of Schleiermacher by sUghtly breaking up
the chapters, and disposing the topics around the person
of Christ as their centre. Thus he would consider, first,
God in his relation to the world and man, and man in
his relation to God and the world, without the mediation
of Christ. For these sections he would retain the
accepted names of Theology and Anthropology. He
would then take up the doctrine of the person of Christ,
and his work for the redemption of mankind. This
would lead to the consideration of man in relation to
Christ and through Christ to God (subjective Soteriology,
doctrine of the Holy Spfrit), and of man in relation to
Christ and through Christ to the world (Church, Sacra
ments, Eschatology). He would finaUy consider God,
as revealed in Christ, in his relation to Himself (the
doctrine of the Trinity), and in his relation to the world
(doctrine of Predestination). The propriety of this
scheme depends upon the principle of arrangement
which we prefer. If we foUow the order of original
investigation, in which the practical experiences of Ufe
point out the way to the theories which serve to explain
them, we may fitly place the doctrine of the Trinity at
the end of our inquiry ; for, as Hagenbach observes, this
whole doctrine remains an unintelUgible speculative
^ "Der christKche Glaube nach den Grundsazen der evangelischen
Kirche im Zusammenhange dargestellt," 1821-22 ; 5th ed. 1861.
2 Pp. 310-11.

SEOT. v.] DOCTEINAL THEOLOGY. 189
problem, if not iUumined by a preceding Christology. But
if we adopt the order of logical dependence, which seems
best suited to exposition, we must give the priority to
the doctrine of the Trinity, for it is presupposed in the
accepted dogmas of the Incarnation and Atonement.
Lipsius, therefore, appears to me to be logically justffied
in returning more nearly to the old local method. He
adopts three main divisions, dealing respectively with
the doctrine of God, the doctrine of the world and of
man, and the doctrine of the salvation that appeared
in Christ. The doctrine of the Trinity receives notice
under the first head. The second embraces, besides the
ordinary topics of Anthropology, the questions of creation
and proridence. The third is subdi"rided according to
the Trinitarian method, and treats of the economy of
the Father, the economy of the Son, and the economy
of the Spirit.^ Eabiger also gives the preference to a
threefold division, answering to the usual Theology,
Anthropology, and Soteriology, which last includes
Eschatology. He seeks, however, to indicate the phUo
sophical connection of these parts by endowing them
"with new titles — the revelation of God to man, the
division between man and God, and the reconciUation
of man with God — subjects which are related to one
another as thesis, antithesis, and synthesis.^ Domer,
in his important work on Christian Doctrine,^ prefers a
^ "Lehrbuch der evangelisoh-protestantisohen Dogmatik," zweite
Auflage. Braunschweig, 1879.
2 P. 482.
3 "System der christlichen Glaubenslehre." BerUn, 1879-1881. "A

190 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. [part hi.
different plan. He begins with the Doctrine of faith,
or Pisteology, and then divides his whole system of
Dogmatics into two main parts, the first containing the
Fundamental Doctrine, and the second the Specific
Christian Doctrine. The first part discharges the
function of Apologetics, and includes three principal
subjects : the Doctrine of God ; the Doctrine of the
Creature, especiaUy man ; and the Doctrine of the union
of God and man by means of the Divine self-revelation,
or the Doctrine of reUgion. The second part, the
Specific Christian Doctrine, or the Doctrine of sin and
salvation, treats first of the Doctrine of sin, and secondly
of the Christian salvation, comprising the Doctrine of
Christ, and the Church or the kingdom of the Holy
Spirit. These examples may suffice to explain the
general nature of the methods which have been used in
the treatment of dogmatics. It "wiU readUy be seen
that they are capable of considerable variation ; but,
instead of pursuing them into further detaU, we may
venture to unfold a scheme of our own, in which we
must endeavour to point out aU the topics that properly
come under discussion, and to assign them thefr places
as parts of a logicaUy consistent whole.
Without presuming to give any definition of reUgion
we may safely say that it implies a certain relation
between God and man, and it is the business of Doctrinal

System of Christian Doctrine," by Dr. J. A. Domer, translated by
Rev. Alfred Cave, B.A., and Rev. J. S. Banks. Edinburgh, T. and T.
Clark, 1880-1882.

SEOT. v.] DOCTEINAL THEOLOGY. 191
Theology to unfold into distinct statement the contents
of this relation. In order clearly to understand the
relation it is necessary to consider the terms between
which it exists. In doing so, however, we must confine
ourselves to those points which throw Ught upon the
main subject of inquiry. Thus, in regard to man, we
must not enter upon discussions which are interesting
only to the biologist or the mental phUosopher ; and in
regard to God we must not forget that He has unex
plored depths in his being, and may enter into innumer
able relations which are utterly unknown to us. In
one aspect God is very close to man ; in another He is
very far off, and reUgion has always bowed before the
incomprehensible mystery of his perfection. Some
relations it can clearly discern, others it can feel after
and speak of in figures, whUe it reverently acknow
ledges the inadequacy of language to describe even its
own purest vision, much more the awful EeaUty
which transcends all finite inteUigence. If we bear this
in mind, we shaU perceive the proper Umits of our
subject, observe a just gradation in the confidence of
our convictions, and be saved from appearing, amid our
hard definitions, to claim a more intimate knowledge of
God than man can reaUy possess.
Our system, therefore, might seem to divide itself
naturaUy into three main branches — God, man, and the
relation between them — a division which would be
appUcable to every school of theology. There are one
or two considerations, however, which modify this

192 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. [part 111.
arrangement. We cannot lay down any inteUigible
doctrine of either God or man apart from their mutual
relations, and therefore the third branch does not easUy
separate itseK from the other two. We must also
remember that man, on one side of his being, is simply
a part of nature, and we must therefore notice the
relations of God to the world as a whole, thus extending
the scope of our investigation. Accordingly our con
dition is apparently satisfied if we adopt two principal
heads — God in his relations to the world and to man,
and man in his relations to God. For those, however,
who accept any of the positive reUgions it is more
convenient to reserve some of the subjects which
naturaUy pertain to these heads for treatment in a
thfrd department, which is devoted to the modifications
of the reUgious Ufe that are characteristic of the given
historical faith. We arrive then once more at a three
fold division : — I. God in his universal relations to the
world and to man ; II. Man in his ideal and his actual
relation to God ; III. The relation between God and
man as affected by historical conditions. In our case
the historical conditions are Christ and his Church ; and
hence our three great departments correspond, Uke
those of Eabiger, with Theology, Anthropology, and
Soteriology. These we must now analyse into thefr
subordinate parts.
I. God in his wniversal relations to the world and to
man, — In this branch of our subject we must remember
that the existence and attributes of God have afready

SEOT. v.] DOCTEINAL THEOLOGY. 193
received attention in our philosophical department. A
treatise on Systematic Theology which was independent
of a more extended course would necessarUy devote to
these topics the fuUest consideration ; but in our case
it would be sufficient briefiy to recapitulate the argu
ments which had been already used, and the con
clusions which had been reached, while we entered at
greater length into the speciaUy reUgious aspects of the
question, and found room for a thorough discussion of
the ecclesiastical dogma. In the treatment of the
subject we must first consider the existence of God, and
then draw forth into clear expression the fundamental
ideas of God which we have thus obtained, and separate
their contents for formal statement and examination.
1. The existence of God. After a recapitulation of
the phUosophical arguments we must dwell upon the
testimony of the religious element, or, in other words,
on the self-revelation of God in the reUgious conscious
ness. 2. The fundamental ideas of God and their contents.
These we may divide into the inteUectual idea and the
reUgious idea.
A. The intellectual idea, God as supreme Cause. This
presents Him to our thought as the Creator and
the Preserver of the universe, and as possessing
certain attributes corresponding to these functions.
a. The Creator. Two principal questions arise in
this connection : —
(1.) Has God created the universe out of nothing
0

194 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. [part in.
extraneous to Himself, or only moulded it out
of co-eternal matter ?
(2.) How is the theological doctrine of creation
related to the scientific doctrine of evolution ?
b. The Preserver. We must consider —
(1.) The sense in which God is the Preserver,
and the relation of the conservative and the
destructive forces which are manifested in
nature.
(2.) The continuity of the Divine action, as con
trasted with the theory of a momentary creative
energy which leaves the universe to go on Uke
a machine, subject only to an occasional Divine
interference.
(3.) The question of intermediate agents, involv
ing the doctrine of angels.
c. Attributes. Here we must examine the ques
tion of God's transcendence or immanence, his
omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, and
unity. The last introduces us to the problem
of his spfrituaUty (without body or parts), and
to the dogma of the Trinity.
B. The religious idea, God as the reaUty of ideal good.
We must notice the attributes involved in this
idea, and the impUed relations which make God
an object of worship.
a. Attributes. These may be classed under four
heads : —
(1.) Holiness.

SEOT. v.] DOCTEINAL THEOLOGY. 195
(2.) Eighteousness.
(3.) Wisdom.
(4.) Love.
b. God as the object of worship. Here He is re
garded —
(1.) As the object of our highest veneration and
love, as alone combining the foregoing attributes
into perfect spfritual beauty, and thus gi'ring
full satisfaction to our finest sentiments.
(2.) As the object of gratitude, the Giver of aU
good.
(3.) As the object of trust, the wise Disposer of
aU things. This leads us to the doctrine of
providence and of the moral government of
the world.
(4.) As the Eeceiver of prayer, one who enters
into communion with his finite chUdren, and
raises them into communion with Himself.
Here miist be discussed the general theory of
prayer as affecting the relations between the
infinite and the finite spfrits, and, in subordina
tion to this, the objects for which we may
pray, the conditions of acceptable prayer, and
the results of prayer.
FinaUy, we must determine how far the personaUty
of God is implicated in the results of the foregoing
investigation. In order that this question may not
degenerate into a mere verbal controversy, we must pay
the strictest attention to the definition of our terms.

196 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. [part HI.
II. Man in his ideal and his actual relation to God. —
This subject is immediately suggested by the doctrine
of communion between God and man, because, whUe
this communion impUes the loftiest capabilities, there is
so much in human existence that stands in appalling
contrast to it. In order to understand man's alienation
from the Divine life we must attend, first, to his ideal
condition, which will serve to throw into sharply-cut
reUef his actual condition. The latter wiU then consti
tute our second branch of inqufry, and receive its inter
pretation in a doctrine of sin.
1. Man's ideal condition. This brings before our
attention two distinct topics : —
A. The nature of the ideal condition. This is im
pUed in the doctrine of prayer afready laid down,
which leads up dfrectly to the Christian doctrine
of man's sonship to God. The meaning of this
doctrine must be unfolded in the light of Christian
teaching and experience.
B. The question whether the ideal was also the
primitive condition : comparison of the dogmatic
with the modern scientific view.
2. Man's actual condition : doctrine of sin. Three
subdivisions present themselves — the nature of sin, the
source of sin in the abstract, the occasion of concrete
sins or transgressions.
A. The nature of sin. Two elements are involved : —
a. Perversion from the inward ideal : dogma of
original sin.

SEOT. v.] DOCTEINAL THEOLOGY. 197
b. Faithlessness of wiU : actual or overt sin.
B. Source of sin. Two lines of inquiry are suggested
by the division of the preceding head. We must,
however, reverse the order which was there fol
lowed. There we could not estimate faithlessness
of wUl without first surveying the ideal and actual
order and strength of the motives ; here we can
not decide upon the sources of inward malady
without first learning the character of the wUl.
a. Consideration whether faithlessness of wUl is a
purely personal and individual act, for which
we may justly be held responsible. We must
here refer back to the phUosophical discussion
of the freedom of the wUl, and "riew the sub
ject chiefiy in connection with the testimony
of conscience. Conflicting dogmas must be
criticised.
b. Source of inward corruption, or perversion from
the ideal. This must be found either in our
own evU choice or in the fact that we inherit
the tendencies of a race, or in both com
bined.
(1.) The effect of faithlessness of wUl : strength
ening and exaggeration of the lower motives,
and decay of the higher, especiaUy of the more
spiritual.
(2.) Effect of heredity. Under this head we
encounter three modes of regarding the sub
ject :—

198 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. [part III.
a. The dogmas of the fall, of the imputation
of Adam's sin, and of total depravity.
y8. The doctrine which refers sin and corrup
tion entfrely to individual choice, and
looks upon each infant as a new creation
in the image of God.
7. The intermediate doctrine, which accepts
the organic unity of mankind, and, whUe
unable to receive the form of the eccle
siastical dogmas, seeks fuUy to recognise
and interpret the spiritual facts on which
they rest.
C. Occasion of transgressions; doctrine of temptation.
We may divide the conditions of temptation into
inward and outward.
a. Inward conditions of temptation. These may be
noticed under two heads : —
(1.) The activity of a worse motive in presence
of a better.
(2.) Indecision of wUl.
b. Outward conditions or enticements : —
(1.) The providential arrangements of the world
which cause trials to our virtue, necessitating
a consideration of the place of such trials in
the Divine economy.
(2.) The solicitations of bad men, opening the
question why we are subject to this kind of
evil influence.
These questions belong, of course, to the

sect, v.] DOCTEINAL THEOLOGY. 199
doctrine of pro-ridence, but must be referred
to here, that we may understand the real
nature ofthe outward conditions of temptation.
(3.) Discussion of the doctrine of the devU and
evil spirits.
III. The relation between God and man as affected by
historical conditions, — Under the Christian system this
subject necessarUy takes the form of an inquiry into
the reconciUation of man with God, for the deUverance
from sin is a fundamental and pervasive thought in
Christianity. Such an inquiry also arises naturaUy out
of our previous consideration of man as a sinful being.
It easily faUs into three principal di"risions — the nature
of reconciUation, the means of reconcUiation, and the
progress or failure of the Divine Ufe in man.
1. The nature of reconcUiation. This question comes
first, because our solution of it must affect the whole of
our subsequent investigation. Without a clear percep
tion of the ultimate aim we cannot estimate justly the
means by which it is to be reached, or the advancement
of mankind towards it. We must survey it on its sub
jective and its objective sides.
A. Its subjective side. The character of this must be
determined by our previous doctrine of man's ideal
condition, for, as aU sin is enmity against God,
reconciliation in its completest sense can be
nothing less than the realisation of the Di"rine
ideal ; or, in other words, the absolute deUverance
from the merely animal and sinful into the

200 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. [part hi.
divinely filial life. This is the goal of the
Christian's hope ; but in a lower sense he is justly
said to be reconcUed when harmony with the
Di-rine will becomes the accepted principle of his
life, when the ideal is consciously operative, though
it has not yet worked itself out into fuU realisa
tion, and a meaner principle occasionaUy asserts
its power. This aspect of the spiritual Ufe wiU
be treated under the thfrd division.
B. Its objective side. This brings in the question of
the Divine forgiveness, with its two elements — the
changed relation between God and man, and the
remission of punishment. In this connection we
must examine the dogma of deUverance from
God's wrath and from a universal doom to eternal
perdition in consequence of Adam's sin.
2. The means of reconciUation. These are, primarily,
Christ, and secondarUy, the Church, which incorporates
his spirit and perpetuates his agency.
A. Christ. In regard to Christ controversy has as
sumed two main directions, and discussed the
nature of his person and of his work.
a. His person. We must endeavour to determine,
with reverent appreciation of every element in
the problem, his relation to man and to God,
and in doing so must review and criticise the
various ecclesiastical and heretical dogmas.
We may perhaps, in principle, express the
main line of demarcation between opposite

SEOT. v.] DOCTEINAL THEOLOGY. 201
tendencies of thought by asking, Is Christ an
object of reUgion or only a teacher of religion ?
Does he come from the Divine side to draw
men up with heavenly strength to himself and
to God, or does he start from the human side
and simply leave an example of holy Uving
which those who choose may foUow ?
b. His work. This was probably larger, more varied,
and more searching than theology has defined ;
but we may view it under the three following
heads : —
(1.) His seU-sacrifice. We must consider —
a. Its nature.
/3. Its efficacy.
Here must be discussed the dogma of the
atonement and its modifications.
(2.) His revelation of God and his Di-rine appeal
to sinful man.
(3.) His revelation of the divinely human life
and his leadership in fiUal service.
Strictly speaking, (1) is more or less im
plicated with (2) and (3) ; but as the subjects
are not conterminous, they require distinct
heads.
B. The Church. We have not now to refer to the
Church as an organ of dogmatic truth, because
that question has been considered in treating of
the sources of doctrine, but we are concerned
rather with its essential and ideal nature,* and

202 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. [part iii.
with the permanent methods by which its purpose
is fulfilled, so far as these affect its doctrinal
character. Matters of regulation and discipUne,
or agencies for influencing the surrounding world,
which do not affect its doctrinal complexion, be
long to the domain of practical theology. Bear
ing in mind these Umitations, we may consider
the subject under four principal divisions.
a. The origin and ideal nature of the Church. In
regard to the first point, although history
cannot be excluded, we refer not so much to
the historical as to the religious origin of the
Church. We have to determine whether and
in what sense it was founded by Christ, and re
ceived from him a Divine commission. From
the character of our answer to this question we
must deduce the ideal of the Church, and
thereby obtain a test which we can apply to
actual churches and a secure ground on which
to rest the Church's functions.
b. The question whether any existing organisation
is the true and only true Church of Christ,
leading to a re-riew of the distinction which
has been drawn between the visible and the
invisible Church, and a discussion, if that dis
tinction be accepted, of the relations between
them.
c. Arising out of the foregoing is the consideration
of the plurality of Churches, their spiritual

SEOT. v.] DOCTEINAL THEOLOGY. 203
origin, and their relation to the ideal Church
and to one another. Are they to be regarded,
with one exception, as so many spurious
counterfeits of the true Church, o-wing their
origin to heretical perversion, or aU as genuine
approximations to the ideal deriving their origin
from some legitimate demand of the reUgious
spirit, and so supplementing one another's de
ficiencies ?
d. Functions of the Church. These must be noticed
under the Umitation already explained, and
require a reference to the agents by whom
they are fulfiUed as well as to the administra
tion itself
(1.) The ministry of the Church. The problems
which caU for attention here relate to the dis
tinction of clergy and laity, to apostoUcal
succession, and to sacerdotalism.
(2.) Action of the Church in effecting communion
between God and man. This is considered
under the two heads of the Word of God and
the Sacraments (means of grace).
a. Ministration of the Word. We must in
quire into the fundamental meaning of
the Word of God, and the sense in which
the term has been applied to the Scrip
tures. Having previously determined
the dogmatic value of the Bible, we have
now only to settle its place as nourisher

204 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. [part Hi.
of the highest Ufe of the Church and its
members.
/S. The Sacraments. Ecclesiastical contro
versy brings before us three topics on
which a decision is required: 1. The
nature of a Sacrament ; 2. The number
of the Sacraments — Protestants generaUy
accepting only two. Baptism and the
Lord's Supper; while CathoUcs add five
others, Confirmation, Penance, Ordina
tion, Matrimony, and Extreme Unction ;
3. The doctrine of the Sacraments
severaUy.
3. Progress or failure of the Divine Ufe in man. As
this may manifest itself in the individual soul or in
society we obtain a twofold division.
A. In the individual. The various topics whieh
present themselves in this connection may be
advantageously arranged according to a principle
of chronological succession, proceeding from the
Di"rine purpose towards mankind up to its final
accompUshment. We are thus furnished with six
distinct subjects of thought.
a. Predestination. Under this head we must in
qufre whether God has any abiding purpose
towards mankind; and, if so, what is the
nature of that purpose, and how it is related
to the human wiU on the one hand and to the
possession of spiritual endowments on the

SEOT. v.] DOCTEINAL THEOLOGY. 205
other. This involves a discussion of the
dogma of election and reprobation.
b. Grace. We must notice —
(1.) Its nature, mode of operation, and relation
to the will.
(2.) Its action as prevenient, drawing the soul
towards the Di-rine life prior to any effort of
its own, and as co-operating, aiding the soul in
its voluntary struggle towards perfection.
c. Conversion. This marks the transition from the
lower to the higher principle of life, and raises
the question of effectual calling and of sudden
or gradual change.
d. Permanent condition characteristic of the new
Ufe. We must view this both in its subjective
and its objective aspects.
(1.) Subjective characteristics, Eegeneration.
We must here discriminate the voluntarUy
accepted action of a higher principle of life,
which is stiU consistent with the presence of
sin, from a state of indifference or hostiUty
towards the Divine life on the one hand and
from a state of sinless perfection on the other.
Hence we must discuss the place and nature
of sin and penitence in a state of grace, and
the question of the impossibiUty of finally
rejecting the divine life which has once been
given (perseverance of saints).
(2.) Objective aspect. Justification. This de-

206 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. [part in.'
scribes the condition of man as approved in
the view of eternal justice. We must discuss
different theories of its conditions : —
a. That man is justified by meritorious
works.
/3. That he is justified by faith alone.
This opens the whole question of the re
lation between faith and works.
e. Gradual advance towards perfection. This is
known as Sanctification, or the work of the
Holy Spfrit in the soiU. We must attend to
the nature of this work, and the human con
ditions under which it is carried on. In
opposition to it we must notice the quenching
of the Spirit and the conditions of degeneracy.
/. Final result, the attainment of our ideal — ^Eternal
Life. Two problems open before us, — immor
tality, and its various conditions.
(1.) Immortality. The immortality of the soul
is discussed in the department of reUgious
phUosophy. The arguments there advanced
may be briefly referred to ; but the doctrine
must be here viewed especiaUy in connection
with Christian evidences, and as the outcome
of our whole theory of the religious Ufe, and of
the relation between God and man.
(2.) Its various conditions.
a. The blessedness of perfect sonship to God ;
the communion of saints.

SECT. V.J THEOLOGICAL ETHICS. 207
/3. Question of purgatory for that lower
state in which sin has not yet been
whoUy destroyed.
7. The misery of the life of seU, excluded
from the light of God ; nature and
duration of future punishment.
B. In society. The ideas and hopes which gather
around this subject may be treated under three
heads : —
a. The idea of the kingdom of God as a society of
his perfected children upon earth. Eelation of
actual societies to this idea.
b. The hope of its progress and final reaUsation in
the world. Here must be examined the dogma
of the second coming of Christ.
c. The consummation of aU earthly things. This
brings our system to a close with an inquiry
into the dogma of a general resurrection and
final judgment.
When we have thus laid down a definite theory of
the relations between God and man, we are prepared
to enter on a consideration of the character and practice
corresponding to these relations. This is the task
which we undertake in the third section of Systematic
Theology. 3. Theological Ethics. — The object of Theological
Ethics may be somewhat differently conceived according
to the attitude which is assumed towards theology in

208 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. [part HI.
general Those who regard theology throughout as a
positive science naturaUy look upon our present depart
ment of it as an exposition of Christian morals. All
Christians must of course believe that it is so in fact ;
but for reasons before given, we cannot consent to
include an historical name in the terms of our definition.
As in Doctrinal Theology our aim is reUgious truth,
without any prejudgment of the question whether that
truth coincides with Christian teaching, so here our aim
is to set forth the ideal morality which springs from the
highest relations between God and man, without assum
ing, in the very statement of our design, that Christianity
has exhibited this ideal. Even if in discussing the
sources of doctrine we reach the conclusion that the
Christian religion possesses the most absolute Divine
authority, stiU it is better in our definition to make it
clear that we wish to describe, not an historical concep
tion, but the abiding and universal ideal ; though, when
once we have started on our quest, we must draw from
the sources and pursue the methods which we deem the
most conducive to the desired result. We may therefore
define Theological Ethics as a systematic exposition of
the temper and conduct which, in the various conditions
of human life, spring from the deepest and truest re
ligious spirit in man.
This detachment of our definition from aU historical
and positive conceptions, seriously affects the relation of
our present branch of study to Doctrinal Theology and
to PhUosophical Ethics.

SECT, v.] THEOLOGICAL ETHICS. 209
Its relation to Doctrinal Theology is at once apparent,
for it is the business of the latter to determine the
character of the deepest and traest reUgious spirit in
man. Theological Ethics, accordingly, presupposes and
rests upon truths which have been estabUshed by Doc
trinal Theology ; and instead of these two being parallel
and co-ordinate studies, they are reaUy successive steps
in one continuous investigation — the former exhibiting
the practical outcome of truths which the latter has
viewed only in their intrinsic nature and meaning. We
are thus relieved from the principal difficulties which
have induced Eothe ^ to assign Ethics and Dogmatics to
two totaUy distinct departments of theology, the former
to the speculative, the latter to the historical The
usual attempt to distinguish them by their objects, and
not by thefr method and treatment, can, he thinks, only
land us in hopeless confusion; for the separation of
thefr objects rests on an unreal antithesis between
knowing and doing, and in fact they have to a large
extent a common object, and their topics melt into
one another. If, for a moment, we admit the existence
of the difficulty, we are nevertheless unable to adopt
Eothe's mode of escape, for we have afready seen reason
to dissent from his judgment upon the proper place of
Dogmatics. We are unable to relegate the investigation
of reUgious truth to the historical sphere, and must
therefore, if we foUow Eothe's terminology, include it
with Ethics in the speculative. We use the word specu-
1 "Encyclop." pp. 28-30.
P

210 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. [part iii.
lative, however, less rigidly than the German theologian,
who confines it to a system drawn exclusively from the
fundamental facts of consciousness by a process of exact
logical thought, whereas we are willing to avail ourselves
of every source of information which is rationally attested,
and to check the movements of our own minds by the
verdicts of experience and the utterances of inspfration
and of genius ; but this quaUfication appUes as much to
Ethical as to Doctrinal Theology, so that we are unable to
distinguish them sharply from one another by their
method of treatment. Hence we must fall back upon
the difference between their objects; and in spite of
Eothe's difficulties, it seems to me that a code of morals
is sufficiently separate in thought from a code of faith ;
and that, although in theology the former depends upon
the latter, there is no occasion for any serious mingUng
of their territories. Eothe urges that the doctrine of
sanctification, if carried out in detaU, cannot but include
a complete doctrine of vfrtue and of duties ; and this is
probably as strong an example as can be found of the
apparent confusion between Dogmatics and Ethics. But
surely the detaU, which is the sole cause of confusion,
would be felt as a disturbing element in Dogmatics.
We ought there to consider the nature, the source, the
method of sanctification, but leave it to Ethics, assuming
this doctrine, to exhibit its practical appUcation in the
various conditions of life. This example, then, instead
of confirming the plea in support of "which it was cited,
illustrates the convenience of separating the two orders

SEOT. v.] THEOLOGICAL ETHICS. 211
of inquiry, and shows at the same time thefr intimate
connection with one another and their relation, not of
paraUelism and co-ordination, but of dependence and
succession. It is less easy to determine the relation between
Theological and Philosophical Ethics. It was formerly
deemed sufficient to say that one rested on the authority
of the Bible, the other on the authority of reason. The
Bible was regarded as a purely external rule which con
tained certain commands arbitrarUy issued by God (ex
mero arbifrio), and requiring our obedience without any
reference to our own reason or conscience ; and the
decalogue, as the most solemn enunciation of the Divine
wUl, was made into a framework of the whole system of
duties towards God and man.-' But, to say nothing of
the gro-wing difficulty of receiving an authority so com
pletely external, this view appears to be based on a
serious misapprehension of Christian teaching. Chris
tianity, instead of thrusting duty upon us from -without,
seeks to implant a spirit within, out of which morality
shaU grow, not as unintelUgent obedience to an arbitrary
letter, but as the spontaneous expression of an iUumined
soul. Theological Ethics, if it would follow the Christian
line, must interpret this spirit, and, though not without
reference to Biblical precept and example, draw forth
its contents by the laws of speculative reason. Thus,
instead of standing over against reason with the blank
look of an authority that wiU not explain itself, it enters
^ See Hagenbach, p. 338.

212 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. [part ill.
the inmost recesses of human consciousness, and claims
the sanction of reason in its highest moods.
The broader statement that the one science is posi
tive, while the other is whoUy speculative, is not much
more satisfactory. If the word " positive " be taken in
a rigid sense, the distinction becomes tantamount to
that which we have just dismissed; whereas, if it be
meant only that the Christian spirit, as opposed to the
universal human spirit, is the basis of Theological Ethics,
the distinction threatens to become evanescent. A
system does not cease [to be speculative because the
consciousness has assumed a peculiar form- under the
action of external influences, for this is true of all human
consciousness, and not merely of the Christian ; nor
does the philosopher lose his vocation because the deepest
reUgious experiences have arisen in his soul, and tinged
the whole complexion of his thought. This difficulty
wUl be more apparent if we notice Hagenbach's analysis
of the distinction under consideration into three heads.-'
The Christian doctrine of the highest good is, he thinks,
conditioned by setting up Christ as the highest type of
morality, and proposing to every one as his aim to
become Uke Christ. But unless Christ is to be accepted
as a mere outward example, whose single acts shaU be
models for our imitation (and this is expressly dis
claimed^), he passes into the soul as a moral ideal,
transfiguring the whole ethical consciousness, and giving
a permanent character to that inward source from which
1 P. 336. 2 p 338

SEOT. v.] THEOLOGICAL ETHICS. 213
a speculative system must flow ; and, if in this sense he
furnishes a positive norm to the theologian, he is also
present, consciously or unconsciously, in the mind of
every Christian phUosopher, and the ideal good, though
it may bear a different title, is yet the same in fact.
Again, it is said that PhUosophical Ethics must proceed
from the moral self-determination of man, while in
Christian Ethics the Spirit of God is the determining
power, and we thus obtain the characteristic mark of
the Christian doctrine of "rirtue. There is here a real
distinction ; but it is not the distinction between posi
tive and speculative, and it is surely arbitrary to pre
clude the philosopher from surveying some of the most
marked phenomena of the moral Ufe. Lastly, it is
urged, PhUosophical Ethics apprehends man in his
relation to the world, and determines his duties accord
ingly; Christian Ethics apprehends him especially in
relation to the kingdom of God; and so arises the
Christian doctrine of duties. This suggests a mere
territorial separation, and involves no difference of prin
ciple ; and it brings with it the strange result that, if
the hope of the Christian were ever reaUsed, and the
world passed into the kingdom of God, Philosophical
Ethics would cease to be. We are thus reminded of a
practical objection to the distinction which we are con
sidering : in the mind of the same man the two systems
inevitably coalesce. It is admitted by Hagenbach ^ that
their essential contents cannot contradict one another,
1 P. 334.

214 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. [part iii.
and Eabiger,^ in noticing their common claim to uni
versaUty of obUgation, goes further, and expresses the
hope that, though they have different starting-points,
they wUl coincide in their essential results. But we
must advance yet another step, and maintain that they
must coincide in thefr essential results, and that, when
we come to the application of our principles, the code of
duties must be common to the two branches of study.
Two men, of whom one is an irreUgious phUosopher, and
the other a religious theologian, wUl no doubt produce
codes more or less dissimUar, because the moral con
sciousness "wUl be different in the two cases; but the
same religious man can produce only one code, for he
cannot accept as a philosopher a duty which he rejects
as a theologian, nor can he demand as a theologian what
he repudiates as a phUosopher. The same consciousness,
whether it be one which is sunk in worldUness and
paganism or one which has been raised by the Spfrit to
the most ideal heights of Christian faith, can yield only
one result ; and he in whom the Son of God has been
revealed, and who from the depths of his own experi
ence can deUneate the features of the heavenly Ufe,
cannot at his pleasure abdicate this higher "wisdom, and
content himself with a caricature which he may label
phUosophy. Wherein, then, do PhUosophical and Theological Ethics
differ from one another ? They seem to me to be rather
mutuaUy supplementary than co-ordinate expositions of
1 P. 504.

SEOT. v.] THEOLOGICAL ETHICS. 215
the same subject, and as soon as they enter the same
field, to flow together and become identical. It is the
business of PhUosophical Ethics to interpret the universal
facts of the moral consciousness, namely, our exercise of
moral judgment and our sense of moral obUgation. The
interpretation of these facts constitutes our ethical
theory, and is the point where the controversies of moral
phUosophy mainly centre. When our theory has been
estabUshed, we may pass from phUosophy in its proper
sense, and proceed to apply it in the construction of a
code of duties. Here we occupy the territory of Theo
logical Ethics ; and, though an ethical phUosopher may
frame his code without regard to any ulterior results, we
cannot but feel, in a wider course, such as we are now
sketching, the inconvenience of traversing the same
ground t-wice. Accordingly, the philosophical course
may be confined to its own proper pursuit, the discussion
of ethical theories, and restrained from elaborating a
scheme of religious, social and personal duties. Now
it is precisely the discussion of ethical theories that
Theological Ethics can best afford to neglect. It may
contentedly assume, so far as it is necessary to do so,
the results attained by phUosophy ; but in truth its own
procedure is Uttle affected by these results. Whatever
view we may take of the nature and origin of conscience,
it remains equally possible to depict the outward life
which is the direct and faithful expression of man's
highest interior life. Theological Ethics, therefore, does
not base itself upon the theories of ethical phUosophy,

216 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY, [part Hi.
or pronounce any decision upon the questions which are
there discussed, but rests upon the doctrines of man's
ideal condition and of the operation of the Holy Spfrit,
which are laid down in Doctrinal Theology. From the
consciousness of that Spirit, and under the tension of
that ideal, it unfolds into flower and frait the plant of
holy and righteous Uving, as it would spring forth
through its own divine energy were it not marred by
human imperfection and sin. In the construction of its
practical system it wUl -riew the various Unes of conduct
which it describes rather as the spontaneous outcome of
an inner power than as actions which are to be performed
as duties through an effort of the "wiU, whereas PhUo
sophical Ethics wUl regard them rather as demands upon
our voluntary obedience. This difference, however, does
not necessitate a dual treatment, for the two points of
view cannot be entirely separated. The sternest ad
herent of duty or the driest calculator of utUity cannot
wholly forget the beauty and the bloom of sweet and
pure dispositions, and those who most habitually " Uve
in the Spirit " stUl need the exhortation to " walk in the
Spirit." In the loftiest minds these two "risions of life
wUl most completely blend, and the phUosopher and the
theologian wUl acquiesce in a single portraiture of that
ideal conduct which is at once the exterior goal of our
voluntary effort and the unpremeditated expression of
the profoundest spfrit "within.
In regard to the di-rision of our subject a few words
may suffice ; for it is not so necessary as in the case of

SEOT. v.] THEOLOGICAL ETHICS. 217
Doctrinal Theology to exhibit it as an organic system
of thought, and to trace the connection of its subordinate
detaUs. Various modes of distributing its several
topics have been adopted by different writers ; but as
these only represent indi-ridual judgments, and there is
not yet any approach to agreement as to the course
which should be foUowed, we need not pause to criticise
them, but content ourselves with sketching in broad
outUnes the arrangement which seems to flow naturaUy
from the view above advocated.
The subject, then, faUs into three principal parts.
The first part, which is most closely connected with
Doctrinal Theology, deals with the inward principle
of life in its unity and its tendency towards practical
manifestation. This inquiry bases itself, as already
intimated, on the doctrines of man's ideal condition
and of the operation of the Holy Spirit. It no longer,
however, regards these doctrines in thefr dogmatical,
but in thefr ethical aspect, and views the Spirit as
the indwelUng power which is dra"wing man towards
the ideal impUcitly contained within itseK, and is
thereby shaping the individual into a son of God,
and society into a kingdom of God. Having de
termined the active character of this power, we must
then endeavour to draw from our dim conscious
ness into the Ught of reflective thought its ethical
quaUty; and perhaps we shaU acquiesce in the word
Love as the supreme term which, best expressing the
etemal essence of God, sums up in itseK the moral

218 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. [part HI.
perfection of man. We thus reach a theory of the
highest good and of the final aim of moral effort.
In the second part we must view the spiritual power
in the complexity of its inward action as manifested in
various dispositions. Since these are dependent for
thefr form on the relations of the Spfrit to surrounding
objects, we may take the latter as the basis of our
classffication. We have, first, love to God, which re
solves itself into such dispositions as reverence, humility,
faith, trust, submissiveness, patience, content, joyful
ness, self-consecration; secondly, love to man, which
may be considered under the two heads of justice, or
the readiness to accord their fuU rights to all others,
leading to serenity and -wisdom of judgment, and a
prompt admiration of others' good ; and next, of bene
volence, or the readiness to promote the happiness of
others, producing sympathy, considerateness, forbear
ance, gentleness, self-denial; and thfrdly, love to
creatures below man, showing itself in appreciation
and reverence towards their mysterious Ufe, and in
the humanity which shrinks from giving needless pain.
In noticing the various dispositions (of which the above
does not pretend to be an exhaustive enumeration), we'
should have to consider not only thefr intrinsic nature,
but the laws of their healthy exercise, and, in contrast
with these, morbid or one-sided tendencies which have
manifested themselves from time to time in the history
of mankind. In this way we construct a theory of
virtue.

SECT, v.] CONCLUSION. 219
In the third part we must consider the Spirit
as operative in the practical conduct of life. The
actions which flow from the spfritual energy "within
become, in the light of ethical phUosophy, duties which
we are bound to perform. Here, as we have seen.
Philosophical and Theological Ethics meet one another,
and having established in the phUosophical department
the theory of duty, we have now only to lay out a
scheme of duties. In doing so we may borrow the
famiUar division into personal duties ; duties to which
we are bound as members of civU society, including
famUy, social political and international duties; and
lastly, reUgious duties, embracing the private expres
sion and cultivation of devotion, and pubUc duties in
connection with the Church, its worship and its
work. Systematic Theology, in thus closing with bur duty
towards the work of the Church, opens before us a
problem which it does not belong to its pro"rince to
solve. We have to pass now from the mountain heights
of eternal reality and permanent obUgation to the
modest plain of experience and expediency, and con
sider in what way the majestic thoughts which Syste
matic Theology brings before us can be made operative
in human life, and mankind led on towards that ideal
kingdom where truth and goodness shaU unveU their
perfect beauty, and aU shall be at last one famUy
in God.

220 PEACTICAL THEOLOGY. [part iii.
Section VI.
Practical Theology.
If it is a striking feature of our own time that aU
sorts of literary, scientific, and commercial interests
seek the encouragement and assistance which associa
tion can render, it has from immemorial ages been
characteristic of reUgion that it endeavours to express
itself through an ecclesiastical organism, and to promote
its growth through different kinds of ecclesiastical
agency. In the practical fulfilment, however, of this
single tendency a large variety may be observed. Not
only have aU the great religions of the world distinct
organisations adapted to thefr respective genius, but
within the limits of the same reUgion there is a sur
prising diversity of usage. As we might expect in a
faith which rests more upon spfritual principles than
on an outward rule, Christianity has displayed the
freest development, and has adopted many forms of
government and of activity, as the creed of its adherents
or the requirements of the time have dictated. It is in
these facts that Practical Theology, regarded as a part
of theological science, has its roots. We cannot but
ask ourselves, In what kind of organisation does reUgion
find its fittest embodiment? Through what forms of
pubUc worship does it best express itseK? Through
what agencies can it be most effectively maintained and

SEOT. VI.] EELATION TO SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. 221
propagated? To these questions Practical Theology
must retum an answer, and we may accordingly define
it as the theory of ecclesiastical organisation and
practice. In this definition we avoid those questions con
cerning the nature of the Church and ecclesiastical
agents and functions which involve doctrinal con
siderations, and which have been referred to under
Systematic Theology. But though it does not belong
to our present subject to enter upon such questions, it
is ob"rious that it is deeply affected by them, and indeed
rests upon our doctrinal system as its basis. A sacer
dotal Church, which claims a supernatural authority for
its clergy, or one which beUeves that the New Testament
prescribes in detaU the permanent and only divine
model of ecclesiastical administration, cannot acquiesce
in the same theory of organisation and practice as one
which asserts the spiritual freedom of all its members,
and holds that the Spirit is the ultimate organising force
and can work with greatest energy through flexible
forms and a diversity of operations. These different
points of view involve profound doctrinal considerations
which must affect the whole of our inquiry ; and to this
extent it is trae that a treatise on Practical Theology
can represent only a particular school of thought.
The limitation which is thus imposed on us by the
very nature of the case need not, however, contract the
breadth of our aim, or impede the scientific impartiality
of our search. As in Systematic Theology our aim is

222 PEACTICAL THEOLOGY. [part ih.
truth, and not the doctrines of any particular Church, so
here we must endeavour, not to describe the practice of
the sect to which we may happen to belong, but to
arrive at that which is ideaUy the best. If in the dis
charge of this task we are under the bias of our famUiar
associations, and can succeed only in setting forth our
own conceptions, we are but labouring under the dis-
abUity which attaches to every branch of human study.
But to acknowledge our disabUity is the first step
towards its cure, and is very different from maintaining,
with Eothe,-' that Practical Theology is entirely a
positive science, and limited to the existing organisation
of some particular Church. Even if we cannot succeed
in cUmbing over our waUs of partition, it is at least a
noble attempt ; and K we can but for a moment lift our
eyes above them, we shaU obtain a wider view, and
learn to cherish more generous aspirations, than if we
deUberately confine ourselves within our own enclosure.
It is the object of science to lead us from the particular
to the universal, and to heal the maladies of the indi-ri
dual inteUect ; and though the most careful precision of
method cannot exempt us from the ine^dtable faUings of
a finite understanding, yet we need not doom ourselves
to a perpetuity of error, but fix our eyes steadfastly on
truth as the goal of aU our thoughts. In any separate
treatise, indeed, on Practical Theology we must seem to
start with an assumption ; but if our doctrine of the
Church has been carefully reached in accordance with
1 "Encyclop." p. 134.

SEOT. VI.] DIVISION OF THE SUBJECT. 223
the principles already laid down, it wUl be an assump
tion, not of prejudice, but of science ; and though, like
other conclusions, it -wUl be open to chaUenge, yet we
shaU be justified in taking it as the starting-point for a
fresh line of investigation.
From the foregoing observations it is apparent that
Practical Theology is justly included within the cfrcle
of theological sciences. This could not be the case if it
consisted merely of a number of empirical rules for the
guidance of the clergy, or if, whUe aUowing it a wider
range, we regarded it simply as an art. Its immediate
relation to active life has occasioned some uncertainty
in its definition, and some hesitation as to its title to a
place in theology. As we have here explained it, how
ever, it is in the main a theory, which attempts to answer
important questions concerning reUgion, and which may
be studied purely for its own sake ; in other words, it
is a science as distinguished from an art. Its results,
no doubt, readUy afford the principles and precepts of
an art, and the student for the ministry cannot but feel
his reUsh for it quickened by its bearing on the practical
duties of his office ; but it deals "with questions which,
no less than those of Systematic Theology, 'grow out
of the reUgious Ufe of humanity, and which may be
treated vrith a purely theoretical interest, and for this
reason, though occupying the border, it claims its place
within the theological boundary.
In seeking for a suitable division of our subject we
cannot faU to be struck with the great variety of plans

224 PEACTICAL THEOLOGY. [paetiii.
upon which it has been laid out. These are ine"ritably
affected by the point of view of each vmter, and by the
growing completeness and consistency of the study. It
is not, however, necessary to dweU upon them here, and
it must suffice to refer to the notices of them in Hagen
bach, Eabiger, and Eothe. The most important differ
ence of principle by which they are controUed is that
which we have already discussed. Those who would
Umit the function of Practical Theology to an exhibition
of existing facts and a formulation of rules for the dis
charge of acknowledged duties naturaUy adopt a purely
empirical di"rision, and regulate the order in which the
several topics should be reviewed by considerations of
practical convenience. On the other hand, those who,
like ourselves, desfre to raise this branch of theology
into the rank of a science might easUy be led away into
an abstract and a priori treatment which had Uttle
relation to the reaUties of IKe. It wUl be weU to bear
both methods in mind. To lay down a theory of a
great concrete institution without paying any attention
to its actual working, and vrithout inquiring where and
how it has succeeded, where and why it has failed,
would not be the mark of wisdom. We must profit by
the lessons of experience, which is the ultimate test of
any theory of practical life, and derive both subjects
for our reflection and materials to aid us in the forma
tion of our judgment from the history of the various
existing Churches. But, on the other hand, we do not
reaUy understand an institution till we are acquainted

SECT. VI.] DIVISION OF THE SUBJECT. 225
with the wants which it seeks to express and the pur
poses which it endeavours to fulfil ; and even if this
knowledge must in the first instance be gathered from
the contemplation of external facts, yet, as soon as we
have reached the spiritual source from which the whole
movement has sprung, we are at Uberty to return upon
our track, armed "with a new principle of judgment, and
prepared to criticise outward institutions by the appU
cation of an ideal standard. But we may do more than
this : we may survey the whole subject from the position
which we have won, and determine in accordance "with
our fundamental conception the grand heads under
which the varied material offered by experience shaU
be brought up for examination. Now we shaU hardly
be wrong in saying that Churches exist for the expres
sion, cultivation, and promotion of reUgion through
pubUc agencies which requfre an organisation for their
successful working. This at once suggests to us the
main subjects which must occupy our attention ; but it
does not settle the order in which they should be
arranged. We might, "with Hagenbach, adopt the
chronological order of the Church's gro"wth, and, be
ginning "with the coUection and introduction of individ
uals into the Church, proceed to the conduct and
promotion of the reUgious Ufe "within the community,
and conclude "with the organisation of the Church. But
the order in which institutions are graduaUy developed
into thefr logical completeness is not the best order for
describing them when they are complete. Before we
Q

226 PEACTICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
can care to investigate the best means of adding con
verts to the Church, we "wish to know what it is that
they are to be in-rited to join, what new duties wiU be
imposed, what restrictions wUl be put upon thefr
personal Uberty of thought or of action, how thefr
position as citizens and their aUegiance to the civU
government wUl be affected : in other words, we must
consider first the theory of ecclesiastical organisation.
In order to complete our knowledge of what the Church
is, we proceed, in the next place, to view its internal
functions, and the modes in which they are fulfiUed,
that is, the various methods which it adopts for the
expression and cultivation of reUgion. It is better to
include these two functions under one head, because in
practice they become to a large extent identified. We
cannot express our reUgious sentiments without at the
same time strengthening their hold upon us ; and in the
same service that which flows spontaneously from the
heart of one may impress itself as an out"ward influence
on the heart of another. Being now acquainted "with
the machinery of the Church and its manner of internal
operation, we are prepared to discuss the agencies by
which it may endeavour to propagate reUgion among
those who are outside its pale. One subject stiU
remains. The benevolent impulses of reUgion lead
men who are associated in Churches to pursue plans
which are not directly reUgious for the ameUoration of
the society amid which they Uve. Thus arises the
question of the propriety of adopting into the specific

SEOT. VI.] ECCLESIASTICAL OEGANISATION. 227
Ufe of . the Church agencies other than religious, and,
generaUy, of the relation of the Church to such agencies
¦when existing outside its own borders ; or, briefly, the
action of the Church outside the sphere of reUgion,
We thus obtain, I think, an exhaustive division of our
subject, and dispose its principal Unes of investigation
in their logical sequence. It wUl now be our duty to
describe the subordinate topics which come under the
several heads.
1. Ecclesiastical Organisation. — In order to solve the
very important and difficult problems which here pre
sent themselves, we must clearly apprehend what it is
that we wish to express and to accomplish; for each
member of the organism ought to be in harmony with
the idea from which we start, and tend to the fulfilment
of the aim which we have in "riew. An organising
genius loves perfection of machinery ; but this very
perfection might prove injurious to the ease and flexi-
bUity of movement which are needed for spiritual growth.
The discipline of a camp, where the one end is to defeat
the enemy, would be intolerable in civU life, and sacrifice
to a miUtary fondness for order the highest interests of
mankind. In the same way ecclesiastical arrangements
which were admfrably adapted to bring the reason and
conscience of men under the control of some central
authority might be iU calculated to develop the inward
resources of the soul, and train it in the exercise of a
power which should be at once reverential and free. It

228 PEACTICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
is evident, therefore, that our ideal of the reUgious man
and of the reUgious community must influence funda-
mentaUy our theory of ecclesiastical organisation. Thus
we are thrown back (as has been afready intimated)
upon Systematic Theology. It is there that we learn the
idea and the principles to which we have now to give
practical expression, and which we must carry with us
as a criterion whUe we endeavour to form an estimate
of the various plans of Church government which have
been proposed. An aUusion to these plans reminds us
that, K our principles are drawn from the region of
abstract thought, our materials must be largely derived
from the history of the constitution of the Church ; and
in reviewing the several types of organisation we must
consider not only whether they are theoreticaUy suited
to fulfil the highest ends of reUgion, but how far the
anticipations of our theory are justffied by experience.
This critical procedure will enable us, upon rational
grounds, either to select, in each part of our subject,
some existing arrangement, or to suggest modifications in
that which seems on the whole to deserve our preference;
or, if it be possible, to propose something entirely new.
The nature of our inquiry gives rise to two principal
di"risions. In the case of the Church, as in that of every
organised society, we desire to know, first, the nature,
arrangement, and functions of its component parts, and
secondly, the character of thelaws by which it is intemaUy
governed and its outward relations are controUed. Each of
these subjects involves questions of the highest interest.

SEOT. VI.] ECCLESIASTICAL OEGANISATION. 229
I. Principles of Ecclesiastical Association. — These re
late to the composition and to the constitution of the
Church. A. Composition ofthe Church. — It is necessary, before
everything else, to inqufre into the conditions of member
ship in the Church ; for our determination of this point
must affect our entire system. In order to reach a
satisfactory solution we must ascertain the principles of
spiritual feUowship, and to ascertain these we must
ascend to the grounds of communion with God ; for those
who are in communion with Him are bound to have
feUowship one with another, and to rid themselves of
those lower conceptions which keep them reUgiously
apart. In saying this we assume that the Church is not
a private club for the nurture of our own pecuUarities,
but a divine institution which, in its ideal embraces the
whole famUy of God. The terms of Church feUowship,
then, are the same as the terms of communion with
God : the Church is to be, in principle, as wide or as
narrow as His kingdom, and to receive whom He receives
and reject whom He rejects. We are thus referred once
more to Systematic Theology.
Our next question is more purely practical. Having
decided on the general basis of membership, we must
discover the best means of giving effect to our principle,
and of obviating those difficulties which arise in practice
from the imperfection and limitations of the human
mind. Even among those who accept the same spiritual
basis different types of thought and feeUng will exist ;

230 PEACTICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
and our problem is, how, -without injurious friction, to
include the needed variety within the embrace of a
larger unity. An examination of this problem wUl
supply us with the main conditions to which the constitu
tion of the Church must conform K its inclusiveness and
exclusiveness are practically to correspond with our theory.
One more subject invites our attention : are we to
regard no one as a member of the Church until he has
formaUy avowed his acceptance of its conditions, or are
we, on the contrary, to regard as members aU who appear
naturaUy connected "with it untU they formaUy express
thefr dissent or in any other way forfeit their rights ?
or, in other words, is the Church to foUow the analogy
of a purely voluntary association, or that of the State,
which embraces, as a matter of course, aU who are born
within its jurisdiction, untU they either are outlawed
or by their own choice renounce their citizenship ?
B. Constitution of the Church. — Ha"ring ascertained
of whom the Church is composed, and the general con
ditions which are thereby laid upon its organisation, we
must next decide upon its constitution, that is, the
arrangement and mutual relation of its parts, and the
provision for its legislative and administrative functions.
In entering upon this task we must notice first of all the
distinction, which is almost universaUy prevalent, be
tween clergy and laity. Here our doctrinal "riew wUl
once more come into prominence, and in accordance
with it we must mark out the authority and the general
ecclesiastical duties which belong to each. In doing so

SEOT. VI.] ECCLESIASTICAL OEGANISATION. 231
we shaU have to discuss the question, which is of such
vital interest to the spfritual welfare of mankind, whether
the Church is to be imder the absolute dominion of a
hierarchy or the laity are to have a voice in the direction
of affafrs. It is evident that the character of the com
munity must be profoundly affected by the theoretical
conception and the practical adjustment of the relations
between these two orders ; and tUl our minds are clear
upon this point we cannot advantageously re"riew the
actual structure ofthe reUgious commonwealth. Various
constitutions exist, the nature of which is largely governed
by differences of opinion upon this one particular. These
constitutions we are now prepared to criticise, noticing
the merits or defects of each ; and, as a result of our
criticisms, we must draw up in detaU the scheme which
appears to us the best. In doing so we can hardly faU
to encounter the question whether any single mode of
government is reaUy the best, or the spfritual interests
of mankind are better consulted by differences of ad
ministration, adapted to varying circumstances, to suc
cessive grades of culture, or to varieties of mental bias.
The unity of the spirit does not necessitate unKormity
of organisation. Nevertheless, where men have mutual
spfritual sympathy they desfre to express it through
some "visible union ; and hence the further question
must arise whether there might not be some federal
bond which, whUe leaving each organism free to fulfil
its own "rital functions, should combine them aU for the
culture and expression of their common Ufe.

232 PEACTICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
The order which we foUow in fiUing in our plan "wUl
perhaps vary according to the nature of the constitution
which we prefer. But we should probably first of aU
deal "with the Church as a whole, and having marked
out the broad features of its constitution, treat succes
sively of its legislature, its judicature, and its executive,
referring in each instance to the appointment of the
requisite officers, the source and extent of their authority,
and their mode of procedure. We may then pass on to
smaUer societies or groups of congregations, tUl we come
to the congregation itseK, which forms the ecclesiastical
unit ; and we must describe the organisation of these,
and defime thefr relation to the Church which includes
them. If we cfrcumscribe the organism of the Church
by the Umits of the nation, we shaU have to consider
whether some recognised connection might not be use
fully established between Churches which are in feUow
ship with one another but in different countries. The
larger question whether the Church ought not to be
constituted independently of national distinctions would
naturaUy be discussed at an earUer stage of our investi
gation, as a part of our inquiry into the general character
of ecclesiastical government.
II. Principles of Ecclesiastical Law. — Every organisa
tion necessarUy has certain rules or laws which define
its position and control its practice. These increase in
number in proportion to the growing width and com
plexity of the society, for the multipUcation of new
relations and circumstances requires new decisions and

SEOT. VI.] ECCLESIASTICAL OEGANISATION. 233
estabUshes new precedents. Thus there graiduaUy grew
up in the CathoUc Church a vast body of ecclesiastical
law. Probably few who are outside of that venerable
Church would wish to pUe up so elaborate a system of
legislation; but even the smaUest and most loosely
organised sect is practicaUy governed by rales which,
even K they are not written or enforced by any acknow
ledged authority, are generaUy understood, and sustained
by the pressure of pubUc opinion. Hence arises a new
subject for our consideration. We have not indeed to
construct an ideal code, but only to ascertain the rela
tion which ecclesiastical law ought to bear to that of
other societies with which it may be brought into con
nection or colUsion, and the general principles on which
it ought to be based.
A, Relaiion of Ecclesiastical Law to that of other
societies. — By far the most important question which
presents itself under this head is that concerning the
relation of ecclesiastical to civU law. It owes its im
portance not only to the immense power exercised by
both Church and State, but to the fact that members of
one are to a large extent members of the other, and may
therefore be soUcited by conflicting demands, each "with
the apparent force of an obUgation. Thus is raised the
whole controversy as to the connection between Church
and State, requiring us to determine, on one side, the extent
and character of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and the moral
right of the Church to restrain its members from obeying
what it deems to be iniquitous laws ; and, on the other side.

234 PEACTICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
the authority of the ci"ril law over the Church, and the
principles by which it should be governed, involving
the question whether the State is justified in inflicting
penalties for the non-compliance with laws to which the
Church has a conscientious objection. Through this
discussion the nature and reasonableness of toleration
and reUgious liberty wUl be brought into view. Here -
"wUl be the most convenient place to notice the relation
of Churches to one another. So long as they are all
co-ordinated under the power of the State, they may
indeed regard one another with hostiUty, but thefr
several jurisdictions cannot clash. If, however, one is
favoured by the State to the disadvantage of the rest, it
may have the opportunity of using its pri"vUeges so as
to injure its neighbours; and even without a dfrect
alUance with the State, a powerful church may attempt
to encroach upon the rights of the weaker. It is therefore
necessary to consider the principles by which the inter
action of Churches should be regulated ; and as amongst
civilised nations there is an international law which
makes itself felt even in time of war, so there may be,
even if unwritten, an inter-ecclesiastical law which shall
promote friendly intercourse in time of peace, and soften
by its reasonable authority the asperities of inteUectual
and spiritual warfare,
B. Principles of Legislation. — ^These may be considered
under two heads, the proper subjects for legislation, and
the means by which compliance with the law ought to
be enforced.

SEOT. VI.] ECCLESIASTICAL OEGANISATION. 235
(a.) Subjects for legislation. We may di"ride these
into doctrine and practice. The general principles affect
ing legislation upon matters of doctrine wiU have passed
under review in discussing the composition of the
Church ; but we must here treat the question in greater
detaU, and criticise the usage of the leading Churches.
We must consider a problem which is one of growing
importance at the present day, and the solution of which
wUl have the most momentous consequences in the
future history of the Church, whether uniformity of
doctrine is to be enforced by ecclesiastical authority at
aU, and if so, to what extent. The decision may be
given differently in regard to the two great classes of
clergy and laity, and we must therefore deal with their
cases separately. In regard to the former, we must
discuss the propriety and the obligations of subscription
or other solemn mode of pledging oneself to maintain a
particular system of theology; and in regard to the
latter, the advantages or disadvantages of requiring some
formal profession of belief before admitting them to the
fuU privUeges of the Church, and of introducing theo
logical creeds into the ordinary public worship of God.
Under the head oi practice the principal topics are the
regulation of the pubUc services, the conditions of elec
tion and the duties of ministers and other officers, and
the maintenance of a high standard of reUgion and
morals among the members of the Church at large. It
is evident that our opinion respecting the stringency
with which rules relating to such matters ought to be

236 PEACTICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
formed, and the advantage of issuing them from some
central authority, wUl be largely affected by our general
theory of ecclesiastical organisation.
(6.) Means of enforcing compliance with the law.
Where there is a formal union between Church and
State the same court may be at once ecclesiastical and
civU, and then its decisions wUl be carried out by the .
whole force at the disposal of government. In such
cases imprisonment and even death may be inflicted as
a punishment for ecclesiastical offences. But where no
such union exists the Church can have no power beyond
that which belongs to every private association. It may
not infringe the liberty of any subject of the State or
impose penalties which in any way contravene the laws
of the country where it exists. It may indeed appeal
to the ci"ril courts for the enforcement of contracts or
the regulation of property; but the civil courts can
take no cognisance of private offences against its in
ternal discipUne. A Church, therefore, which is not in
union with the State is strictly Umited in its means of
exacting compUance "with its legislation; but it may
censure, it may suspend from office for a greater or less
period, it may refuse admission to certain of its services,
or it may excommunicate. Every voluntary society
must reserve to itseK the right of infUcting some such
penalties if its affafrs are to be carried on with order
and decency ; and our problem is to define the suitable
kinds of penalty, and discover the best modes of in
flicting them, so as to meet at once the necessities

SEOT. VI.] LITUEGICS. 237
of good government and the demands of Christian
charity. 2. Agencies for the expression and cultivation of
Religion. — We now come to the principal object for
which our ecclesiastical organisation is pro"rided. This
may be briefly defined as the efficient maintenance of
those agencies through which the reUgious life of the
members of the Church may find adequate expression
and receive the necessary culture. Such agencies, if we
proceed from those which are most purely expressive
to those which are most purely educational may be
grouped under the four heads of Liturgies, HomUetics,
Poimenics, and Psedeutics.
I. Liturgies, — This term properly denotes the science of
Uturgies or pubUc services. The Greek word \eiTovpyla
is derived from XeiVo? (or Xiji'To?) or Xetro? (from Xao';
or Xeco?), an old Ionic form, superseded by the Attic
Sr]fi6a-io<!, pubUc, and epyov. Observe, it is not derived
from XiTjf, a prayer, from which comes "Utany," and
does not in its original meaning imply any association
"with religion. It is, however, used, with its affiUated
words, in the LXX. to denote the pubUc service of God,
and thence passed in this more Umited sense into the
New Testament and ecclesiastical Uterature. The in
stitution of pubUc worship is grounded in the very
nature of the Church. As the reUgious spirit becomes
developed it impels men, not only to offer praise and
prayer in the retirement of thefr homes, but to join with

238 PEACTICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
their feUows in a common act of self-dedication, which,
springing from mutual sympathy, shall express their
corporate life. This impulse leads to the ordinary
assembUng of the congregation for worship. But be
sides the regular meetings which express the average
and permanent sentiment, the feeUngs which arise in
some of the serious crises of Ufe demand special services
of their own, and not inappropriately seek the Church's _
sympathy and benediction. For the due celebration of
these various services forms more or less flexible must
be provided ; in other words, the Church must have an
estabUshed ritual Now, it is the business of Liturgies
to lay down a theory of ritual, and to foUow it into its
several details.
In attempting to do this we must first of aU deter
mine the general character of pubUc worship, the
sources from which it springs,- and the ends at which it
aims, and thence deduce the principles by which it
ought to be regulated. While in the construction of
these principles we remain faithful to essentials, we
must guard against a narrow and pedantic spirit, and
remember the rich variety of legitimate aspfration which
the Church is bound to satisfy.
Having settled our principles, we must then apply
them to the various elements which enter into the
usual celebration of pubUc worship. One of these,
however, is for sufficient reasons excluded from the
province of Liturgies. The sermon, though less import
ance is attached to it by some parties than by others, is

SEOT. VI.] LITUEGICS. 239
nevertheless a marked feature in the services of the
Christian Church considered as a whole. But it is
broadly distinguished by two characteristics from the
rest of the ser"rice "with which it is associated. It is
didactic instead of being simply an expression of the
heart's devotion ; and, however devout it may be in its
conception, and however spontaneous as an outburst
of reUgious fervour, yet, as an institution, it exists for
the sake of the impression which it may produce or the
instruction which it may convey. And again, it is
distinctly and avowedly the utterance of an individual.
In it the minister no longer acts as the mouthpiece of
the congregation, the authorised leader of an act of
worship in which all are supposed equaUy to participate ;
he is now committed to his own thought and discretion,
and seeks to impress upon his hearers that which
appears to himseK to be important. It is true that he
has generaUy been confined by certain doctrinal Umita
tions ; but even in Churches bound by the most stringent
creeds the sermon stands out from the common devotion
of the congregation as a free and indi-ridual act. It is
therefore not included under the ritual; and while
Liturgies may fix its place in the organic structure of a
complete service, the fuU treatment of its theory is
properly reserved for the separate head of HomUetics.
Of the elements of pubUc worship which belong to
Liturgies prayer is the most important. Here we must
consider, first, the matter which is suitable for pubUc
prayer, and secondly, the manner in which this part of

240 PEACTICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
the service ought to be conducted. Under the latter
head, besides laying down rules generally appUcable to
the composition of prayer, we must notice the contro
versy between liturgies and what is caUed free prayer,
and in regard to free prayer, between the written and
the extempore. The next portion of the ser-rice that
requfres attention is the lessons. By the tacit consent
of the Christian Church some portion of the Bible has
from the earUest time been pubUcly read for the pur
pose of edffication. The items to be attended to here
are the appointment of readers and the selection of the
passages to be read. The question may also be dis
cussed whether extracts from the rich devotional Utera
ture of the Church might not be advantageously read in
addition to the Scriptures, just as the introduction of
more modern hymns in addition to the Psalms has so
greatly enhanced the wealth and expressiveness of our
services. Hymnology is another important branch of
Liturgies, and deals with the contents, the form, the
music, and the selection of hymns. These three
elements constitute the main body of the devotional
ritual; but rales must also be laid down for the col
lection, during service, of the charitable offerings of the
congregation, and finaUy a brief reference must be made
to the closing benediction. When we have thus viewed
in detaU the several elements of which the regular
services of the Church are composed, we have stUl to
construct an order of public worship by combining them
in just proportion and consecution.

.SECT. VI.] LITUEGICS. 241
We must next turn our attention to those special
services for which the Christian Church has almost
universally made provision, Baptism, Confirmation, or
some equivalent dedication of the younger members
of the Church, the Lord's Supper, Marriage, Funeral,
Ordination. To these we must add services appro
priated to particular days in the Christian year. The
mode of conducting these several ser-rices must be con
sidered in detail, and prescribed according to the various
objects which they have in view, and agreeably to the
principles which we have previously recognised as
sound. In regard to all ecclesiastical services certain
questions must recur, which, to avoid repetition, we
may most conveniently place in a distinct section. AU
requfre some definite time and place for their celebra
tion, and some rules must be laid down in regard to
these. The practice observed by the Eoman Catholic
Church of conducting the most solemn forms of worship
in a dead language renders it necessary to say some
thing upon this point ; and even the question of dress
cannot be altogether omitted. The relation of art to
Christian worship involves serious and interesting
questions. Architecture, sculpture, painting, and music,
have all made the most brilliant contributions which
consecrated genius can offer to the expression of re
Ugion. Are these to be gathered into the sanctuary,
and allowed to minister to the loftiest or the most
pathetic emotions of which the human spirit is capable.

242 PEACTICAL THEOLOGY. [part in.
or driven forth with Puritanic dread lest the symbol
should supplant the reality, and the sensuous form
come between the soul and that supreme, invisible
Beauty which alone ought to command our homage and
waken our deepest admiration ?
One topic remains. What manner of man is the
Liturffus himself to be? On what does his infiuence
depend? How far can he exalt by his nobiUty of
character, how far destroy by his unworthiness the
significance and value of the services which he conducts ?
How shall he best prepare himself for his sacred duties,
and so sink every manifestation of self in the majesty of
his office as to bear all hearts with him into the awful
and blessed Presence, and make the worship of the
Church truly a spiritual service of God ?
II. Homiletics. — The word HomUetics, it is perhaps •
hardly necessary to observe, comes from o/juXia, which
properly denotes mutual intercourse or converse, and
was applied to the famUiar and colloquial addresses
which at an early time became customary in Christian
assembUes. The homUy, therefore, is not strictly co
extensive with our sermon, which often aspires to the
rank of a \0709, or regularly constructed discourse ;
but it does no violence to the term to use it as generaUy
descriptive of that peculiar kind of speech which is
deUvered in churches. WhUe, however, it admits of
this extension, it is stUl confined to discourses which
are addressed to feUow-believers, and which accordingly
allow us to presuppose a certain unity of thought and

SEOT. VI.] HOMILETICS. 243
feeling between the speaker and his hearers, and does
not include every imaginable kind of religious oration.
By HomUetics, then, we understand the theory of
preaching in the regular services of the Church.
In the development of our theory we must first of
all ascertain the specific character of the sermon ; for
on this our subsequent rules wiU depend. What is the
object which it has in view? In what way does it
endeavour to accompUsh that object? In answering
these questions we must distinguish it from those kinds
of speech to which it is most nearly aUied — the oration,
the lecture, the meditation. Having gained a clear
idea of what the sermon is, we may next view it in its
connection with Liturgies, and consider whether it is
subject to any restrictions from the necessity of har
monising it with the solemn expression of the Church's
devotion. The most serious problem that here presents
itself is to determine the precise amount of Uberty that
the preacher may justly and advantageously claim. Is
he to speak simply in the name of the Church, and
confine himself rigorously within a prescribed circle of
dogma ? Or is he, on the other hand, to speak solely
from himself, and to flmg forth every random thought
and novelty that may happen to entice him with a
momentary attraction, without regard to the convictions
or the needs of his congregation ? Or is there a middle
course which combines the advantages of both methods,
while avoiding their errors, and is it possible to acquire
that width of culture which, though leaving us free to

244 PEACTICAL THEOLOGY. [part in.
listen to that which is deepest and mightiest in our
selves, vriU save us from the tyranny of random thoughts
and novelties ; and to gain that immersion in the hoUest
spirit of Christian faith which, though aUowing a man
to be a prophet instead of a puppet, wiU yet bring him
into communion -with the grandest Ufe of the Church,
and enable him to find the most spiritual sympathy of
his hearers and to penetrate the innermost core of their
con-rictions ? Our settlement of this problem wiU help
us to solve a further question. Is preaching to be per
mitted only to ministers duly qualified by a formal
training, or is it to be open also to laymen who are fitted
by their gifts, culture, and reUgious character to speak
with effect to their feUow-men upon the highest
themes, and who, not being open to any suspicion of
professional taint, and having a larger practical know
ledge ofthe world, might in some respects have greater
influence than those with whom the production of
sermons is an official duty ?
Having completed our general theory of preaching,
we come to the composition and deUvery of the indi
vidual sermon. Here we must foUow to a large extent
the rales of rhetoric, only modifying them to suit the
particular kind of discourse that we have in hand. In
considering the material of the sermon, we must notice
first the principles which are universaUy appUcable to
the selection and statement of the subject if a public
address is to be reaUy effective. We must next investi
gate the kind of matter that is suitable or unsuitable to

SEOT. VI.] HOMILETICS. 245
sermons in general. And lastly, we must remark upon
the subjects that are adapted to various occasions and
purposes. From the choice of the material we pass on
to its arrangement. This must depend in part on the
nature of the sermon. Some sermons are simply ex
pository of a passage in Scripture, and follow the order
of thought which is there presented. These are caUed
"analytical." Others, on the contrary, start with a
certain theme, and expand it in its proper logical order.
These are known as "synthetical." Yet a third class
endeavours, by a skUful selection of the text, to combine
these two methods. For the disposition of the subject
under these various modes of treatment rules must be
provided. The style wiU next claim our attention, and
lastly, the deUvery. .In connection -with the latter we
must not only examine the requirements of elocution
and gesture, but must carefuUy estimate the respective
merits of the different kinds of delivery — extempore,
memoriter, and reading from the manuscript.
We may suitably close our HomUetics by an inquiry
into the ultimate sources of pulpit power, and the nature
of that spiritual preparation without which we may
have an eloquent oration or a logical lecture or a Uterary
essay, but not a sermon — a discourse drawn from the
soul's deepest Ufe, delivered through Ups that have been
touched by fire from the altar, winging its way far into
the souls of the hearers, and not lowering them to the
praise of a man, but lifting them to the worship of
God.

246 PEACTICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
III. Poimenics, or Pastoral Theology, — This portion
of our subject relates to the more private and personal
care which the minister exercises towards the members
of the congregation committed to his charge, or towards
others whom he may be reasonably expected to influence.
It admits less of scientiflc treatment than the inqufries
which have hitherto come before us ; for plans must be
continually modified to suit varying cfrcumstances, and
true pastoral success depends upon quaUties of mind
and heart which cannot be communicated by instruc
tion, and in the appUcation of which rales are of much
less service than in more inteUectual labours. It is,
however, possible to point out the leading dfrections
which pastoral acti-rity must assume, and to lay down
in regard to each certain general principles, which must
be accepted rather as the flexible suggestions of wisdom
and experience than as rigid technical laws. The sub
ject, being of an inexact character, easUy aUows different
modes of division ; but it may be found convenient to
consider first the general supervision which a minister
exercises over the best interests of his congregation, and
secondly, his intercourse with individuals affected in
various ways, outwardly or inwardly. In order that his
supervision may be wise and useful it is necessary that
he should become acquainted with his people, and we
are thus introduced to the question of regular -risiting,
and the formation of societies or other agencies for pro
moting intercourse between the congregation and their
minister. Whether any further action should arise out

SECT. VI.] POIMENICS. 247
of the mutual knowledge thus obtained, must depend on
a variety of circumstances. Where the congregation is
in the main wealthy and highly cultured, the members
will be comparatively independent of the special aids to
improvement which a Church may provide ; but in poorer
and less educated communities the minister will do
weU to study the social conditions among which his
people Uve, and devise agencies which wUl conduce to
their moral and religious elevation. We need only
refer, by way of example, to the diffusion of information
by tracts or lectures, and the estabUshment of libraries,
of sa-rings banks, of temperance societies. From these
more general labours we tum to those which concern
different classes of individuals. The minister, even in
a short experience, wiU be brought into contact with the
poor, the sick, the affiicted, the vicious, and perhaps the
criminal. He may be caUed in as a mediator in quarrels,
or, -without being invited, may have the opportunity of
acting as a peacemaker. He "wiU be required to influ
ence men of every variety of spiritual type, the sceptical,
those who are indifferent to reUgion or to public worship,
those who suffer from a sense of sin, or are oppressed by
doubt, or pine under some other form of mental distress.
He will have to listen to the smooth tongue of hypocrisy,
the sincere regrets of penitence, the confession of the
dying, the triumphant thanksgi"ring of those who have
found for the first time the reaUty of God. To aU these
he wiU have to speak the needed word, and Pastoral
Theology must tender such ad"rice as wUl help the

248 PEACTICAL THEOLOGY. [part in.
natural tact of sympathy and love. A concluding
section may sum up the personal qualifications of the
good pastor, and refer to the means whereby he may
cultivate that spfritual discernment which, IKting its
possessor above the fear of human judgment, enables
him to know what is in man, and to reach the deep
springs of life in the various characters that pass before
him. IV. Pcedeutics, — The term Psedeutics signifies the
science of education, and, in its theological use, denotes
the theory of that religious instruction which is pro
vided by the Church for the benefit of its members. It
is usual to combine "with Liturgies, Homiletics, and Poi
menics, only one subordinate branch of Paideutics,
namely Catechetics ; but it seems better to place together
under one head aU the educational agencies which the
Church finds it necessary to estabUsh. These may be
divided into agencies which are intended for the younger
or less experienced and those which meet the wants of
older and more advanced students. The theory of the
former is known as Catechetics, the principles of the
latter we may distinguish by the name of Theological
Didactics. A. Catechetics, — This term is derived from Karrj'^elv,
to sound in the ears, and hence to give oral instruction.
The substantive KaTi]')(r](ri<; was used in early times to
describe the preparatory teaching which new converts
received prior to baptism. Owing to the practice of
infant baptism its application is now modified, but its

SEOT. VI.] PJDDEUTICS. 249
general purport remains substantiaUy the same : it stUl
denotes that oral instruction which is designed to enable
the younger and less experienced members of the Church
to assume their place in the kingdom of God with in
telUgent con"riction and deUberate and weU-grounded
purpose. To unfold the theory of this kind of instruc
tion is the business of Catechetics. We may begin by
laying down the principles on which catechetical teach
ing depends, so that we may apprehend more clearly
the object which is proposed and the nature of the
means by which it may be attained. The end in "riew
must next be resolved into its three elements — the com
munication of the necessary knowledge, the training of
the powers of thought upon religious and moral subjects,
and the awakening and development of religious feeling.
Each of these must be taken up in succession, and viewed
not only in its general bearing, but in its relation to
different ages and capacities. The question of method
"will next engage our attention, and we must weigh the
respective merits of the several modes of teaching which
have been technicaUy named the "acroamatic" (from
aKpodo/jMi, to Usten), in which the learner is simply a
Ustener, the " erotematic " (from ipcordo), to ask), the
system of question and answer, and the "Socratic,"
which seeks to draw forth by skUful questioning the
ideas latent in the mind of the pupU. We must con
sider also the advantages or disadvantages of catechisms,
of lessons to be learned at home, and other means of
assisting the memory or clearing the thought. This

250 PEACTICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
wUl lead naturally to some remarks on the qualffica tions
of the catechist himseK. Thus far our theory will apply
generally to the religious instraction of the young ; but
when we come to the practical agencies for giving in
struction we must make a division. Attention is usuaUy
confined to the minister's class ; but the Sunday school,
if its teaching admits of wider scope, has substantiaUy
the same end in "riew, and may properly be included
under Catechetics. For the conduct of a minister's class
only general directions can be given, for much must
depend upon local circumstances. A Sunday school,
however, must exhibit everywhere the same general
features; and as it is a highly complex agency, the
various parts of its external management must be brought
under weU-defined rales, and its various connected in
stitutions placed in thefr proper relation to the grand
purpose which ought to pervade this free and beneficent
movement of Christian phUanthropy.
B. Didactics, — The object of Didactics is to consider
the principles and method of a more extended and exact
instruction than is contemplated by Catechetics. In
this kind of teaching knowledge and thought must take
the leading place, and the cultivation of the religious
affections, although it cannot be neglected, and may
insensibly accompany the whole process of training, wiU
not be so prominent as in that which is intended for less
mature minds. Various agencies may be devised for
communicating this more advanced knowledge ; but
perhaps we shall be sufficiently comprehensive if we

.SECT. VI.] MISSIONS. 251
classify them under the three heads of the private class,
the public lecture, and the theological college, or the
theological faculty at a university. Each of these may
be -viewed in the light both of theory and experience, and
the college especiaUy will afford an ample field for the dis
cussion of the objects for which it should be founded,
of the principles on which it should be based, and of the
methods by which its purposes may best be realised.
We thus complete our survey of the internal economy
of the Church, and are now prepared to view it in its
action on the surrounding world.
3. Agencies for the propagation of Religion outside the
Church, — ^Agencies for the external promotion of religion
may be comprehended under the term missions, and
missions may be divided into domestic and foreign.
The theory of foreign missions has been variously named
HaUeutics (the science of fishing, from aXievco, iu aUusion
to the " fishers of men "), Keryktics (from Kiqpvcrdw, to
proclaim), Evangelistics, and ApostoUcs. So far as the
domestic mission is simply a Christian congregation
maintained in a poor neighbourhood by a wealthier
society, it does not come under the present head, but
must find its place in what has been afready said about
the organisation and work of the Church. So far,
however, as it aims primarily at attacking the heathenism
which exists at home, and bringing under the influences
of religious feUowship those who are practicaUy outside
of aU the Churches, there is no reason why it should not

252 PEACTICAL THEOLOGY. [part HI.
be included with foreign missions under HaUeutics. The
object is in both cases essentially the same, to gather
into the kingdom of God those who are ignorant of it,
or, if they know something of its superficial aspects,
regard it with indifference or aversion. The two agencies,
however, are carried on under such different social con
ditions, and to a certain extent appeal for their support
to such different motives, that they require a separate
treatment. At the same time they need not be here
dissociated, since we have only to indicate the general
direction which our investigations must assume ; and the
main topics for discussion, however they may vary in
their detailed subdivisions and conclusions, must present
themselves in each instance. First, we must grasp the
inward reUgious principle in which missionary enterprise
has its roots, and ascertain its true place and value in
the collective spfritual life. Our determination of these
points must affect our whole conception of religious pro-
pagandism, and is itself dependent on our theological
convictions. Next, it will be necessary clearly to define
the object at which we aim, to mark off any by-ends
which, though subordinate, are still legitimate, and to
point out the misleading purposes which can only cor
rupt the purity of our work. We may then proceed to
consider the best means of exciting an interest in mis
sionary effort, of procuring for it the requisite support,
and of organising a system of management. The selec
tion, appointment, and qualifications of missionaries must
not be overlooked. And finally, we must discuss the

SEOT. VI.] CAEE OF THE POOE. 253
best methods of procedure in carrjdng on the actual
work of the mission in different places and under
varjdng conditions.
4. Action of the Church outside the sphere of Religion.
— With the discharge of its religious functions it might
seem that the action of the Church was complete, and
that it must modestly retire from aU other fields of
human endeavour. But the disinterested benevolence
of reUgion extends its care to whatever affects the weal
of man ; and it is only becoming that an organisation
resting on the basis of religion, and primarUy founded
for purely religious objects, should exert its influence on
behalf of the general welfare of society. The Church,
accordingly, has largely mixed itseK up with secular
affairs, sometimes with beneficial result, but sometimes
without advantage either to its own spirituaUty or to
social progress and enlightenment. The injurious effects
which it may have had render it aU the more necessary
to include this subject in our scheme of Practical Theo
logy, that we may be put upon our guard against dangers
and abuses, and ascertain the limits and methods of the
Church's salutary action. Three principal directions
assumed by the activity of the Church invite our
attention. Ffrst, the care of the poor, which is so congenial to
the spirit of Christianity, has from the earUest times
given rise to practical arrangements for inqufring into
the merits and necessities of those requiring assistance,

254 PEACTICAL THEOLOGY. [part III.
and for the distribution of relief. This is a function
which the Church cannot abdicate, although its mode of
action must vary in accordance with altered social con
ditions. We may distinguish the provision which is
made for its own poor by each congregation and the
charities which are intended to assist the poor of a town
or district. In the former case a closer personal know
ledge of the recipients will naturally exist, the needed
help will more easily take the form of a brotherly gift,
and abuses wiU be less likely to arise. StUl the best
modes of coUecting and administering the funds, and the
way in which relief may be given so as to awaken most
fully the sense of Christian sympathy and do least injury
to the independence and self-reliance of the character,
are subjects weU worthy of consideration. For the
proper management of charities which go further afield
it is necessary to be acquainted with the poor-law ofthe
country, so that the relief which is given may not over
lap, but judiciously supplement the labours of the poor-
law officer. It is how a weU-estabUshed social law that
indiscriminate almsgiving aggravates the evUs which it
is intended to cure; and hence it is necessary to lay
down rules for the guidance of our benevolent impulses,
so that the highest ends of Christian charity may be
secured. This leads to the question of the organisation
of charity, so that different agencies may not be working
without mutual knowledge in the same field, a practice
which gives rise to grave abuses. We must remember,
moreover, that almsgiving is not the only mode of ad-

SEOT. VI.] GENEEAL EDUCATION. 255
ministering relief to the needy. Various other agencies
must come under our notice. And lastly, we must
consider the relation in which the Church ought to
stand towards the great charities which have been
founded by the energy of private benevolence and de
pend for their support upon voluntary contributions,
such as hospitals and dispensaries.
The second main topic for inquiry is the part which
the Church ought to have in the education of the
country. It is impossible for the Church in this matter
to stand aside as an indifferent spectator; for not only
are her own interests deeply involved in the results of
education, but she would be faithless to her highest
mission if she did not desire to see the youth of every
country trained in the noblest principles of virtue and
religion. The influence of a corrupt Church, however,
may be most maUgn, and many friends of education at
the present day view with more than suspicion all
ecclesiastical meddling with this department of the
national Ufe. Ecclesiastics retort with charges of in
fidelity and secularism. This schism cannot be whole
some for either Church or State; and it is therefore
desirable to discuss the proper relation of the Church to
national education, and the means whereby its legitimate
influence may be secured without danger to the interests
of a wide and manly culture or to the freedom of the
individual reason and conscience. Our views upon this
point wUl obviously be controlled by our general theory
of the Church and its organisation.

256 PEACTICAL THEOLOGY. [part hi.
Our last topic concerns the action of the Church in
poUtical and social movements. Even where a Church
has no formal connection with the State it has a right.
of petition, its members are citizens with votes, and its
strongly-expressed opinion must have some weight in
the deliberations of Parliament. It can also address the
pubUc through its officers, or in other ways take part in
the popular agitations of the time. How far ought the
Church to mix itself up in affairs of this kind ? Ought
it to hold itself aloof in a holy seclusion, and allow
social questions which stfr the deepest passions and most
vitally affect the welfare of mankind to pass before it
as though it had no eye for these things, or to step down
into the arena with smooth and peaceful brow, bearing
in one hand the scales of justice and in the other the
sceptre of conscience, tranquUUsing with words of sym
pathy and wisdom the fury of the crowd, and with lofty
disinterestedness shaming the selfishness of privilege,
sorrowfully rebuking oppression and greed, and lifting
a glad victorious voice on behalf of Uberty and right ?
If we accept the latter alternative, we must seek for the
principles by which the action of the Church ought to
be governed, so that it may never contract the taint of
earth, nor borrow the passions of the world which it
seeks to rale, but, like its great Master, mingle in the
controversies of men only to bless them with its love,
and reconcile them through its spfrit of benign and
healing power.

INDEX.

[N.B. — If the treatment of a subject referred to extend over several pages, only
the number of the first page is given. Figures in thiclc type indicate the prin
cipal place where a subject is treated.]

ABfeiARD, 146.
Abraham, 105.
Accadian, 34.
Acts, Book of, 96.
Adam, 198,200.
Adrian, 90.
.fflthiopic, 34, 78.
Agnosticism, 5t.
Alexandria, 79, 89, 150.
Allegorical Interpretation, 88, 89.
Anagogic Interpretation, 89. ¦
Angels, 194.
Animism, 67.
Anselm, 146, 147. .
Anthropology, 185.
' Antioch, 150.
Antiquities, Christian, 140.
 of the Bible, 101.
Apocalypse, 72, 96.
Apocrypha, 75, 96.
Apologetic Period, 147.
Apologetics, 176.
Apostles' Creed, 149.
Apostles, Lives of the, 106, 118.
Apostolic Age, History of the, 118.
Apostolical Succession, 203.
Apostolics, 251.
Arabic, 34, 78.
Aramsean, 77, 78, 79.
Archaeology, Biblical, 97.
 Christian, 140.
Architecture, 163, 241.
Arianism, 149.
Armenian, 34.
Arminians, 152.

Art, History of Christian, 161.
 Relation of, to Christian -wor
ship, 241.
 Eelation of, to Theology, 39.
Articles of belief, 185.
Arts of the Hebre-ws, 102.
Astronomy, 38.
Assyria, 100.
Assyrian, 34, 77.
Assyrian monuments, 105.
Athauasian Creed, 149.
Athanasius, 146.
Atheism, 57.
Atonement, 189, 201.
Augsburg Confession and Apology,
151.
Augsburg, Diet at, 152.
Automatism, 58.
Babylonia, 77, 100.
Babylonian Captivity, 79, 106.
 monuments, 105.
Baptism, 204, 241.
Barnabas, 155.
Basilica, 162.
Bible, as a source of Doctrine, 180.
 Doctrine of, in relation to
historical investigation, 104.
 Theology of the, 72.
Biblical Theology, 70.
Bleek, 95.
Calviw, 186.
Calvinistic Church, 151.
Canaan, Dialect of, 77.

258

INDEX.

Canon, History of the, 91, 92, 95.
Canon of New Testament, 73.
 of Old Testament, 74.
Canones et Decreta Conoilii Triden-
tini, 151.
Canon-law, 139.
Capita fidei, 185.
Captivity, 79, 106.
Cardinals, 139.
Catechetics, 248.
Catechism, Larger and Shorter, of
Scotch Church, 152.
— : — Luther's Larger and Smaller,
151.
Catechismus Heidelbergensis, 152.
 Eomanus, 151.
Cathedral, 140, 161.
Catholicism, 136, 137, 148, 155,
167.
Chaldee, 34, 77.
 Paraplirases, 78.
 Passages in Old Testament,
78.
Charlemagne, 134, 135.
Christ, Doctrine of, 200.
 Life of, 106, 114, 121.
Christianity, Claim of, to attention,
5.
 • Place of, ^.mong religions, 70.
 Relation of, to Judaism, 74.
— — Eelation of, to Scriptures, 72,
93.
— — Truth of, not to be assumed at
the outset of inquiry, 5.
Christology, 185.
Chronology, 130.
Church as a source of Doctrine, 182.
— — Composition of the, 229.
 Constitution of the, 230.
 • Doctrine of the, 201.
 History of the, 122.
 History of constitution of the,
138, 139.
 Origin of the, 125.
 Political action of the, 256.
 • Eelation of the, to education,
265 ; to the State, 130, 233 ; to
the Theological College, 20.
Church (the building), 140, 161.
Clemens Romanus, 155.

Clergy, 139, 203.
Coccejus, 186.
College, 9, 14, 18, 20, 251.
Commentary, 85.
Comparative Religion, 63.
Concordienbuch, 151.
Confessions of the Greek Church,
150.
.  of the Reformed Church, 152.
Confirmation, 204, 241.
Congregation, 232.
Congregational government, 140.
Conscience, 60.
Consensus Patrum, 155.
Consistorial government, 139.
Constantine, 134.
Constantinople, 135, 149, 160.
Conversion, 205.
Corpus dogmaticum, 185.
Council of Constantinople, 149 ; of
Nicasa, 146-7, 149; of Trent,
151 ; Vatican, 161.
Councils, 139.
Critica sacra, 81.
Criticism, Higher and lower, 82.
 Textual 81.
Dante, 161.
Decalogue, 211.
Deism, 148.
DevU, 199.
Dicta probantia, 112.
Didactics, 248, 250.
Diplomatics, 131.
Divina Commedia, 161.
Doctores ecelesise, 155.
Doctrinal Theology, 184 ; Place of,
in Systematic Theology, 176 ;
Proposed scheme of, 190.
Doctrine, Sources of, 178.
Doctrines, History of, 138, 141.
 General and Special History
of, 144.
Dogma, 168.
Dogmatic Interpretation, 89.
Dogmatics, 168, 169, 176, 184
Domer, 189.
Dort, Synod of, 162.
Dutch, 34.
Dyophysites, 160.

INDEX.

259

Eastern Church, 135, 150.
Ecclesiastical Association, Principles
of, 229.
 '¦ History, 122.
 Law, Principles of, 232.
 Organisation, 227.
Ecclesiology, 185.
Education, 255.
Egypt, 99.
Egyptian Hieroglyphics, 34.
 Monuments, 105.
Einleitung, 90.
Eirenics, 176, 177.
Encyklopadie der Theologie, 42.
England, Church of, 152.
Episcopacy, 139.
Epistles, 96 ; Pauline, 97.
Eschatology, 185.
Ethics, 60, 176, 207.
Eusebius, 105.
Evangelistics, 251.'
Evolution, 38, 194.
Ewald, Heinrich, 107.
Ewald, Paul, 150.
Exegesis, 108.
Exegetical Theology, 70.
Exodus, 105.
Exposition and Explanation, 109.
Extreme Unction, 204.
Fall, The, 198.
Farrer, 46.
Fathers, 154 ; Apostolical, 155.
Fetichism, 67.
Formula of Concord, 151.
French, 34.
Funeral, 241.
Gennadius, 150.
Geography, Biblical, 99 ; Ecclesias
tical, 130.
Geology, 38.
German, 34.
Gesenius, 99.
Glassius, 81.
God, Doctrine of, 192.
Gospels, 96, 115.
Grace, 205.
Grammatico- historical interpreta
tion, 89.

Greece, 100.
Greek, 33, 131, 160 ; of New Testa
ment, 78.
Greek Church, 73, 135, 150.
Gregory the Great, 146, 155.
Griesbach, 84.
Hadrian, 106, 107.
Hagenbach, 42, 50, 70, 82, 99, 166,
188, 212, 224, 226.
Hagiographa, 74, 96.
Halieutics, 251.
Hase, 151.
Hausrath, 107. ,
Heathen reUgions, 67.
Hebraism, 113.
Hebrew, 34, 77.
Henotheism, 68.
Heredity, 197.
Heresy, 143.
Hermas, 155.
Hermeneutics, 84, 108.
HUgenfeld, 95.
Himyaritic, 78.
History of the Israelites, 103.
History, Place of, as preparation
for Theology, 34.
Hodge, 185.
Holy Ghost, Procession of the, 150.
Homiletics, 110, 239, 242.
Hymnology, 240.
Ignatius, 156.
Immortality, 206.
Incarnation, 189.
Innocent III., 136, 146, 161.
Interpretation, Schools of, 88.
Introduction, 82, 90.
Israelites, History of the, 103.
 Religion of the. 111.
Italy, 100.
Jacobites, 150.
Jerusalem, 100, 160.
Johannine Theology, 120.
Josephus, 105.
Judaism, Historic position of, 106,
113.
 Place of, among religions, 69.
 Relation of, to Christianity, 74.

260

INDEX.

Justification, 205.
Justinian, 162.
Kautzsch, 43.
Kennicott, 84.
Keryktics, 251.
"Koivij StdkeKTOS, 80.
Koran, 180.
Koreish, 78.
Kritik, 82.
Lachmann, 84.
Languages, Biblical, 76.
Latin, 33, 131, 160.
Latin Church, 73.
Law, as a division of the Old Testa
ment, 96.
Legal Religion, 69.
Legates, 139.
Legend, 104.
Leo HI., 135 ; XIIL, 52.
Lessons in the Church, 240.
Liberty of thought, 22, 29.
Liberty, Religious, 148, 234.
Life of Christ, 106, 114, 121.
Lipsius, 189.
Litany, 237.
Literature, History of Christian,
169.
Liturgies, 237.
Liturgy, 237.
Lives of the Apostles, 106, 118.
Local method, 185.
Loci classici, 112.
Lord's Supper, 204, 241.
Luther, 136, 137, 146, 151.
Lutheran Church, 151.
Maccabees, 106, 107.
 First Book of, 106.
Macedonia, 100.
Macedonian Empire, 80.
Man, Doctrine of, 196, 204.
Manetho, 105.
Manning, Cardinal, 52.
Maronites, 150.
Matrimony, 204, 241.
Matthew, Gospel according to St.,
80.
Melanchthon, 151.

Mesopotamia, 77.
Methodus foederalis, 186.
Metropolitan, 139.
Middle Ages, 136, 146, 147, 161.
MUton, 40.
Mind, Nature of, 58.
Miracles, 116.
Missions, 251.
Mogilas, 160.
Mohammed II. , 150.
Mohammedanism, 78, 130.
Monarchy, Hebrew, 106.
Monasteries, 135.
Monophysites, 150.
Monotheism, 68, 69.
Monothelites, 150.
Moral Interpretation, 89.
Morals, History of, 156.
Music, 162, 163, 241.
Mystical Interpretation, 89.
Myth, 104.
Neander, 147.
Nestorians, 149.
Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte,
107.
New Testament, Canon of, 73.
 Critical editions of, 83, 84.
 Language of, 78.
 Origin of, 72.
 Theology of, 119.
Nicasa, Council of, 146-7, 149.
Nicene Creed, 149, 150.
Numismatics, 131.
Old Testament, Canon of, 74.
 Language of, 78.
 Textual Criticism of, 84.
 Theology of, 111.
Ontology, 38.
Oratory, 140.
Ordination, 204, 241.
Oriental Languages, 77.
Origen, 155.
P.a)DEUTics, 248.
Painting, 162, 163, 241.
Palestine, 99.
Pantheism, 68.
Papacy, 135, 136.

INDEX.

261

Papias, 156.
Paraphrase, 86, 110.
Pastoral Theology, 246.
Patriarch, 139.
Patristics, 148, 154.
Patrology, 166.
PauUnism, 120.
Pelt, 48.
Penance, 204.
Persia, 100.
Philo, 106.
Philologia sacra, 76, 81.
Pliilology, Ecclesiastical, 131.
Pliilosophy, Ethical, 60 ; History
of, 130; Mental, 56; Place of,
in Theology, 51 ; Eeligious, 61.
Phoenicia, Dialect of, 77.
Physica sacra, 100.
Physiography, BibUcal, 100.
Pisteology, 190.
Poetry, 40.
Poimenics, 246.
Polemics, 176, 177.
Political Antiquities of the Bible,
101.
Political Economy, 86.
Polycarp, 156.
Polytheism, 68.
Poor, Care of the, 253.
Pope, 139, 182.
Positive Theology, 168, 169.
Practical Theology, 220.
Prayer, 141, 196, 239.
Preaching, 14, 141. /See HomUetics.
Predestination, 204.
Presbyterian government, 140.
Preuss, 150.
Primitive-Apostolic doctrine, 120.
Professio fidei Trideutinse, 151.
Prophets, 96.
Protestants, 75, 137, 139, 140, 142,
148, 151, 156, 172, 181.
Providence, 196.
Purgatory, 207,
Purists, 81.

Eabbinical Hebrew, 34.
 Schools, 78.
 Writings, 105.

Rabiger, 43, 48, 50, 70, 82, 89, 94,
163, 177, 189, 192, 214, 224.
Rationalistic Interpretation, 89.
Reconciliation, Doctrine of, 199.
Reformation, 135, 142, 146, 147,
161.
Reformed Church, 161.
Regeneration, 206.
Religious element in man, 62, 178.
Representative government of
Church, 140.
Reuss, 89, 90, 91.
Revelation, Christ's, 201 ; Relation
of, to phUosophy, 54.
Ritual, History of, 138, 140.
 Theory of, 238.
Eoman Church, 150, 151.
 Empire, 134.
Romano-German. CathoUcism, 136.
Rossi, de, 84.
Rothe, 133, 168, 169, 170, 209,
222, 224.
Sacerdotalism, 203.
Sacraments, 141, 186, 203, 204.
Sacred Antiquities ofthe Bible, 102.
Samaritan dialect, 77.
Sanctification, 206, 210,
SchafiF, 160.
Schleiermacher, 45, 163, 168, 187.
Schmalkald, Articles of, 151.
Schneckenburger, 107.
Scholarship, 19, 41.
Scholasticism, 147.
Schriftauslegung and Schrifter-
klarung, 109.
Schurer, 107.
Science, History of, 130 ; Natural,
38.
Sciences of the Hebrews, 102.
Scotland, Church of, 162.
Scriptores ecclesiastici, 155.
Scriptures, Greek Translation of the
Jewish, 79 ; Beading ofthe, 141 ;
Translations of the, 160.
Sculpture, 162, 241.
Semitic languages, 77.
Sermon, 238, 243.
Shelley, 40.
Simon, R., 90.

262

INDEX.

Sin, Doctrine of, 196.
Sinai, 100.
Singing, 141.
Slavery, Relation of Christianity to,
158.
Social Antiquities of the Bible, 101.
 science, 36,
Sophia, St., Church of, 162.
Soteriology, 185.
Sources of Doctrine, 176, 178.
Speculative Theology, 170.
Sphragistics, 131.
Spiritual ReUgion, 69.
Spiritual things spirituaUy dis
cerned, 24.
Statistics, Ecclesiastical, 163.
Staudenmaier, 44.
Sunday School, 250.
Symbolics, 138, 148, 169.
Symbols, (Ecumenical, 149, 151.
Symbolum ApostoUcum, 149.
 "Quicunque vult," 149.
Synod of Dort, 152.
 at Jerusalem, 150.
Synods, 139.
Syria, 77.
Syriac, 34, 77.
Systematic-polemic Period, 147.
Systematic Theology, 165, 228.
Targums, 78.
Teaching, Ministerial, 16.
Temptation, 198.
Textual Criticism, 81.
Theologia topica, 112.
Theological Ethics, 176, 207.
Theological Study, Principles of, 20.
Theologik, 43.
Theologische Encyklopadie, 42.
Theology, Basis and compass of, 2 ;
Biblical, 70 ; Definition of, 1 ;
Division of, 44 ; Historical, 50 ;
Importance of, 7 ; of the Bible,
72 ; of the New Testament, 72,
119 ; of the Old Testament, 72,
111 ; Pastoral, 246 ; Place of, in

education, 7 ; Practical, • 220 ;
Relation of, to Art, 39 ; to His
tory, 34 ; . to Languages, 32 ; to
Philosophy, 51 ; to Physical
Science, 38 ; to Poetry, 40 ; to
Social Science, 36 ; Sources of,
2 ; Synoptical view of, 42 ; Sys
tematic, 166 ; Value of, to the
Minister, 12.
Theology as a subdi-vision of Dog
matics, 185.
Thirty-nine Articles, 152.
Thirty Years' War, 137.
Thought, Manner of growth of, 143.
Tischendorf, 84.
Titus, 106.
Toleration, 234.
Topical method, 185.
Topography, 100.
Trajan, 106.
Translation, 85, 110.
TregeUes, 84.
Trent, Council of, 161.
Trinity, 149, 160, 194.
Various Readings, 83, 84.
Visiting, Pastoral, 17, 246.
War, Eelation of Christianity to,
158.
Weiss, 120.
Westcott and Hort, 84.
Western Church, 136, 150.
Western Empire, 134.
Westminster Confession, 152.
WestphaUa, Peace of, 137.
Wette, de, 113.
WUl, Nature of the, 58, 197.
WUliam III., 137.
Winer, 81, 150.
Witsius, 186.
Word, The, 185, 203.
Wordsworth, 40.
Worship, Public, 141, 238.
Z-winoli, 162.

Printed by R. & R. Clark, Edinburgh.

MESSRS. MACMILLAN & CO.'S PUBLICATIONS.

By James Martineau, LLC, D.D.
A Study of Spinoza. By James Martineau,
LL.D., D.D., Fellow of Manchester New College, London. With
Portrait. Second Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s.
" A very faithful and pleasant account of the philosopher's life. In some respects
fuller than any that has yet been published in England."— Spectator.
" The author's account of Spinoza's philosophy is no less able in its way than
his graceful biography."— Safurdaj/ Beview.

The Unseen Universe ; or. Physical Speculations
on a Future State. By Professors Balfour Ste-wart and P. G.
Tait. New Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s.
Paradoxical Philosophy. Being a Sequel to " The
Unseen Universe.'' Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.
Ecce Homo. A Survey of the Life and Work of
Jesus Christ. Seventeenth Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s.
Natural Eeligion. By the Author of " Ecce
Homo. " Second Edition. Fourth Thousand. 8vo. 9s.
Philochristus. Memoirs of a Disciple of the Lord.
Second Edition. 8vo. 12s.
Onesimus. Memoirs of a Disciple of St. Paul.
By the Author of "Philochristus." Demy 8vo. 10s. 6d.

MACMILLAN & CO., LONDON.

MESSRS, MACMILLAN & CCS PUBLICATIONS.

The New Testament in the Original Greek. The
Text revised by B. P. Westcott, D.D., Eegius Professor of
Divinity, Canon of Westminster, and F. J. A. Hort, D.D., Hul-
sean Professor of Divinity, FeUow of Emmanuel College, Cambridge ;
late Fellows of Trinity College, Cambridge. 2 vols. Crown 8vo.
10s. 6d. each.
J VoL I. Text. — II. The Introdttctioit and Appendix.
The Greek Testament and the English Version,
A Companion to. By Philip Schaff, D.D., President of the
American Committee of Revision. With PacsimUe Illustrations
of MSS. and Standard Editions of the New Testament. Crown
8vo. 12s.
The Bible Word-Book : a Glossary of Archaic
Words and Phrases in the Authorised Version of the Bible and the
Book of Common Prayer. By W. Aldis Wright, M.A., Fellow
and Bursar of Trinity College, Cambridge. Second Edition, Re
vised and Enlarged. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.
Ealph Waldo Emerson, the Collected Works of.
With an Introductory Essay by John Morley. Globe 8vo.
Price 5s. each.
1. Miscellanies. With an Introductory Essay by John
Morley. 2. Essays. 3. Poems. 4. English Traits ; and
Representative Men. 5. Conduct of Life ; and Society and
Solitude. 6. Letters ,; and Social Aims ; eto.
¦' " The more we see of this edition the more -we like it." — Academy.
Works hy John Eichaed Green, M.A., LL.D., Late
Honoi-ary Fellow of Jesus College, Oxford.
The Conquest of England. With Portrait and
Maps. Demy 8vo. 18s.
The Makiiig of England. With Maps. 8vo. 16s.
History of the English People. In Four Vols.
8vo. 16s. each.
Vol. I. Early England. — Foreign Kings— The Charter—
The Parliament. With Eight Coloured Maps. Vol. II. The
Monarchy, 1461-1540. — The Reformation, 1540-1603. Vol.
III. Puritan England, 1603-1660.— The Revolution, 1660-
1688. With Four Maps. Vol. IV. The Revolution, 1683-
1760.— Modern England, 1760-1815. With Maps and Index.
A Short History of the English People. With
Coloured Map.5, Genealogical Tables, and Chronological Annals.
Crown 8vo. 8s. 6d. 95th Thousand.
" This history of Mr. Green's wiU be found an able guide to every student of
history."— TAe Timm.
" It stands alone as the one general history ofthe country, for the sake of which
all others, if young or old are wise, -wiU be speedily and surely set aside."— Tfte
MACMILLAN & CO., LONDON.

.... ...*... ,4^
till, »•;",»'•,

4 til. 'J!